Wimbledon Draw is out!!

baseliner

Professional
Henman may have a GOOD draw. Given his problems with his nerves in the Wimbledon semis, maybe it is to his advantage to play Federer early. If Agassi's body holds up, he should beat Nadal. No way Nadal makes finals of Wimbledon this year. On the women's side, top 3 seeds have never won Wimbledon. Wonder how long since that has been true on the Men's side of the draw?
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
BabolatFan said:
What r u smoking there? If lower ranked players can't beat him, there're hewitt and roddick who had a decent run at the Queen's.
Hewitt was tied 1-1 with Nadal when Nadal retired.
 
my two cents: Gasquet has talent and a past win over Fed (Gasquet=sweet backhand albeit a hitch in his forehand), but when push comes to shove, his lack-of-sack (mentally) will keep him from closing the deal even if he had, e.g. a 2 sets to 1 lead on Federer. Gasquet is the big tease and I wouldn't be surprised if 10 years later people would be saying "could of...should of" when speaking about Gasguet.
 

Andres

G.O.A.T.
Daaaaaaamnnn!!! Bracciali and Hrbaty on 1st round!! Those two meet EVERYWHERE!! They even played doubles together!! :mad:

Am I seeing right? A Karlovic-Ancic matchup in the 3rd round? I don't like those draws by Quarter... I want a full draw to see :p
 

Grimjack

Banned
JennyS said:
This is all I have to say about Roger's draw: worst.draw.ever!!!!!
Fed's draw is a monster. He can't have even one off day, or he's packing his bags. Worse still, he'll potentially be playing with added pressure, because he has a real chance to lose some points to Nadal here, who for whatever reason was given every opportunity to take a free pass into the quarters -- which I suspect he'll blow anyway.

Fed, if he wins again, will really have earned it. Which is as it should be. Guy is trying to make a case that he's Wimby's best ever over the next couple years. Rolling through a draw like this would really help him make his case. Losing somewhere along the line would hardly be inexcusable, but it would definitely go a long way towards cementing his place in history alongside the second-tier greats on grass (McEnroe, e.g.), rather than among the Borgs and Samprases.

Ought to be interesting.
 

Volly master

Semi-Pro
Nadal sucks on grass..people tend to forget about that.

Roddick got the quarters in rome and lost in the first round of the french (Yes due to an injury of course, but having ONE good week, doesnt mean your god on that surface).

Better Example : Fishing winning houston, you didnt see Mardy in the 2nd week of the french did you?

Just because Nadal won 2 matches on grass, doesnt mean he is going to get to the wimbledon final. Hes a good player, but he is not a grass player.
 
I think what everyone is forgetting about Fed's half of the draw is that it is ROGER FEDERER!!!!!!!! Hello,,,,,, did you all forget that?????? I'm not a huge Fed fan but this guy is truely amazing on grass. I sure dont see anyone in his half of the draw(or the whole tourny. for that matter) that can take him out. Just my opinion.;)
 

Andres

G.O.A.T.
Nalbandian faces Moodie in 1st round... Tough task.
Moodie has a fantastic serve, IMO one of the best 2nd serves in the Tour right now, and he's a great volleyer.
Should be an interesting matchup ;)
 

KBalla08

Semi-Pro
hewitt vs roddick quarters could be awesome, they both lucked out to be on the other half of federer though, even if they have tough draws otherwise
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Volly master said:
Nadal sucks on grass..people tend to forget about that.

Roddick got the quarters in rome and lost in the first round of the french (Yes due to an injury of course, but having ONE good week, doesnt mean your god on that surface).

Better Example : Fishing winning houston, you didnt see Mardy in the 2nd week of the french did you?

Just because Nadal won 2 matches on grass, doesnt mean he is going to get to the wimbledon final. Hes a good player, but he is not a grass player.
Unlike Fishy, Nadal has hard court titles and hard court win over Fed in Dubai.
He has proved himself on 2 surfaces already.
 
I think Nadal might might it to the quarters where he will be crushed by Ljubicic/Davydenko/Tursonov or whoever he plays in that round
Yeah, because those guys have done so well on grass in the past. And they never get nervous in big matches.

On the women's side, top 3 seeds have never won Wimbledon. Wonder how long since that has been true on the Men's side of the draw?
Probably never, the top 3 guys every year of the open era are full of great grasscourt players(Laver, Borg, Sampras, Mac, Connors, Becker, Edberg, etc)

Losing somewhere along the line would hardly be inexcusable, but it would definitely go a long way towards cementing his place in history alongside the second-tier greats on grass (McEnroe, e.g.),
You think Mac was 2nd tier on grass? He was in 5 straight W finals & 7 straight queens finals.
 

Volly master

Semi-Pro
yes, he beat fed on hard courts, because Federer is personalyly afraid of this kid up his butt all the time and hes like his kryptonite to federer. but thats also hard courts

besides, where in that logic does it say anything about grass?
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Volly master said:
yes, he beat fed on hard courts, because Federer is personalyly afraid of this kid up his butt all the time and hes like his kryptonite to federer. but thats also hard courts

besides, where in that logic does it say anything about grass?
It didn't.

Just pointing out that today's game is about baseline power and stamina. With serve and volleyers dying out, and grass courts being slowed down, nothing prevents a clay and hard court champion from doing well on grass.

Justine is in the finals of Hastings this week even though she was raised on clay.
 

ACE of Hearts

Talk Tennis Guru
I have Justine vs Venus Williams in the finals.I hope i am right, Justine's draw looks nice.I wanna see her win wimbledon.
 

Chadwixx

Banned
OrangeOne said:
The seeds are placed in designated spots based on their seeding
Seeds are not placed in designated spots. The tournament organizers get to place the seeds in what ever postion they want to.
 
besides, where in that logic does it say anything about grass?
past performance on grass doesn't always have a correlation to how well players do at W. The surface is a crapshoot(& their aren't that many good grasscourt players today). Most players only play 2 touraments on grass per year. Considering how new Nadal is to the tour, I wouldn't read much into how well he might play at W this year based on a handfull of grass events over past 3 years. Nalbandian made final of his 1st grasscourt event(W in '02)
Gonazalez made the quarters last year. There is a very long list of players who didn't do much on grass previosly but made the later rounds of W over the years.
Even Sampras & Federer sucked on grass their 1st 3 years at W. This is only Nadal's 3rd W.

Clay is different, there are like 20 events on clay on tour, so a fluke performamce is less likely. Many players' games are molded for play on clay. Not the case with grass, most pros never even get the chance to play on grass when before they join the pro tour.
 

exruda

Semi-Pro
Chadwixx said:
Seeds are not placed in designated spots. The tournament organizers get to place the seeds in what ever postion they want to.
the last sentence is only true if we assume that the organizers are free to:
- place the first seed wherever they want, but under the condition that they want it at the very top of the draw and
- place the second seed wherever they want, but only under the condition that they want it at the very bottom of the draw.

For the rest of the seeds, the organizers are free to randomize in whichever way they want -- throw dice, a coin, or whatever.

Cut the BS, please. What's the point of posting this?
 

Chadwixx

Banned
So 2 seeds are in a designated place and 30 arent?

"What's the point of posting this?"

If you didnt notice i quoted someone. Its that grey looking box above my comment.
 

exruda

Semi-Pro
Chadwixx said:
So 2 seeds are in a designated place and 30 arent?
Precisely.
You do not know where seed no 3 will be before you see the actual draw.
You do not know where seed no 4 will be before .............. etc,

although you do know which lines in the table are reserved (designated) for the no
1
2
3-4
5-8
9-16
17-32 seeds.
 

Chadwixx

Banned
The guys in the backroom get to determine the seed number, the location of the seeds, and the match ups of the seeds (1vs3 of 1vs4 in the semis for example). It gives them way to much potential to manipulate the draw. As they have done.
 

malakas

Banned
Chadwixx said:
The guys in the backroom get to determine the seed number, the location of the seeds, and the match ups of the seeds (1vs3 of 1vs4 in the semis for example). It gives them way to much potential to manipulate the draw. As they have done.

The wimbledon comitee?!?Yeah right..It's TONI NADAL!!!He's behind all these!He pulls all the strings in all the Grand Slams!!


:mrgreen:
 
A draw is a draw. why you think it's called that? It's all random and there are times when you are lucky and times when you are not, no different from everything else in life, you need luck sometimes. So Nadal got easier early rounds, so what? Are you Nadal bashers also crying that why it's always someone else win the lotteries every week? beat it.
 

Volly master

Semi-Pro
i know that Wimbledon is changing and that they are slowing down the grass (which is entirly stupid, i mean, why change the surface just becausr the style of the game is changing? I mean, then it would force people to come in and the slam would be harder to win, makes guys like borg winning it from the baseline an achivement, rather then nowadays)

Not that federer sucks for not going in, he does, and it normally works. He has an all-court game.

but why change the properties of this grandslam to beneift baseline rallies? It used to be a S&V surface and it should because in order to win, you should be AT LEAST volley somewhat decent. now, you could get away with not doing that by just standing at the baseline and that defeats the purpose of going in at all.

as for Nadal, his high top spin game just doesnt come across to be as a "Winning Grass Game".
Isnt the best game for playing on grass:

- Big serve
- Good Volleys
- Slicing the ball by keeping it low
- Hitting alot of drop shots
- Good movement

Now movement isnt as big of a problem for most players who havent played on the surface people like it is on clay. But Big servers and Good Volleyers can take advantage of the baseliners alot more because of how much behind the baseline that they are.

Nadal is a legit good player, dont get me wrong, what he has done in the past 2 years is what most guys want in a career, but i dont feel he has the game enough to do well at wimbledon.
But what i can say thats positive is, He simpily wants too.

He wants to win wimbledon more then anything and that desire is rare from a guy from spain, and i feel he might go all the way ONE DAY, once he learns how to use the grass to his advantage, bulk up his serve and volley better, then he will have a shot, but for now, he is just trying to find his way on the grass for the time being.
 

Chadwixx

Banned
Draws are based on mathmatical equality (look into why they created them). Not random placements. Only tennis and hockey use a non standard system. All other sports use the 1v8 2v7 3v6 4v5 so the sums = 9. Which is balance.
 

fastdunn

Legend
This looks like amazing chance for Nadal although you never know
until it actually happens. IF Nadal can pass Agassi and somehow
avoid Lujbicic/Roddick and get pretty exhausted Federer...(sorry another
Fed-Nadal scenario, it's very very remote possibilty anyway...)
 

fastdunn

Legend
But we're not exactly sure about what it takes to win Wimbledon on
this new (cement underneath, new thick slower, boucier "rye") grass courts.

Federer's setting a new standard. His serves, and volleys do not appear
to be factor in last 3 years. Same goes for Hewitt. Roddick too.
Serve is always a big factor on any surface. Hewitt and Roddick
with their big forehand swing do not exactly have best game to handle
low skidding balls. These are basically hard court players in 90's conditions...

Volly master said:
i know that Wimbledon is changing and that they are slowing down the grass (which is entirly stupid, i mean, why change the surface just becausr the style of the game is changing? I mean, then it would force people to come in and the slam would be harder to win, makes guys like borg winning it from the baseline an achivement, rather then nowadays)

Not that federer sucks for not going in, he does, and it normally works. He has an all-court game.

but why change the properties of this grandslam to beneift baseline rallies? It used to be a S&V surface and it should because in order to win, you should be AT LEAST volley somewhat decent. now, you could get away with not doing that by just standing at the baseline and that defeats the purpose of going in at all.

as for Nadal, his high top spin game just doesnt come across to be as a "Winning Grass Game".
Isnt the best game for playing on grass:

- Big serve
- Good Volleys
- Slicing the ball by keeping it low
- Hitting alot of drop shots
- Good movement

Now movement isnt as big of a problem for most players who havent played on the surface people like it is on clay. But Big servers and Good Volleyers can take advantage of the baseliners alot more because of how much behind the baseline that they are.

Nadal is a legit good player, dont get me wrong, what he has done in the past 2 years is what most guys want in a career, but i dont feel he has the game enough to do well at wimbledon.
But what i can say thats positive is, He simpily wants too.

He wants to win wimbledon more then anything and that desire is rare from a guy from spain, and i feel he might go all the way ONE DAY, once he learns how to use the grass to his advantage, bulk up his serve and volley better, then he will have a shot, but for now, he is just trying to find his way on the grass for the time being.
 
malakas said:
The wimbledon comitee?!?Yeah right..It's TONI NADAL!!!He's behind all these!He pulls all the strings in all the Grand Slams!!


:mrgreen:
Yeah.. his real name is Anthony Nadal Windsor, cousin of Charlie and member of the W comitee!!!:mrgreen: .


On a non related topic: Go Hass!!
 

simi

Hall of Fame
Volly master said:
i know that Wimbledon is changing and that they are slowing down the grass (which is entirly stupid, i mean, why change the surface just becausr the style of the game is changing?
Changed as a direct result of the "Spanish boycott" of several years ago. Too many of the highly ranked clay court "specialists" skipped Wimbledon because they knew they didn't stand much of a chance at AELTCC. After a long and difficult clay season, and what they precieve to be bias in seeding, decided to start taking a one-month vacation after the French Open. Slowing down the grass was an attempt to bring the clay courters back to Wimbledon.
 
Moose Malloy said:
Yeah, because those guys have done so well on grass in the past. And they never get nervous in big matches.
Whatever, if you honestly think Nadal is likely to survive his quarter of the draw, you are in your own little world. One of Ljubicic, Davydenko, and Tursonov are likely to get past that section and Nadal is lucky to get even a set off any of them on grass.

Ljubicic has reached the quarters and semis of his first two slams this year, so he is becoming a better slam performer then he used to be, whereas I agree before this year he was a big slam underachiever. He lost in straight sets to Nadal at the French, but that was clay, this is grass. Nadal has a hard time beating him on hard court type surfaces, so Ljubicic would crush him on grass.

Davydenko has made alot of slam quarters or better in the last year and a half for a poor slam performer. He simply loses to better players he does not choke in his losses. Nadal on grass is not a better player.

Tursonov with a good section can go deep, and he is the type of player Nadal would not beat on grass unless he was having a very off day. His flat strokes, and eastern grips, and how early he hits the ball, would be too much for Nadal on grass.
 

GRANITECHIEF

Hall of Fame
Womens #1 seed Mauresmo has potential to be upset in 2nd round by M. Krajicek or Stosur. If not-trouble in 4th round vs Safina or Ivanovic.
 

urban

Legend
I saw Ancic today beating Baghdatis. Looks pretty solid and steady.Hard, reliable serve; and he learns to come in with serve and volley. He needs to handle low returns to his feet, but is trying. With his looks and style, reminds me a bit of the young Gonzales, the original Pancho 'Gorgo' Gonzales of course. He could be the real thread to Federer.
 
Ancic is so overrated. I will be surprised if he even makes the quarters, and if he does he will be lucky to take 1 set off Roger. He won the warmup event right before Wimbledon last year too remember.
 

35ft6

Legend
I've seen Ancic play twice in person, and he's a guy who has a lot of big shots, but IMO no big weapon. When him and Roddick played at Davis Cup, it was pretty striking how much harder Roddick hit his forehand and serve, two big weapons of the game. He does a lot of things well and generates easy power, but a lot of things have to be working for him to beat the very best players. His volleys looks pretty good though. Skinny, lanky people's strokes always look prettier.
 

urban

Legend
Could be right with the lack of a big weapon,35ft6. His serve looks quite heavy, hoever, and on grass you need not necessarily a big weapon. Pat Cash had no penetrating serve or groundstroke, yet he did well on grass.
 
Whatever, if you honestly think Nadal is likely to survive his quarter of the draw, you are in your own little world. One of Ljubicic, Davydenko, and Tursonov are likely to get past that section and Nadal is lucky to get even a set off any of them on grass.
You said you expected Nadal to get to the quarters, but think he has no chance of winning his qf? I'm not making any predictions about nadal, but its strange that you think he can get that far but not beat those guys(and they might not even make it that far) If he makes it that far & plays one of those guys, I imagine he will be the clear favorite with the oddsmakers. Never underestimate how much choking occurs on tour these days when anyone plays Federer or Nadal. Most of the time they look like they're wizzing themselves. A GS QF is about as much nerves as it is surface. Those guys aren't ready for the big show & never will be, Nadal has been ready since birth.

Tursonov with a good section can go deep, and he is the type of player Nadal would not beat on grass unless he was having a very off day. His flat strokes, and eastern grips, and how early he hits the ball, would be too much for Nadal on grass.
Tursonov is barely .500 for his career, looks like he has 'off days' most days. Guy lost to Moya at W in '04. Those flat strokes or eastern grips didn't work so well on grass that day.

its funny a few weeks ago, you said nadal would never reach a W QF in his career, would lose 1st or 2nd round to anyone this year, is so horrible on grass, yet now you think he can reach the QF in only his 3rd attempt.
And I saw in another recent thread you now think he can reach a SF at some point in his career. Sounds like you're waffling a bit on your previous stance.
 

HollerOne5

Semi-Pro
federerhoogenbandfan said:
Whatever, if you honestly think Nadal is likely to survive his quarter of the draw, you are in your own little world. One of Ljubicic, Davydenko, and Tursonov are likely to get past that section and Nadal is lucky to get even a set off any of them on grass.

Ljubicic has reached the quarters and semis of his first two slams this year, so he is becoming a better slam performer then he used to be, whereas I agree before this year he was a big slam underachiever. He lost in straight sets to Nadal at the French, but that was clay, this is grass. Nadal has a hard time beating him on hard court type surfaces, so Ljubicic would crush him on grass.

Davydenko has made alot of slam quarters or better in the last year and a half for a poor slam performer. He simply loses to better players he does not choke in his losses. Nadal on grass is not a better player.

Tursonov with a good section can go deep, and he is the type of player Nadal would not beat on grass unless he was having a very off day. His flat strokes, and eastern grips, and how early he hits the ball, would be too much for Nadal on grass.
I think its ridiculous that people think they can determine results strictly based on surface....

I mean the whole, Nadal wins on clay, strugges on hardcourt versus a player = getting crushed by same player on grass, shows you know nothing about tennis.

Anything can happen on any day, and given the huge mental advantage Nadal has over Ljubicic, I think you better wait until this encounter actually happens before you say stupid stuff like that. It just discredits everytying you have to offer to these forums.
 

fastdunn

Legend
federerhoogenbandfan said:
Davydenko has made alot of slam quarters or better in the last year and a half for a poor slam performer. He simply loses to better players he does not choke in his losses. Nadal on grass is not a better player.
.
Isn't Davydenko's record on grass something like 1-13 ?

The fact that Nadal at 17 was able to weather power players like Ancic
on grass in his debut presents lots of things about grass court and Nadal.
 

OrangeOne

Legend
HollerOne5 said:
I think its ridiculous that people think they can determine results strictly based on surface....

I mean the whole, Nadal wins on clay, strugges on hardcourt versus a player = getting crushed by same player on grass, shows you know nothing about tennis.

Anything can happen on any day, and given the huge mental advantage Nadal has over Ljubicic, I think you better wait until this encounter actually happens before you say stupid stuff like that. It just discredits everytying you have to offer to these forums.
Things that could potentially discredit what someone has to say:

1. Ignoring the effects surfaces have (which you did in para 1)
2. Ignoring a logic progression in court speed - as a general rule, fedhoogfan made a well recognised point talking about court speed and relative performance (your para 2)
3. Calling what someone else says "stupid", even if you have a good point to be made (para 3 - your mental advantage point was good, adding that the other person was saying is 'stupid' negates your nice point)
4. Finishing a post with a raw blanket opinion line like "it just discredits everything you have to offer"... (para 3 too).

Just my opinion....
 

HollerOne5

Semi-Pro
OrangeOne said:
Things that could potentially discredit what someone has to say:

1. Ignoring the effects surfaces have (which you did in para 1)
2. Ignoring a logic progression in court speed - as a general rule, fedhoogfan made a well recognised point talking about court speed and relative performance (your para 2)
3. Calling what someone else says "stupid", even if you have a good point to be made (para 3 - your mental advantage point was good, adding that the other person was saying is 'stupid' negates your nice point)
4. Finishing a post with a raw blanket opinion line like "it just discredits everything you have to offer"... (para 3 too).

Just my opinion....
Well think what you'd like, but to assume someone would get crushed on grass when the match has never taken place, just because they play closely together on hardcourts, is a dumb assertion. Thats all I'm saying.
 

Rhino

Legend
OrangeOne said:
Things that could potentially discredit what someone has to say:

1. Ignoring the effects surfaces have (which you did in para 1)
2. Ignoring a logic progression in court speed - as a general rule, fedhoogfan made a well recognised point talking about court speed and relative performance (your para 2)
3. Calling what someone else says "stupid", even if you have a good point to be made (para 3 - your mental advantage point was good, adding that the other person was saying is 'stupid' negates your nice point)
4. Finishing a post with a raw blanket opinion line like "it just discredits everything you have to offer"... (para 3 too).

Just my opinion....
Woah dude, this is serious stuff for you isn't it Orange?
Sometimes it's not even worth getting into a 'discussion' with certain posters. Ok, if you're bored you may want to proceed with a bit of light teasing, but usually "stupid" does cover it quite well - if you can be bothered.
You should just let fedhoogfan and moose get on with it, they deserve each other. Sure, sometimes they'll say ridiculous and horrendously uninformed rubbish but hey, it's kinda cute, and we're all friends here!
HollerOne makes some good points, people always think they know about matches that haven't even taken place yet.

Just my opinion....
 

unjugon

Rookie
Davydenko has made alot of slam quarters or better in the last year and a half for a poor slam performer. He simply loses to better players he does not choke in his losses. Nadal on grass is not a better player.
Dude, you been in a cave for how long? Davydenko is a noone on grass. As in much worse than Nadal on it. You watched Davydenko last week? Let me tell you: it wasn´t pretty. :(
 

jhhachamp

Hall of Fame
Chadwixx said:
The guys in the backroom get to determine the seed number, the location of the seeds, and the match ups of the seeds (1vs3 of 1vs4 in the semis for example). It gives them way to much potential to manipulate the draw. As they have done.
Proof please...
 
Top