Seeding - here we go again - different thought for this time round?

Two weeks away and then Wimbledon starts. Seeding issue(s) to raise their "head" again.

Djokovic - World No 1, and 2011 Champion
Murray - World No 2, and 2012 Runner Up
Federer - World No 3, and 7 time champion (as Nadal was in Paris just finished)
Ferrer - World No 4, and 1 time quarterfinalist
Nadal - World No 5, 2008 & 2010 Champion, and 3 other times Runner Up; made 5 finals
in a row before injured knees broke that run last year (OK Rosol contributed to that too!)


So how do you see the seeds being attributed, and why?

By the ATP Rankings + W seeding formula, as usual.

Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Ferrer and Nadal is the order I think it should be.

Whatever Wimbledon's system (which factors in Wimbledon achievement) says.

I don't know if that tips Federer ahead of Murray (but then Murray did well last year) but other than that I can't see any other adjustments that should happen.

When the Wimbledon Formula is applied, the top 5 in the rankings are seeded in the same order. Nadal's withdrawal from Halle denies him the opportunity to overtake Ferrer in the rankings. The Wimbledon Committee retain the right to change the seeding order at their discretion, but I can't see them doing that.

I don't see them overturning this year - Djokovic is too far ahead to warrant not being No 1, and Murray's performance at Wimbledon and Olympics certainly ensures he must stay at No 2. I suppose you could make an argument for Murray leapfrogging Djokovic, but I think the ranking points would have to be an awful lot closer for the committee to consider that.

Top half of the draw gonna be like this

Djokovic - Rafa in quarters
Djokovic - Fed in semi's
Djokovic - Murray in finals

Bottom Half

Murray - Gasquet in quarters
Murray - Ferrer in Semi's
Murray - Djoko in finals

It would be fun if this turns out to be a draw, atleast 1000 threads will be seen in various different tennis forums discussing the draw.

If I was deciding the seedings I would not follow the rankings.

The only thing they'll raise their eyebrows at is that the RG final was anticlimactic after the Nadal-Djokovic semi. However, that was a completely different situation. It is hard to ignore the fact Nadal is a 5 time Wimb finalist though. Live and let live...it'll sort itself out post-Wimb.

Oh I missed the fact that Nadal stays 5 virtue of Ferrer's brilliant RG. Definitely a case for reversing those two rankings, and wouldn't be totally surprised to see Wimbledon do so, as they have in past. I guess the only thing against is Nadal's early exit from both Halle and W last year.

time please wrote:Oh I missed the fact that Nadal stays 5 virtue of Ferrer's brilliant RG. Definitely a case for reversing those two rankings, and wouldn't be totally surprised to see Wimbledon do so, as they have in past. I guess the only thing against is Nadal's early exit from both Halle and W last year.

But they only reverse on the basis of the Formula, which they apply rigidly. I cannot remember any male player receiving a discretionary elevation, though it has happened once or twice with the women. And Nadal has fewer points than Ferrer after the Formula has been applied. Let's wait and see but I'd be very surprised if they reverse the positions.

The odd thing is that if you head over to the discussion on the FO points spy it's Federer who's likely to be #5 at the close of the tournament, unless he wins it.

I don't think it's any different for Wimbledon than the French Open. They go with their normal process.

I guess one difference is that at the French, with Nadal and Djokovic on one side of the draw, whatever final came up was looking like a foregone conclusion. That doesn't feel the same if the draw goes that way at Wimbledon.

Although it does create an anomaly with Ferrer sitting about Nadal, Ferrer's the one who's played and won the matches to get there - not Nadal. Ferrer's got a Masters 1000 win plus a final, a slam final, 2 semis and a quarter, plus a grass court tournament win in his rankings. I'm no fan of Ferrer, but why should be penalised because someone else didn't play?

Wimbledon, as all the Majors, have the right to "go differently" from the seedings as it is NOT under ATP but the ITF instead. Seems like some people don't understand that at all. It IS up to the Seeding Committee as to what action is taken in certain circumstances.

Djokovic is a deserved No 1, has won the event, so should be No 1 seed.

Murray, being British, it will be perhaps a conundrum BUT having made semis more than once, and winning Olympics should be in Top 4 - not sure how the Olympics figure in the formula as they are a once in 4 year event.

Federer as 7 time champion, could justifiably be placed at No 2, but think he'll be No 3 because of the above.

Nadal, twice champion, and five consecutive finals in last 5 tournaments played, prior to last year's event, could justifiably be placed at No 4.

Ferrer, World's No 4, hasn't produced anything at SW 19 to enforce his being the No 4 seed, and I doubt would feel any injustice at being placed as the No 5 seed.

Quite a few websites suggesting that Federer, Murray and Nadal WILL be in opposite half from Djokovic, which is interesting...

Nadal should, I feel be placed at No 4 at a minimum, and I believe they give points for last year's performance on grass, plus half points for the year before that...so not sure about exact numbers (though for sure someone(s) will come in very quickly and strongly but hopefully informatively and respectfully, as to what they are!!), but think Nadal gets the no 4 seeding as a minimum. So we'll see how it goes. But hoping that it doesn't turn out to be Djokovic in one half and Murray, Federer and Nadal in the other, with possibly Tsonga in there as well....

I think that the Seeding Committee at SW19 will show a greater testicular fortitude than did their peers at Roland Garros - which ultimately cost them a blazing final in the end, though all respect to David Ferrer.

Well given you've just showed what muppets the French were by placing the 8 time winner as top seed only once, it's stands to reason as 5 time finalist the All England Club might be a little more circumspect and bump him above Ferrer.

However. I doubt it.

One would hope it encourages RG to develop a seeding formula, as it is stupid not to take clay form into account.

However, as I've said on the other thread, Wimbledon does have such a formula. Unless I've done my sums wrong, Rafa remains at 5 under that system and will be 5th seed.

I had heard he would stay at 5 but surely the AELTC have further powers to go "off-piste"?

lydian wrote:I had heard he would stay at 5 but surely the AELTC have further powers to go "off-piste"?

But if they do other players will squeal...

On their head be it if they don't though. We could be looking at a Nadal Mahut final Zzzzz.... and think of those poor debentures who look forward to making some pocket money by off loading their center court tickets. They may have a slightly reduced return.

lydian wrote:I had heard he would stay at 5 but surely the AELTC have further powers to go "off-piste"?

It's a bit of a grey area, but I don't think they do - because the players don't want them to have such powers.
When there was a seeding committee, the players 'squealed' - so the GS's reached a deal with the players to make them happier i.e. the formula that now exists.
No system is perfect and will make everyone happy - but it's in place for the best interests of the majority of players. I appreciate that not all fans share those interests.

Edit - given that Rafa has only played 4 grass tournaments in the last 2 years, losing in the 2nd round and final of Wimby and the QF at Halle and Queens, should he really go above Ferrer who won a grass tourny and reached the QF of Wimby last year, given that last year's results are the most significant guideline?

Right, just so I understand the arguments.

The idea is that they take the method that recognises ranking and Wimbledon performance, which was created because players were unhappy at the seeding committee deciding the most appropriate seedings..... and dump it because Rafa won the French?

Born Slippy wrote:One would hope it encourages RG to develop a seeding formula, as it is stupid not to take clay form into account.

The two situations are entirely different. There are 22 clay tournaments on the ATP tour played over a 7-month period (actually more than outdoor hard which has 20 tournaments). Contrast that with the 5 grass tournaments squeezed into into a 4-week period. Because of this, grass tennis is very much a special case and that is why the AELTC felt justified in introducing their formula which takes the previous 2 years' results on grass into account.

I know the formula was introduced to keep of the players happy, but in practice it has made very little difference, if at all.