Wimbledon Seedings for this years tournament

First topic message reminder :

GENTLEMEN'S SINGLES

DJOKOVIC, Novak (SRB) [1]
MURRAY, Andy (GBR) [2]
FEDERER, Roger (SUI) [3]
FERRER, David (ESP) [4]
NADAL, Rafael (ESP) [5]
TSONGA, Jo-Wilfried (FRA) [6]
BERDYCH, Tomas (CZE) [7]
DEL POTRO, Juan Martin (ARG) [8]
GASQUET, Richard (FRA) [9]
CILIC, Marin (CRO) [10]
WAWRINKA, Stanislas (SUI) [11]
NISHIKORI, Kei (JPN) [12]
HAAS, Tommy (GER) [13]
TIPSAREVIC, Janko (SRB) [14]
ALMAGRO, Nicolas (ESP) [15]
KOHLSCHREIBER, Philipp (GER) [16]
RAONIC, Milos (CAN) [17]
ISNER, John (USA) [18]
SIMON, Gilles (FRA) [19]
YOUZHNY, Mikhail (RUS) [20]
QUERREY, Sam (USA) [21]
MONACO, Juan (ARG) [22]
SEPPI, Andreas (ITA) [23]
JANOWICZ, Jerzy (POL) [24]
PAIRE, Benoit (FRA) [25]
DOLGOPOLOV, Alexandr (UKR) [26]
ANDERSON, Kevin (RSA) [27]
CHARDY, Jeremy (FRA) [28]
DIMITROV, Grigor (BUL) [29]
FOGNINI, Fabio (ITA) [30]
BENNETEAU, Julien (FRA) [31]
ROBREDO, Tommy (ESP) [32]

LADIES' SINGLES

WILLIAMS, Serena (USA) [1]
AZARENKA, Victoria (BLR) [2]
SHARAPOVA, Maria (RUS) [3]
RADWANSKA, Agnieszka (POL) [4]
ERRANI, Sara (ITA) [5]
LI, Na (CHN) [6]
KERBER, Angelique (GER) [7]
KVITOVA, Petra (CZE) [8]
WOZNIACKI, Caroline (DEN) [9]
KIRILENKO, Maria (RUS) [10]
VINCI, Roberta (ITA) [11]
IVANOVIC, Ana (SRB) [12]
PETROVA, Nadia (RUS) [13]
STOSUR, Samantha (AUS) [14]
BARTOLI, Marion (FRA) [15]
JANKOVIC, Jelena (SRB) [16]
STEPHENS, Sloane (USA) [17]
CIBULKOVA, Dominika (SVK) [18]
SUAREZ NAVARRO, Carla (ESP) [19]
FLIPKENS, Kirsten (BEL) [20]
PAVLYUCHENKOVA, Anastasia (RUS) [21]
CIRSTEA, Sorana (ROU) [22]
LISICKI, Sabine (GER) [23]
PENG, Shuai (CHN) [24]
MAKAROVA, Ekaterina (RUS) [25]
KUZNETSOVA, Svetlana (RUS) [26]
LEPCHENKO, Varvara (USA) [27]
SAFAROVA, Lucie (CZE) [28]
PASZEK, Tamira (AUT) [29]
CORNET, Alize (FRA) [30]
BARTHEL, Mona (GER) [31]
OPRANDI, Romina (SUI) [32]

GENTLEMEN'S DOUBLES

BRYAN, Bob (USA) & BRYAN, Mike (USA) [1]
GRANOLLERS, Marcel (ESP) & LOPEZ, Marc (ESP) [2]
PEYA, Alexander (AUT) & SOARES, Bruno (BRA) [3]
PAES, Leander (IND) & STEPANEK, Radek (CZE) [4]
QURESHI, Aisam-Ul-Haq (PAK) & ROJER, Jean-Julien (NED) [5]
LINDSTEDT, Robert (SWE) & NESTOR, Daniel (CAN) [6]
MIRNYI, Max (BLR) & TECAU, Horia (ROU) [7]
BHUPATHI, Mahesh (IND) & KNOWLE, Julian (AUT) [8]
FLEMING, Colin (GBR) & MARRAY, Jonathan (GBR) [9]
GONZALEZ, Santiago (MEX) & LIPSKY, Scott (USA) [10]
BENNETEAU, Julien (FRA) & ZIMONJIC, Nenad (SRB) [11]
DODIG, Ivan (CRO) & MELO, Marcelo (BRA) [12]
LLODRA, Michael (FRA) & MAHUT, Nicolas (FRA) [13]
BOPANNA, Rohan (IND) & ROGER-VASSELIN, Edouard (FRA) [14]
KUBOT, Lukasz (POL) & MATKOWSKI, Marcin (POL) [15]
HUEY, Treat (PHI) & INGLOT, Dominic (GBR) [16]

LADIES' DOUBLES

ERRANI, Sara (ITA) & VINCI, Roberta (ITA) [1]
HLAVACKOVA, Andrea (CZE) & HRADECKA, Lucie (CZE) [2]
PETROVA, Nadia (RUS) & SREBOTNIK, Katarina (SLO) [3]
MAKAROVA, Ekaterina (RUS) & VESNINA, Elena (RUS) [4]
KOPS-JONES, Raquel (USA) & SPEARS, Abigail (USA) [5]
HUBER, Liezel (USA) & MIRZA, Sania (IND) [6]
GROENEFELD, Anna-Lena (GER) & PESCHKE, Kveta (CZE) [7]
HSIEH, Su-Wei (TPE) & PENG, Shuai (CHN) [8]
PAVLYUCHENKOVA, Anastasia (RUS) & SAFAROVA, Lucie (CZE) [9]
MLADENOVIC, Kristina (FRA) & VOSKOBOEVA, Galina (KAZ) [10]
BLACK, Cara (ZIM) & ERAKOVIC, Marina (NZL) [11]
BARTY, Ashleigh (AUS) & DELLACQUA, Casey (AUS) [12]
KING, Vania (USA) & ZHENG, Jie (CHN) [13]
HANTUCHOVA, Daniela (SVK) & KIRILENKO, Maria (RUS) [14]
CHAN, Hao-Ching (TPE) & MEDINA GARRIGUES, Anabel (ESP) [15]
GOERGES, Julia (GER) & ZAHLAVOVA STRYCOVA, Barbora (CZE) [16]

Source:http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/articles/2013-06-19/201306191371633190432.html

Johnyjeep wrote:

If only the US Open hadn't seeded Nadal No 2 for all those years he wasn't deserved of it (according to the logic applied by some on here) then maybe they'd have had the match they always wanted in an earlier round rather than not (maybe never) at all.

 Where's her royal Hawkeyeness?

Here's a trivia question.

Mahut joined Federer, Murray, Djokovic, Hewitt and Mardy Fish and in which group today?

No idea.

He beat Malisse today, but can't see how that connects them.

Pass

That's the group of current players who have made the final of 3 or more of the different Grass court events on the ATP tour. Hewitt is quite impressive as he's managed finals at 5 different locations.

Interesting reading Lydian's posts about whether seedings should be predictive rather than reflective. Ideally, they should be both. The problem with looking from a purely predictive angle is 
(a) how to deal with varying opinions on who are the favourites & in what order (only need to look at opinions on the legendkiller's Crystal Ball thread to see varying views for this Wimbledon  which are mostly backed up with some reasoning)
(b) that in allocating seedings, you are influencing the event you're trying to predict. Whoever is picked as top 2 seeds get a good deal of protection in the draw and thus are more likely to win.

Given that, I think I'd always want the "predictions" to be done with past performance data thereby making them reflective. If the way the past performance data is used (whether at Wimbledon or elsewhere) isn't fit for purpose because it doesn't allow for injury breaks or very recent form or whatever, then I'd rather the formula was refined, rather than a subjective element introduced.

Another interesting question. If Federer doesn't defend his Wimbledon and Cincinnati points, I believe he'll be ranked fifth for the US Open. Does this also seem an anomaly given his record there and his better H2H against Djokovic, Nadal & Murray than Ferrer? Or would Ferrer deserve to be seeded higher as his results over the previous 12 months would be better? It's harder to argue as case for bumping up Fed's seeding given he's not been out with injury, but if you weren't just going to follow the rankings, it'd need some consideration. Far easier to declare your measure and stick with it I think.

I definitely think it's less contentious than the Nadal case and that after a whole year where both players have had equal opportunity to gain points, one just has to maybe admit that Ferrer has reached a higher level than Federer.

Ferrer has been better in the Slams with 2 SF and 1 RU compared to 2 QF and 1 SF. Ferrer has been better at the Masters, with 1 W and 1 RU. In the same period Federer has 1 RU. Ferrer will have still won a handful of tournaments. They may be 250's where he was No 1 seed, but he still turned up and won. Federer could potentially be the defending champion at Halle. 

Now, we don't know what July and August will bring and by early-September we may be talking   about a decent summer for Federer and how Ferrer may be fading away, but if Federer does slip behind Ferrer, you might just have to accept that Federer in his twilight. 

So, yes Ferrer 4th and Federer 5th if that's what the situation is. You can't bump Federer up for his past greatness if his results show otherwise.

Good summary Ryan. For all Ferrer's shortcomings in terms if Top4 H2H and slam success he's still doing the business at the sharp end and his effort is to be commended. He's 1,600 points ahead of Fedrerer in the race. Indeed, Fed is still only 60pts above being 8th in the overall race. However, we expect the next 3-4 monts to be his strongest part of the season - a lot depends on how well the "Little 4" do between now and WTF.

http://live-tennis.eu/race

ryan86 wrote:I definitely think it's less contentious than the Nadal case and that after a whole year where both players have had equal opportunity to gain points, one just has to maybe admit that Ferrer has reached a higher level than Federer.

Ferrer has been better in the Slams with 2 SF and 1 RU compared to 2 QF and 1 SF. Ferrer has been better at the Masters, with 1 W and 1 RU. In the same period Federer has 1 RU. Ferrer will have still won a handful of tournaments. They may be 250's where he was No 1 seed, but he still turned up and won. Federer could potentially be the defending champion at Halle. 

Now, we don't know what July and August will bring and by early-September we may be talking   about a decent summer for Federer and how Ferrer may be fading away, but if Federer does slip behind Ferrer, you might just have to accept that Federer in his twilight. 

So, yes Ferrer 4th and Federer 5th if that's what the situation is. You can't bump Federer up for his past greatness if his results show otherwise.

Exactly otherwise where do we stop? Do we give a top 32 seeding to Andy Roddick because of his grass court prowess if he had decided to come out of retirement?

No, that would require a 2 year ranking system CC

lydian wrote:No, that would require a 2 year ranking system CC

Yes granted but you see where I am coming from. The system used cannot be manipulated and neither it should. Now I'd fully understand people's views if this system had been altered this year but it has, in fact, been in place for over a decade so Rafa and his fans knew the set-up and seemingly Rafa has accepted it more than a handful of his fans if Sky is anything to go by the odd handful of his fans should follow his lead.

Rafa has accepted it more than his fans if Sky is anything to go by so some of his fans should follow his lead.



Hurrumph... correction here.... more than SOME OF HIS FANS

Yes fair point Haddie. I will away and edit it. In short it is what it is and all players have to get on with it until it is altered.

Roger being 5th in the rankings but bumped up for the USO would be MORE contentious in my opinion. Rafa has been out of action for 8 months, whereas Roger hasn't. Whatever rank Roger is will be what he deserves.

I like seedings totally based on rankings. I think the Wimbledon formula is acceptable too, rankings plus last couple of years grass performance. That's pretty fair.

If it took into account a longer period then you'd be in danger of protecting older players too much, to the posdible detriment of younger players.

But whatever the formula that is pre-agreed it should be stuck to. I don't think you should ever adjust seeds due to subjective calls, like Rafa being more likely to win it than Ferrer. The day that seedings are changed based on opinion - even if its a widely agreed opinion - is the day it becomes unfair.

Rankings aren't subjective, they are black and white. I think that's how every slam should be seeded.

The OOP is out   http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/schedule/index.html

Hewitt vs Warwinka is one to look forward to. Pity I'll be out losing, er, I mean playing, a tennis match.

Hadn't realised Fed was playing someone even older than he is.

It's nice they've given Hewitt and Wawrinka a show court.  I'd be very surprised if this wasn't Hewitt's last appearance at SW19.

The Special Juan wrote:It's nice they've given Hewitt and Wawrinka a show court.  I'd be very surprised if this wasn't Hewitt's last appearance at SW19.

Agreed, he certainly deserves it. I hope Hewitt goes into commentating after he retires, I like his straightforward approach.

I hope the Australian Open name court after him that holds night sessions. Then you'd be late on Hewitt.

Can't see that happening ryan, don't think the Aussies are that sentimental.

Hewitt has been a great servant to his country when on DC duty ; but when it comes to his home Slam, one solitary Final appearance (and no semis at all) in 17 attempts is not really the stuff of legend

ryan86 wrote:I definitely think it's less contentious than the Nadal case and that after a whole year where both players have had equal opportunity to gain points, one just has to maybe admit that Ferrer has reached a higher level than Federer.

Ferrer has been better in the Slams with 2 SF and 1 RU compared to 2 QF and 1 SF. Ferrer has been better at the Masters, with 1 W and 1 RU. In the same period Federer has 1 RU. Ferrer will have still won a handful of tournaments. They may be 250's where he was No 1 seed, but he still turned up and won. Federer could potentially be the defending champion at Halle. 

Now, we don't know what July and August will bring and by early-September we may be talking   about a decent summer for Federer and how Ferrer may be fading away, but if Federer does slip behind Ferrer, you might just have to accept that Federer in his twilight. 

So, yes Ferrer 4th and Federer 5th if that's what the situation is. You can't bump Federer up for his past greatness if his results show otherwise.

Yeah, I totally agree with you and Lydian's subsequent post. It does really reinforce my point though, that everything you've said here is reflective - where Ferrer should be seeded at the US is about his results in the previous year's tournaments, rather than an analysis of his chance of winning the next one. Not that you were arguing against my post anyway!

ryan86 wrote:I hope the Australian Open name court after him that holds night sessions. Then you'd be late on Hewitt.

It took me an hour to get that. I'm having a very slow day.

Took some even longer ! ....