Thoughts on Nadal's seeding at French Open

First topic message reminder :

Ferrer currently stands at No 4, Nadal at No 5. This makes the seeding issue at the French Open very interesting as it's possible that the draw could see Djokovic (1), Federer (3) and Nadal (5) all in the same half, with a possible quarterfinal match: Djokovic v Nadal, or Federer v Nadal (as well as Murray v Nadal if other side of draw).

Ferrer made:

2nd rnd at Monte Carlo - didn't win a match
Final at Barcelona - lost to Nadal
1/4's at Madrid - lost to Federer
Rome SF - lost to Nadal
(SF - French Open - lost to Nadal again!)

I see him at bettering his Monte Carlo result, perhaps a round less in Barcelona, making same round at least in Madrid, and probably same round or perhaps one less in Madrid.

So doubtful that with Nadal winning all his clay court matches, with the exception of Madrid on blue clay (he has all pts to defend), will/can reclaim the No 4 ranking.

Do you feel that the French Open should flex their "muscles," and put Nadal into the fourth seeded position instead of Ferrer (they CAN do this if they wish to - there's no rule that says the French Open MUST STICK to world rankings with their seedings)?

I think that being the 3 time defending champion (7 titles in 8 years) in Paris, with 8 consecutive Monte Carlo Opens, plus his slew of other clay titles historically in the run up to Paris - that he SHOULD NOT be seeded lower than 4; but what are your thoughts on the matter?

HM.Murdoch. So Nadal is not versitile, he only has one plan that doesn't work (and lacks the discipline to even be able to stick to that), he looks totally lost and comes out short when compared to Murray?

The other players have nothing to fear then.

Luvsports. Yes I agree there have been a lot better matches between the two. I particularly like these

https://www.606v2.com/t41683-two-of-the-best-rafa-nole-matches

But in terms of history, drama and even quality the RG final is right up there with some of the best slam finals. If you've time I recommend watching it again. It's very good!

Anti-climax best sums up last year's RG Final so it was certainly not as Hawkeye sees it minus her Rafa specs. Chill out Hawkeye and enjoy watching Rafa win RG in a different way - seeded No.5.

Danny_1982 wrote:Seeding by ranking is the only way to make it not subjective.

Because if you say that Rafa should be above Ferrer, it's just as easy to say he should be above everyone at RG. It would essentially be ranking on bookies favourites. But how is that fair to the world number 1 who has clocked up more points than anyone?

To those that say he should be number 4 only above Ferrer, well why should Ferrer alone be penalised? All he has done is earn more points than all but 3 players over the last 12 months. Yes, Rafa is more likely to win it than Ferrer but he's more likely to win it than anyone I think, so he should be number 1 on that basis.

But that's a subjective call of course. And when it's subjective you bring in theories of favouritism, conspiracy... Etc.

Seed by rankings and you can never go wrong. Judging by points won is never subjective. As said earlier, I don't think it will make a blind bit of difference anyway as this is Rafa and RG we're talking about. He'll probably win it losing about 2 sets along the way.

And for the sake of fairness, transparency and the good of the sport I hope he wins it as number 5 seed.

They could easily adopt a similar seeding formula to Wimbledon. Add the best two results in the clay masters in the run-up plus 75% of a player's best clay result in the previous year. Assuming Rafa wins two Masters, he would then gain 3,500 points under the seeding formula and magically re-appear probably as 4th seed or possibly slightly higher. Its how I would do the seedings for RG but they follow the rankings, so that's what will happen this year.

hawkeye wrote:HM.Murdoch. So Nadal is not versitile, he only has one plan that doesn't work (and lacks the discipline to even be able to stick to that), he looks totally lost and comes out short when compared to Murray?

The other players have nothing to fear then.

This would have been wittier if it responded to what I actually said.

Murdoch. I find the trick is when dealing with HE, is to have a very low expectation that she will address your point and if she does then it will be not that relevant, suit nadal, her argument etc.

So in that sense when she does a good comment by her standards I am pleasantly surprised, before reverting quickly back to my stance of low expectations .

While I agree that RG was not the final we hoped for, I think that had more to do with the fact that Nadal finally began to understand how to nullify Djokovic. Djokovic won only one set vs Nadal the entire clay season, and that was in the rain. I am convinced that Nadal would have duffed him in three had it not started raining.

LuvSports, I think the mistake I made was to put 'Nadal' and 'Murray' in such close proximity. I suspect this may have reduced the rest of my post to just a white noise for poor Hawkeye.

"screeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeNADALeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeMURRAYeeeeeeee"

Could be, could be.
Seriously though, think about my advice..... viiicccee.... viicccceee .viccceee

hawkeye wrote:Most agree that there should be some form of seeding. Technicalities about how the seeds are drawn are a side issue to how the players are seeded. Prior to his injury Nadal was number one in the race and had stolen the clay season as usual including three straight wins against the number one player of the moment. He didn't gain ranking points for 7 months not because he was beaten but because he didn't take part. When he came back he just started where he left off. He could do the same clay sweep leading up to RG and yet still be seeded 5. (Ha ha CC and others that think he's a similar case to Roddick and Del Potro)

I don't think I have to explain that Nadal isnt the 5th best player at RG because I think everyone agrees on this. Despite this knowledge and despite everyone talking about it because it is clearly ridiculous some still think the seeding should still be based on ranking. Their only reasoning is that it's always been done that way and in the past it hasn't been a problem. Not good reasoning for knowingly doing the wrong thing. I wonder what happened when pro players returned to open tennis. Did Laver have to play through challengers to get his ranking points up on the way to his grand slam? Or did they make some special rules to suit special circumstances?

I agree it probably won't make much difference to Nadal's chances of lifting the trophy at the end but that's not the point. The point is the "final" may very well take place in the quarters. No tournament wants it's marque match in the quarters and a damp squid in the final. Thats why we have seeding in the first place.

Also really don't understand those that say it's somehow disrespectful to Djokovic to allow Nadal to leapfrog him in the seedings (not the rankings) because given half a chance he would be first in the queue to sign a petition to give Rafa top seeding. Ha ha! "Please Rafa you can go 1st I don't mind"

Hawkeye you have it the wrong way around. Nadal is the side issue. How the seedings are drawn is the main issue. Because you have to apply the same to everyone. What people are talking about is going against the grain purely to satisfy one player. If they apply a different rule/formula to one player they should apply it to everyone. If they decide to move Nadal arbitrarily, each player should then have a right to demand the same treatment. It’s all relative depending where you are ranked within the tour against the players around you. Do the players in the top10 have a different method of determining their seeding compared to the players 20-30? No, of course not.

It doesn’t matter if RG do use a different formula by which to move Nadal up the order – though I’m sure this would raise some eyebrows. Whether this be all the way to 1, 2, 3 or 4. But as I said, if they then change the seedings back the following year the tournament risks losing a bit of credibility because by doing that, it looks like blatant favouritism. If this is their desire, then so be it.

I’m not opposed to them changing their policy of drawing seedings. I am opposed to them using a different mechanism for one player only. Hawkeye, I agree with everything you say by Nadal not being the 5th best player at RG. But seeds aren’t drawn by player’s previous performances at the same competition. This much is obvious so I’m not sure why you’ve made this comment.

This stuff about having the seedings set so the best players reach the final stages. The best player on the day wins the match. It’s a knock-out competition – anything can happen. That’s the beauty. If you want the ‘best’ players in the final then let’s just have the top 4 play-off for every grand slam. It’d be ridiculous. I don’t care if Nadal meets Federer in the final or quarters. It’ll be a great game either way. In fact, I think the earlier Federer meets Nadal the closer it would be given these are Fed’s autumn/winter years. He needs to be as fresh as possible to stand any chance – which on clay has been shown to be next to none. At RG it actually is none!

I'm not fussed what they do with their seedings to be honest - whether they leave them with the ranking or adjust them. But if they adjust them, I think it would be preferable to do so based on a formula (like the surface adjustment Wimbledon use) for transparency rather than an arbitrary move of Nadal alone.

I understand Hawkeye's argument about the tournament & the sponsors wanting their marquee match in the final - but I have to say that I'm not convinced that Nadal is one of their preferred finalists, much as he is the man to beat. The French seem to prefer Federer and the global viewing figures for last year's Wimbledon final seem to suggest that global audiences do too. So wouldn't the dream final be Federer against either a French player (Tsonga, Gasquet) or a player who would compete just well enough against Fed to not be a foregone conclusion. I think that rules out Nadal & Djokovic from the dream final too. Ultimately, of course, it's extremely unlikely this dream final will happen, and there's no seedings that RG could choose that would make it more likely to happen with Nadal still in the draw somewhere - this is why I don't think they will bother altering their seedings.

If spectators want to see dream finals, they should just watch exhos.

YvonneT. I don't know. I agree that the French probably love Federer more than Nadal but if it were possible to fix a final I'm pretty sure it would be Federer v Nadal. It doesn't seem too long ago that 606v2 was filled with articles suggesting that this was actually happening (Ha ha!). It's of more importance to sponsors to have the two biggest draws in the final and that is undoubtedly Federer and Nadal.

We saw evidence of this just recently. The excitement of them both being in the draw at Indian Wells with record ticket sales... and then the damp squid of Miami with notable poor sales. Both generate their own interest but more important both are recognised as THE face of tennis to the more general and casual fan. The only tournament were a different marque match might be preferred would be Wimbledon were they would like Murray in the final maybe even against a low ranked player. Well that's what Karlovic believes anyway... (But that wouldn't be the best match to sell world wide.)

RG can I believe do anything they want with the seeding. I too doubt they will. I hadn't thought of Haddie-nuffs point that if they did alter the seeding to make it more realistic and put Nadal in the top spot. We would never hear the last of it. Can you imagine. Ha ha!

Luvsports. You were so busy talking about me behind my back you probably didn't see my answer to you about the best Nadal Djokovic matches and why RG 2012 was a great slam final. Tennis at it's best involves drama with more than a single match at stake. That match still makes me feel nervous thinking about it. I don't know how either player managed to hold a raquet without shaking let alone produce the quality tennis that they did. Nadal was quite brilliant at the beginning but Djokovic's resilience and the way he swung out for winners in the rain shows why he is so good and tricky to beat. Then both players had to sleep on it. It was like a film script. Watch some of it again and see. Maybe because the ending was restoration rather than destruction makes the ending appear less dramatic to some?

As for you talking about me...Ha ha! Don't try and say Murray is better than Federer, Nadal or Djokovic as I will always jump in and say "no!" Less people say it about Federer and Djokovic though so I don't have to do as much jumping for them.

laverfan. An exhibition featuring Nadal and Djokovic could never be compared with the 2012 RG final. I think most spectators would notice the difference

hawkeye wrote:YvonneT. I don't know. I agree that the French probably love Federer more than Nadal but if it were possible to fix a final I'm pretty sure it would be Federer v Nadal. It doesn't seem too long ago that 606v2 was filled with articles suggesting that this was actually happening (Ha ha!). It's of more importance to sponsors to have the two biggest draws in the final and that is undoubtedly Federer and Nadal.

We saw evidence of this just recently. The excitement of them both being in the draw at Indian Wells with record ticket sales... and then the damp squid of Miami with notable poor sales. Both generate their own interest but more important both are recognised as THE face of tennis to the more general and casual fan. The only tournament were a different marque match might be preferred would be Wimbledon were they would like Murray in the final maybe even against a low ranked player. Well that's what Karlovic believes anyway... (But that wouldn't be the best match to sell world wide.)

RG can I believe do anything they want with the seeding. I too doubt they will. I hadn't thought of Haddie-nuffs point that if they did alter the seeding to make it more realistic and put Nadal in the top spot. We would never hear the last of it. Can you imagine. Ha ha!

Luvsports. You were so busy talking about me behind my back you probably didn't see my answer to you about the best Nadal Djokovic matches and why RG 2012 was a great slam final. Tennis at it's best involves drama with more than a single match at stake. That match still makes me feel nervous thinking about it. I don't know how either player managed to hold a raquet without shaking let alone produce the quality tennis that they did. Nadal was quite brilliant at the beginning but Djokovic's resilience and the way he swung out for winners in the rain shows why he is so good and tricky to beat. Then both players had to sleep on it. It was like a film script. Watch some of it again and see. Maybe because the ending was restoration rather than destruction makes the ending appear less dramatic to some?

As for you talking about me...Ha ha! Don't try and say Murray is better than Federer, Nadal or Djokovic as I will always jump in and say "no!" Less people say it about Federer and Djokovic though so I don't have to do as much jumping for them.

oh i saw it, but i disagreed as it was like this.... bla bla bla bla bla nadal is the best ever bla bla bla best final ever as nadal made history bla bla bla yackity smackity i hate murray tried and trusted lingo.
We get it every single win over feds or djoko for nadal is amazing and one of the best.

HE You really are living in cloud cuckoo land if you believe there is still a viable rivalry between Nadal and Federer.. sorry but they are simply history now.. yes the French would love Federer to beat Nadal and win the FO but it simply isn´t gonna happen. Now to asuage your enormous disappointment I have found this ESPECIALLY FOR YOU


http://www.downthelinetennis.com/


Now restrain yourself HE

Now look here LS: Everybody knows Verdascos victories over Murray, Nadal are amazing and one of the best

Haddie-nuff wrote:HE You really are living in cloud cuckoo land if you believe there is still a viable rivalry between Nadal and Federer.. sorry but they are simply history now.. yes the French would love Federer to beat Nadal and win the FO but it simply isn´t gonna happen. Now to asuage your enormous disappointment I have found this ESPECIALLY FOR YOU


http://www.downthelinetennis.com/


Now restrain yourself HE

Sorry but HE has just spontaneously combusted looking at that.

Yep I thought she might

Luvsports. Now I think it's you that's being a little touchy. If you didn't like last years RG final fair enough. But there is no way that wasn't the marque match. That was the match that everyone apart from the rare few wanted to see. They didn't want to see it in the quarters either.

Same goes for this year.

Ha ha! About the naked oiled up Murray picture. You may not believe this but I actually posses my own double page glossy copy of this. It came in the magazine copy of The Times last week. It's I presume part of the attempt to (cough) enhance his image. I think laverfan said she wanted it. I'm still waiting for her to pop round and pick it up. If your reading this laverfan you better be quick as it's recycling day next Wednesday...

Will laverfan want it though with all those dart holes in it?

Point is that in no way did it pan out like a Marquis match. It was a disappointing let down in general apart from if you were a Nadal fan.

Andy is really skinny though!

CaledonianCraig wrote:Will laverfan want it though with all those dart holes in it?

At a distance you wouldn´t see the dart holes.. its the egg stains that are difficult to disguise

i cant even spell the word tutchie.... tutchy..... touchie...

It was the marquee event yes, but imo it was a big let down. The standard wasn't that high and they have had way better matches.
I didnt think that fo was great, only the tsonga-djoko match stands out.

Try touchy LS

How about touché? I dont know I am just guessing

kingraf wrote:How about touché? I dont know I am just guessing

Ohhh is that what he´s trying to say... I thought touchy feely ...ooops !!!

Leave it as is, it'll make the draw really interesting.

I will be praying to the tennis Gods for Fed to have just Murray in his half.

hawkeye wrote:YvonneT. I don't know. I agree that the French probably love Federer more than Nadal

I have no idea why the word "probably" makes it's way into that sentence.

I think they may like Murray more than Rafa, considering that Murray is British, it shows you how rough it is.

I got the impression that during their '11 FO semi nadal got more of the support.

Must have some Spaniards who snuck through border control!!

On a serious note, why dont they like Rafa? I remember hearing it had something to do with an interpretor during a victory speech.

bogbrush. Mmmm... That might not be what the restless, always looking for change, the grass may be greener just over there 606v2 posters want but I think I might sign for that. Federer can have Murray in the quarters. We have to be kind to old tennis players with bad backs. And Nadal can take care of Djokovic in the quarters (gulp!). That way we have the chance to see the old and trusty marque final of Federer v Nadal. Hurray! We will probably get good seats too as I've been informed that no one is interested in watching this pair anymore.

You know I think even the sponsors may be persuaded by this... but don't tell Djokovic!

Yep, everyone wants a Federer v Nadal final, it's the most thrilling match up you can get.

I particularly like how 6 of the last 10 have been straight sets wins.

I also like how 7 of those matches have included sets of 6-2, 6-1 or 6-0. That just shows how great the attacking tennis is. It's nothing to do with the fact that one of them is usually way off the pace.

It's a rollercoaster. I can never tell who is going to win until maybe half an hour before the end of the match.

Truth is Fedal is still the hottest ticket in tennis. In 2010 they sold out back-to-back exhos. I think they could do the same next week, really.Marketing-wise, its like The Beatles and Stones having a tour together, Ali and Tyson fighting each other. Schumacher and Senna having a one-off race. Tennis pretty much bottled lightning with this rivalry, and while has been one-sided (11-4 since 2007 WTF), you can not doubt it is. the hottest ticket in town. Look up their social network reach.

Don't be sour HM Murdoch. If you don't like the big marque matches it has it's advantages. You can get front row seats for the less popular matches at a fraction of the cost. Next time they play don't force yourself to watch. This golden age will be over soon and you won't have to put up with what you consider a less than thrilling match up anymore.

kingraff

It's ok murdoch, remember my HE advice...vicee..viiiiccceee.....vviiiccceeeee.

ANyway everyone comes to see feds over nadal, feds gets the greater support, bar madrid

hawkeye wrote:I think laverfan said she wanted it. I'm still waiting for her to pop round and pick it up. If your reading this laverfan you better be quick as it's recycling day next Wednesday...

If you can scan it and send me a link or post it, I can download it and stick it on my wall along with Fedalovic, Ferrer, 'Muscles' Rosewall, Laver, Smoking Pancho, Shirt-exchanging Llodra, Racquet-in-the-stands Soderling, Tsonga, 5-MPs Monfils, and an assortment of WTA stars.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Will laverfan want it though with all those dart holes in it?

I will take it. Dart holes with or without.

kingraf wrote:Truth is Fedal is still the hottest ticket in tennis. In 2010 they sold out back-to-back exhos. I think they could do the same next week, really.Marketing-wise, its like The Beatles and Stones having a tour together.

This is actually a good analogy.

If you see the Stones or Paul McCartney nowadays it's pretty clear that they were much better in the past.

And if social media is the measure of quality, let's just get Justin Bieber to play Harry Styles and be done with it.

I must ask, who is Harry Styles? Seriously, I live in the bottom of Africa, and only follow athletes, a few rappers, and uhm.. Justin Timberlake

Social media is a measure of popularity, though. Which was my point, really.

kingraf wrote:Must have some Spaniards who snuck through border control!!

On a serious note, why dont they like Rafa? I remember hearing it had something to do with an interpretor during a victory speech.

They are two Nations who do not particularly like each other ... full stop.. dont think its just Rafa

kingraf wrote:I must ask, who is Harry Styles? Seriously, I live in the bottom of Africa, and only follow athletes, a few rappers, and uhm.. Justin Timberlake

Ha! He's an inexplicably popular popstar with a silly haircut! Count your blessings that you are unfamiliar with his work!

I actually don't disagree with about the popularity point.

I just find the moans of pleasure that the very mention of Fedal elicits from certain posters on this forum a little nauseating after a while!

HM Murdoch wrote:Yep, everyone wants a Federer v Nadal final, it's the most thrilling match up you can get.

I particularly like how 6 of the last 10 have been straight sets wins.

I also like how 7 of those matches have included sets of 6-2, 6-1 or 6-0. That just shows how great the attacking tennis is. It's nothing to do with the fact that one of them is usually way off the pace.

It's a rollercoaster. I can never tell who is going to win until maybe half an hour before the end of the match.

HM you ar not seriously tellng us that you ever expect to see that again .... not really surely !!! ?? It was the rivalry to beat all rivalries but no more.

Sorry Haddie, I'm not following your question (I'm probably being a bit slow).

What do you think I don't expect to see?

Well I may have misunderstood YOU so forgive me . I thought you were expecting to see a continuation of the rivalry (that many of us have enjoyed) between the two of them.. and I believe it will never happen.. that sadly it has faded to the point of near death ! again if Im wrong Im sorry

HM- sadly I now know who he is. My sister filled me in on his popularity.

I like Fedal, tbh, but it isnt the be-all of my viewing, in fact Nadal-Djokovic is much nicer, on a decently paced court.Only problem with the rivalry is that it wildly fluctuates. Its currently 19-14, but either side of Djokovic's 7 match run, Nadal won three straight. While Djokovic also won three straight before the that

Haddie - no, I was saying the opposite (obviously the sarcasm didn't translate when in writing!).

It WAS an amazing rivalry, one of the greats. But it's been more miss than hit for years now and yet some people still think it's raging like it's 2008!

OK HM then lets see if this will persuade them differently


http://www.pickenssentinel.com/view/full_story/22097520/article-The-Federer-Nadal-rivalry-is-dead

For me a keen rivalry is one that produces closely-fought and tight matches and the Fedal rivalry hasn't produced that for a few years so people should change the record. It was great many years ago but no more. I suppose it would be akin to pitting Steve Davis up against Stephen Hendry nowadays - it wouldn't recapture the magic of previous meetings between them.