One notes that apart from 2017, Jo's grass court records of 2015, 2016 and 2018 were exactly the same. i.e. won 6 and lost 4. In the first 3 grass tournaments of 2018 she has lost to the eventual winner so to keep this record Dominika Cibulkova has to win Wimbledon which is perhaps a tall order. It's also a fact that in her last 4 Wimbledon's Jo has been beaten by a player who has played in at least one Grand Slam final. i.eSharapova,Bouchard, Venus and Cibulkova. Unfortunately some other comparisons apart from clay courts are not as favourable.
Don't know other people's thoughts and I know it is hypothetical - Just wonder if anything different might have happened if Cibulkova had been British? Would she still have been the seed to lose out as anything or anyone else would have made then appear to exercise blatant favoritism?
I don't understand - what blatant favouritism?
Serena being seeded?
That's simply a correct use of the committee's discretionary powers - it's exactly what the powers are there for.
I don't understand - what blatant favouritism? Serena being seeded? That's simply a correct use of the committee's discretionary powers - it's exactly what the powers are there for.
No, think you misunderstand. A131 is setting up a hypothetical situation then to hypothetically wonder about possible hypothetical favouritism towards a Brit in that hypothetical event. Hmm.
ie if it had not been Cibulkova but a Brit that had been in the last position if just going by rankings, would that Brit have been ousted from the seeds in the way Cibulkova has been? It is not the Serena seeding as such that is being questioned.
Who knows but I find enough to deal with without considering such hypothetical set-ups and speculating about possible favouritism in that hypothetical situation. And with seemingly actual favouritism in some areas away from seedings.
Tx Indy. I am obviously confused....
But seedings all seem so irrelevant this year anyway.
Although she looks like she is going to lose, I even love the Sasnovich story - ranked about 50 - played two grass court wam up events - lost in R1 in both - including losing 4&0 to lottner wta 130 approx. And then gets to the last 16 of Wimbly.
I don't understand - what blatant favouritism? Serena being seeded? That's simply a correct use of the committee's discretionary powers - it's exactly what the powers are there for.
No, think you misunderstand. A131 is setting up a hypothetical situation then to hypothetically wonder about possible hypothetical favouritism towards a Brit in that hypothetical event. Hmm.
ie if it had not been Cibulkova but a Brit that had been in the last position if just going by rankings, would that Brit have been ousted from the seeds in the way Cibulkova has been? It is not the Serena seeding as such that is being questioned.
Who knows but I find enough to deal with without considering such hypothetical set-ups and speculating about possible favouritism in that hypothetical situation. And with seemingly actual favouritism in some areas away from seedings.
That's just what I was getting at Indy - fair enough if you have enough to deal with!
Tx Indy. I am obviously confused.... But seedings all seem so irrelevant this year anyway. Although she looks like she is going to lose, I even love the Sasnovich story - ranked about 50 - played two grass court wam up events - lost in R1 in both - including losing 4&0 to lottner wta 130 approx. And then gets to the last 16 of Wimbly.
I really wonder sometimes how hard some players try at these warm up events - Outside of Federer, there is not one player that won one of the main tour grass events either in the WTA or ATP leading up to Wimbledon left in the singles draw, or even reached the 4th round.
-- Edited by A131 on Monday 9th of July 2018 12:44:26 PM
You may well be right, A131. But I would have thought that they wiuld like to win a couple of matches, at least. Qfs, or SFs wiuld do. Of course some like Sloane do nothing. And that doesn't work too well either. But, yes, you don't want to peak at some non event.