Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Link Back -> Andrew Murray message board -> General tennis discussion -> Grand Slams: number of seeds to be reduced from 32 to 16
Post Info TOPIC: Grand Slams: number of seeds to be reduced from 32 to 16
Stircrazy


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 53265
Date:
Grand Slams: number of seeds to be reduced from 32 to 16
Permalink  

A post I made on the Jay Clarke thread in the Individual players forum seems to have sparked a bit of discussion entirely unrelated to Jay, hence this new thread here.  The post in question was:

And with Wimbledon looming, we're spoilt for choice [tennis articles in The Sunday Times] today:  the Jay article, Johnny Mac tipping Kyle for major success, Johanna inadvertently missing a drug test, the odious Kyrgios claiming that he's "not as professional as Rafa and Roger" & Pat Cash asking where the next Boris Becker is (Shapo's name & that of the currently injured Chung Hyeon mentioned as possibilities)!  Interesting aside in the Cash column (for me, at any rate):

One reason for the continued domination of Federer, Nadal and, until last year, Djokovic was, I believe, connected to the fact that in 2001 the decision was made to extend the list of seeds from 16 to 32. It was made partly in response to complaints from Spanish and South American clay-court specialists, who felt they deserved more draw protection on what they perceived to be the unfair, fast grass surface at Wimbledon. Their complaints had two results. One, the glorious game of serve and volley was effectively killed off because things were done to the grass to make it slower, and attacking the net became a strategy for disaster unless you had special athleticism and hand skills. Racket and string technology also had something to do with the transition.

The impending reduction of the number of seeds from 32 to 16 is the issue which sparked the "off road" discussion, hence this thread.



__________________
flamingowings


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5404
Date:
Permalink  

So in my opinion 16 seeds sounds fairly horrendous and unnecessary.

I mean, a R1 grand slam match could become this:

1R matches that could have occurred this year at Wimbledon if there had been only 16 seeds:
Federer v Kyrgios
Nadal v Pouille
Zverev v Coric
Cilic v Nishikori
del Potro v Raonic
Dimitrov v Gasquet
Thiem v Shapovalov

12:04 PM - Jul 1, 2018


See Oleg S.'s other Tweets

 

Meaning that some of the big names could go out in R1. I mean, they could anyway but it just seems unnecessary.  



-- Edited by flamingowings on Sunday 1st of July 2018 03:30:41 PM

__________________
indiana


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 39512
Date:
Permalink  

As I said in Jay's thread :

I think the big clay courters' complaints was the way Wimbledon used to subjectively adjust the rankings list for their 16 seedings and some top 16 ranked essentially best on clay players could drop out of the seedings, having they felt earned a seeding.

I may be wrong but my memory is it was then the same year that Wimbledon introduced their objective grass court adjustment formula for the men that they also increased to 32 seeds ( as did the other Slams ) with the protection that if you were in the top 32 participanting ranks you were guaranteed a seeding.

Now of course going back to 16 seeds next year, if they are going to retain the seeding protection ( then for the top 16 ) will limit Wimbledon to using the grass formula on many fewer players, in that they won't be able to bump a player beyond the top 16 into the top ( then only ) 16 seeds.

Edit : Yes, the extention to 32 seeds was made at the same time as the grass court formula was introduced after long discussions, and while the ATP was happy with the general Slam extention to 32 seeds it was still unhappy about moving away from the rankings at all.

www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon-change-seeding-system-9249997.html



-- Edited by indiana on Sunday 1st of July 2018 03:19:39 PM

__________________
indiana


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 39512
Date:
Permalink  

I have said before that generally the last 32 has already lost many of its seeds. It is not as if all is anything like predictable and there is IMO no need for the reduction other than ( quite unnecessarily to me ) introducing potentially very big clashes in the first two rounds ( and thus also losing more big players early on than we already do - see flamingowing's above post re some of the names currently for whatever reasons outside the top 16 but at least with how things stand just now in the top 32 ).

But I know there are differing views on this. Some would have no seeds at all !



__________________
Michael D


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 7055
Date:
Permalink  

Yes, I don't see anything wrong with the principle of not being expected to meet a fellow seed for the first two rounds of a tournament... any tournament, which is what the current seeding arrangements achieve from 15k to Grand Slam. I think it's fine for someone like Naomi to meet Garbine Muguruza in the first round of Wimbledon, unlucky but ok. But for Jo to face Garbine, which she could next year with her current seeding, or Kyle to face Roger Federer, just seems wrong and unnecessary. I don't see the point at all of cutting the number of seeds.

__________________
Michael D


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 7055
Date:
Permalink  

Arggghhh



-- Edited by Michael D on Sunday 1st of July 2018 03:43:41 PM

__________________
Helen40


Grand Slam Champion

Status: Offline
Posts: 3985
Date:
Permalink  

So, are we definitely going back to 16 seeds next year with no grass court adjustment? Sounds crazy to me with the crazy R1 matches possible as stated by flamingowings. Is this an ATP idea?

__________________

Face your fears........Live your dreams!
indiana


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 39512
Date:
Permalink  

Helen40 wrote:

So, are we definitely going back to 16 seeds next year with no grass court adjustment? Sounds crazy to me with the crazy R1 matches possible as stated by flamingowings. Is this an ATP idea?

As of now we are going back to 16 seeds for all Slam singles next year. I have heard nothing about doing away with the Wimbledon grass court formula. So whether they simply keep it as is and now apply it just to the top 16 rather than the top 32 ( so ensuring all the top 16 have a seeding ) I am not entirely sure.

Pretty sure its the Slams that decided the reduction in seeds just themselves. The ATP liked it when it changed from 16 to 32 and I guess they prefer that bit more protection for the leading players.



__________________
Helen40


Grand Slam Champion

Status: Offline
Posts: 3985
Date:
Permalink  

hmmm I guess it makes sense from a ticket sales point of view eg for RG as they don't sell many early on, if at all, and I'm not sure about the other slams. But for Wimbledon, it's a national institution, so is oversubscribed, surely it would be better to protect the players.

__________________

Face your fears........Live your dreams!
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Link Back -> Andrew Murray message board -> General tennis discussion -> Grand Slams: number of seeds to be reduced from 32 to 16
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard