Early Grass Talk - 2019

[Carol]

Not calling him a hypocrite but the sour grapes here are kind of silly considering that he perfectly understands how the seedings are done at Wimbledon.

They asked him what he is thinking about it and he answered he disagrees about that regulation and not not just because him but others too. By the way Novak has said the same thing and probably most of the players are thinking the same way

 

[Carol]

The problem is that they want that all the players have to participe playing in Queens o Halle so they are counting the points they have done from last year. Federer played last year and this one too while Nadal didn't play both years . Of course he knows about that stupid regulation but it doesn't mean he must agree because the grass season is too close to the clay and after to win several tournaments including RG it would be crazy to play one week later on grass which is a surface completely different.

 

[Moxie]

How is he 100% right. There is nothing new with Wimbledon for the last century seeding according to their formula. If Fed had lost in Halla he would have been ranked #2. It's not disrespectful at all.

I have been looking for historical back-up for when Wimbledon started using their own particular formula for seeding. If it was when grass tournaments became so scarce, then I understand it. If it was 100 years ago, then there was no reason for it at the time. Interestingly, I learned that Wimbledon introduced the seeding system...in the 20s, I think.

Not calling him a hypocrite but the sour grapes here are kind of silly considering that he perfectly understands how the seedings are done at Wimbledon.

You should go back to Broken's post where he says what Rafa actually said. Clearly he was asked a question and answered it. He's not complaining. What he said has nuance and you really should read it.

Nadal just needed to play in Queens and reach QF, he would have been #2 despite Roger winning Halle. Instead of doing that, he just cries foul play. He knows how the system works before hand as well as everyone else (and there is nothing wrong with the system in view of short grass season).

Again, read what Nadal actually said. He's not crying foul play, at all. He answered a question and you should read what he said, instead of jumping on him, as many have done here, to say that he's complaining about a system that is in place. He was asked to give his opinion and he did.

 

[MartyB]

I have been looking for historical back-up for when Wimbledon started using their own particular formula for seeding. If it was when grass tournaments became so scarce, then I understand it. If it was 100 years ago, then there was no reason for it at the time. Interestingly, I learned that Wimbledon introduced the seeding system...in the 20s, I think.


You should go back to Broken's post where he says what Rafa actually said. Clearly he was asked a question and answered it. He's not complaining. What he said has nuance and you really should read it.
Again, read what Nadal actually said. He's not crying foul play, at all. He answered a question and you should read what he said, instead of jumping on him, as many have done here, to say that he's complaining about a system that is in place. He was asked to give his opinion and he did.

I did read his entire quote. What jumps out is his questioning a seeding at Wimbledon that Nadal has understood from his junior days. I don't disagree why the other slams don't take into consideration surface when doing seeding. But to question it now don't you think smacks of self serving? Plus I don't think Thiem will be ranked #4 either.Haven't heard him complaining yet. Lol. Moxie I have the highest admiration for Nadal but when he deserves criticism and in this instance justified.

 

[Moxie]

I did read his entire quote. What jumps out is his questioning a seeding at Wimbledon that Nadal has understood from his junior days. I don't disagree why the other slams don't take into consideration surface when doing seeding. But to question it now don't you think smacks of self serving? Plus I don't think Thiem will be ranked #4 either.Haven't heard him complaining yet. Lol. Moxie I have the highest admiration for Nadal but when he deserves criticism and in this instance justified.

I think you put too much emphasis on what players say in a presser when asked a question. You say it's self-serving, but it's not like he called a press conference to complain about his seeding. He was asked a question and offered an opinion. Why should he be happy about being seeded 3 when he's #2? And sure, it's the way Wimbledon does it, but it IS an anomaly in all of the tournaments in this. It's not like there's nothing to be discussed.

 

[MartyB]

I think you put too much emphasis on what players say in a presser when asked a question. You say it's self-serving, but it's not like he called a press conference to complain about his seeding. He was asked a question and offered an opinion. Why should he be happy about being seeded 3 when he's #2? And sure, it's the way Wimbledon does it, but it IS an anomaly in all of the tournaments in this. It's not like there's nothing to be discussed.

This seeding by Wimbledon didn't single out Nadal for the snub. Not sure but the seedings for the top 32 will reflect grass court prowess like it has for 75 years? Nadal is bitter about his ranking no? The question asked of him was probably asked to get a rise out of him I'm sure but he knows the score and his questioning of it sounds a bit whiny in my opinion.

 

[Moxie]

This seeding by Wimbledon didn't single out Nadal for the snub. Not sure but the seedings for the top 32 will reflect grass court prowess like it has for 75 years? Nadal is bitter about his ranking no? The question asked of him was probably asked to get a rise out of him I'm sure but he knows the score and his questioning of it sounds a bit whiny in my opinion.

I think you make too much of "bitter" and "whiny." And also "snub." Those are subjective judgements/words about what he said, and what I object to. As you say, he was asked a question, probably to get a rise out of him. Don't call him whiny just because he answered it. Also, we still haven't determined when Wimbledon decided to make their own seeding system.

 

[mrzz]

Actually I think the current seeding formula is from 2002... but I would need to check and I don't have much time. And honestly any major can do what the hell they want, they could do seeding in alphabetical order. It is their tournament. As long as the rules are the same for everyone, it is ok. On top of that, it makes a whole lot of sense to have a special grass formula. It is (still) a peculiar surface after all and it is an obvious truth that some players adapt more to it than others, from top to bottom. Actually I think even the entry list should follow their formula.

...and smart posters already got where I want to get. Dustin Brown should be in the main draw without having to qualify for it!

 

[MartyB]

I think you make too much of "bitter" and "whiny." And also "snub." Those are subjective judgements/words about what he said, and what I object to. As you say, he was asked a question, probably to get a rise out of him. Don't call him whiny just because he answered it. Also, we still haven't determined when Wimbledon decided to make their own seeding system.

My impression of Nadal's comments stand. Don't begrudge his greatness.

 

[Moxie]

Actually I think the current seeding formula is from 2002... but I would need to check and I don't have much time. And honestly any major can do what the hell they want, they could do seeding in alphabetical order. It is their tournament. As long as the rules are the same for everyone, it is ok. On top of that, it makes a whole lot of sense to have a special grass formula. It is (still) a peculiar surface after all and it is an obvious truth that some players adapt more to it than others, from top to bottom. Actually I think even the entry list should follow their formula.

...and smart posters already got where I want to get. Dustin Brown should be in the main draw without having to qualify for it!

Possibly from 2002, but I have looked for it, and can't find it. Surely, the tournaments, even Majors can do whatever they want, since they've all designed different formulae for TBs (or not.) As to moving far beyond the established seedings...well, now you're just being an anarchist.

And this could be a function of English, but grass is not "still" a peculiar surface. It is more newly so. There was a long time that most of the calendar was played on grass. But not so, now, I understand. Sure, the tournament could completely upset the apple cart and seed players based on grass results per some really random choice, but they had for a long time a committee to decide that. Then they switched to a specific formula, per agreement with the ATP. Look, everyone likes Dustin Brown. But at a certain point, you do have to respect what players have done during the year. To this point I agree with Nadal. Do players who work hard all year for their ranking deserve to be just thrown into a blender at a Major? Do you really want Wimbledon to turn into the Wild West? I mean, it might be really fun if you put Brown directly into main draw. (He's currently ranked 150.) But that's what the WC is for. As GSM and I mentioned above, there is one WC that seems wasted on Bagdhatis, just because he's retiring. I don't think it would change the top 3 if you just randomly put in grass players into main draw, and maybe it would be interesting. I'm not saying that it's Nadal who would be harmed. (2 v 3...he should have such problems in life,) but it's lower ranked players that you would throw out. Who have worked hard for their ranking, and their position in MD v. Qualifying. Do you really think that is fair?

 

[Carol]

I did read his entire quote. What jumps out is his questioning a seeding at Wimbledon that Nadal has understood from his junior days. I don't disagree why the other slams don't take into consideration surface when doing seeding. But to question it now don't you think smacks of self serving? Plus I don't think Thiem will be ranked #4 either.Haven't heard him complaining yet. Lol. Moxie I have the highest admiration for Nadal but when he deserves criticism and in this instance justified.

Maybe Thiem has complained too but nobody cares what he says. The problem is that some of you care too much what Rafa says lol. Like D. Quijote said to Pancho: "If the dogs are barking it means we are still riding"

 

[monfed]

dull whining again..What's new?

 

[Carol]

dull whining again..What's new?

And you barking again....What's new?

 

[mrzz]

Do you really want Wimbledon to turn into the Wild West?

Of course I do. I am an anarchist (and, no, I am not being sarcastic, you got it right).

Who have worked hard for their ranking, and their position in MD v. Qualifying. Do you really think that is fair?

But it is a grass tournament, isn't it also fair that the better grass players get the positions? I see that there are arguments for both sides. And -- just a remark -- I inserted D. Brown in this conversation just for fun. In fact, grass ranking would probably benefit more players that I don't like than the other way around (but a few favored ones I really like, of course).

 

[Carol]

This is exactly what Nadal has said

https://en.as.com/en/2019/06/25/other_sports/1561461402_404426.html

 

[Carol]

I'm hearing that Rafa is calling the Wimbledon adjusted ranking system "disrespectful"

@britbox can I officially lodge a request for the "crying with laughter emoji" please?

Don't put words that Rafa has never said and try to read what exactly he said

 

[Carol]

Nadal just needed to play in Queens and reach QF, he would have been #2 despite Roger winning Halle. Instead of doing that, he just cries foul play. He knows how the system works before hand as well as everyone else (and there is nothing wrong with the system in view of short grass season).

Nothing wrong with the system because we know that Wimbledon is "Jurassic Park" :lulz2:

 

[Moxie]

Of course I do. I am an anarchist (and, no, I am not being sarcastic, you got it right).

But it is a grass tournament, isn't it also fair that the better grass players get the positions? I see that there are arguments for both sides. And -- just a remark -- I inserted D. Brown in this conversation just for fun. In fact, grass ranking would probably benefit more players that I don't like than the other way around (but a few favored ones I really like, of course).

But we come back to practicalities. Dreddy Brown is the poster child for "fun grass tennis." Who else would you say has been unfairly excluded, based on the current system, or would benefit from some "Wild West" seeding? Feliciano Lopez? Matteo Berretini? Who do you think is an especially fine grass player that has been excluded/relegating to qualies, that you'd move to the main draw?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Actually, all majors used to have only 16 seeds. But, when the grass formula was used, some players who were in top 16 did not get top 16 seed. There was a huge army of Spanish players who threatened to boycott Wimbledon as they were not getting seeded. In order to avert the crisis Wimbledon decided to raise the number of seeds from 16 to 32, but keep using the formula. Now, the players who were not getting protection would be way below in the pecking order and so their voice would not count too much (at least that must have been the calculation).

I think once Wimbledon raised the number of seeds, all the rest of the majors followed the suit.

 

[Moxie]

Actually, all majors used to have only 16 seeds. But, when the grass formula was used, some players who were in top 16 did not get top 16 seed. There was a huge army of Spanish players who threatened to boycott Wimbledon as they were not getting seeded. In order to avert the crisis Wimbledon decided to raise the number of seeds from 16 to 32, but keep using the formula. Now, the players who were not getting protection would be way below in the pecking order and so their voice would not count too much (at least that must have been the calculation).

I think once Wimbledon raised the number of seeds, all the rest of the majors followed the suit.

Citation?