ATP & WTA rankings

[ponchi101]

Novak out of the #1. Total weeks there: 387.
It is an unbelievable number, and achievement.

[ashkor87]

How many players will perform up to their rankings at RG? Would be interesting to track, say, the top 16..a safe bet it wouldn't even be 50% ..

[ponchi101]

How many players make their seeding?
Well, since you are proposing the experiment...

[ashkor87]

Yes, I bet less than 50%!! We shall see.

[ashkor87]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2001/ ... is.comment
Just remembering why there are 32 seeds today. Personally, I think, 8 is enough
But what is the real purpose of seeding? Not truth and justice, for sure, nor fairness to the players .it has always been to maximize revenue to the tournament..by ensuring that the players people want to see, last as long as possible, and the marquee matches are as late as possible , when revenues are highest.
In today,'s world, I think, ,8 seeds would be enough..and add some local wild cards! When I went to see Wimbledon, I got to see Federer on centre court because folks had come to see an English player and left right after,! I couldn't believe my luck...!

[New England Nitemare]

From the 70's to the mid 90's they used to seed 16 players at the GS tournaments. I think they should go back to that. I always thought 32 players seeded was too many.

[ponchi101]

16 was the right number. But remember that even the mid level players wanted the 32 seeds system. The #17 player in the world ran the chance of running into Mac or Lendl in 1R, and that was a bit harsh.
And we always attach a little bit of a morality play to tennis; we forget that, as poetic and beautiful as it can be, this is still a business. If you cannot generate the revenue to make it worth it for the players, some possible champions will not join the sport.
Look at the WTA; we have been talking lately about equal pay and all it entails, not realizing that for all its faults, the WTA is still the most profitable women's league in the world. Having Kalinina lose in 1R to Swiatek at RG (for example) does nobody any good.
So, keep it at 32 seeds. It really is a trivial problem in comparison to others.

[New England Nitemare]

To your case and point ponchi, i remember in 1994 at Wimbledon, Steffi Graf was the #1 seed and she lost in the 1st round to Lori McNeil who I think was ranked #19 in the world, a brutal draw for Steffi, and Lori McNeil went all the way to the semifinals before losing to eventual champion Conchita Martinez. I think the 32 seeds are here to stay. They would never go back to 16 seeds.

[skatingfan]

I don't think we should have fewer seeds at the Grand Slam events than we get at Indidan Wells, Miami, Rome, and Madrid.

[ponchi101]

Certainly not. Those seedings should revert also to 16, if that were the move at the slams.

[skatingfan]

Certainly not. Those seedings should revert also to 16, if that were the move at the slams.

How do you do that in a 96 player draw? Random players get a first round bye, or do you change the draw size?

Also, if only 1/8 of players should be seeded should 64 player draws only have 8 seeds? I don't see how fewer seeds is better for the tournaments, the players, or the fans.

[ponchi101]

We started talking about how it went in the past, with only 16 seeds. The general agreement for the tournaments is as you say: more seeds avoids highly ranked players playing top seeds early in a tournament.
About going back to 8 seeds in 64 seed tourneys: that happens, doesn't it? You get tournaments in which only the top four seeds get a BYE, while the others play their round. Which has never made sense to me either.

[Owendonovan]

Certainly not. Those seedings should revert also to 16, if that were the move at the slams.

How do you do that in a 96 player draw? Random players get a first round bye, or do you change the draw size?

Also, if only 1/8 of players should be seeded should 64 player draws only have 8 seeds? I don't see how fewer seeds is better for the tournaments, the players, or the fans.

Especially if a bunch go out in early rounds.

[skatingfan]

Nadal will drop outside the top 100 as a result of not defending the title at Roland Garros.

Zverev needs a good run to keep his ranking. If he loses early he will fall out of the 50.

[ashkor87]

5 of the top 16 gone in R1!!