PDA

View Full Version : Looking ahead...FO


choi15
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:02 PM
So one of the commentators, I'm horrible with names but he's Australian, said Justine SHOULD be ranked within 1-4 at the French Open. That it would be a travesty if she weren't considering how much she's achieved there, and that the ITF has the power to do so.

Do you agree? Should the FO make an adjustment to accommodate Justine, and rank her as one of the 1-4 seed because of the four titles she's won? Does it even matter (meaning she will blitz through the field anyways)?

Tennisstar86
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:03 PM
Darrin Cayhill said it and hes an idiot and doesnt know what hes talking about.... the ITF does not change the rankings... Only Wimbledon does...... so no. Justine should not be seeded...

Uranium
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:04 PM
So one of the commentators, I'm horrible with names but he's Australian, said Justine SHOULD be ranked within 1-4 at the French Open. That it would be a travesty if she weren't considering how much she's achieved there, and that the ITF has the power to do so.

Do you agree? Should the FO make an adjustment to accommodate Justine, and rank her as one of the 1-4 seed because of the four titles she's won? Does it even matter (meaning she will blitz through the field anyways)?

Ugh, I heard that too:rolleyes: They also said she and Kim should have been seeded higher for this Australian Open.:lol:

choi15
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:06 PM
Noob question: Why does wimbledon make accommodations for seeds depending on past achievements but other GS don't? I know that wimbly does, but never bother to check up on it.

TheSeth1119
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:13 PM
Why does only the USO have a tiebreaker for the deciding set in singles (3rd set women's and 5th set men's)? The AO, FO, and W you have to win the final set by two games (i.e. 6-4, 7-5, 8-6, and so on).

choi15
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:19 PM
Why does only the USO have a tiebreaker for the deciding set in singles (3rd set women's and 5th set men's)? The AO, FO, and W you have to win the final set by two games (i.e. 6-4, 7-5, 8-6, and so on).

True...but wouldn't there be more of an argument for accommodating unranked players (whether due to injury/retirement comeback/personal) as seeded players, because of their past achievements, as opposed to something as obscure as having a tiebreaker for the deciding third set?

goldenlox
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:20 PM
Justine not being seeded hurt Dementieva, but it didn't affect the tournament.
If Justine drew Serena in round 2, that would have been a big match, but the winner would probably win the title.

Justine will be seeded by the FO. I would expect her to be top 16 by then.

TheSeth1119
Jan 30th, 2010, 06:23 PM
No doubt she will be. Justine after her minimum 3 tournaments played after coming back from retirement will be at least in the 30s in the rankings, so expect her to be in the top 32 by the FO.

MarieC
Jan 30th, 2010, 07:40 PM
She's going to be top 40 following the Australian Open.

I assume she will probably play at least 4 tournaments before the French Open so she will probably be somewhere inside the top 20.

I don't agree with ranking someone inside the top 4 who's been out of the game, you have to earn that. I do agree though with giving a seed in the top 32 just to avoid clashes with the top seeds before the 3rd round. Dementieva got screwed because of this.

We shouldn't have to worry about this for anytime in the near future now that there isn't anymore top players expected to come out of retirement.

goldenlox
Jan 30th, 2010, 07:48 PM
Justine will be the favorite, and it's going to be interesting.
She was not the favorite here, and most of the players she beat were not contenders.
Maybe Alisa, Nadia and Jie played well, but they would have been shock winnere.

A lot more pressure in Paris. But the clay will slow down Serena's game a lot, and that helps Justine

brickhousesupporter
Jan 30th, 2010, 07:59 PM
I don't remember any outcry for changes to the seeding system when Serena was ranked 81 in the world and playing the 2007 Australian Open. When you are good enough, it does not matter who your competition is.

danieln1
Jan 30th, 2010, 08:02 PM
Justine should be seeded 4 at the french, but she wont, because they donŽt change the seeds...

But sheŽll be seeded at least 16 for the french... and draw Dementieva/Petrova in her section just for a change! :haha:

goldenlox
Jan 30th, 2010, 08:28 PM
The FO is a big major being that if Justine is going to make a real run at Serena in career slams, she has to get it back to 4, probably has to be at worst 3 behind after the 2011 FO.
And she has to win a Wimbledon, and that will get easier, probably, if Justine can hold her level for a few more years.
I don't see any young players coming up who are threats.

debby
Jan 30th, 2010, 08:42 PM
Justine will be seeded, she is in the TOP 40 but her next tournament is Indian Wells. If she plays well there , she can win it (the WS won't be there), then Miami , why not. Then clay summer... Justine should not be seeded #4 but she should be seeded at RG. And she will, because she will earn it. End of the story.

I was the first to complain about Sharapova having a higher seed ranking at Wimbledon, I don't know double standards ;)

You know, RG is 4months far away... lol...

nevetssllim
Jan 30th, 2010, 08:45 PM
Of course Justine will be seeded for the French Open but there's no way she should have been seeded for the AO (and Clijsters shouldn't have been seeded higher), as Virginia Wade also said in the Eurosport studio.

Nothing forced them out of the game and they left because they chose to so you have to accept, and I'm sure they do, that they won't be seeded on their reputation alone.

Tennisstar86
Jan 30th, 2010, 08:56 PM
Noob question: Why does wimbledon make accommodations for seeds depending on past achievements but other GS don't? I know that wimbly does, but never bother to check up on it.

Im not sure how long they have been doing it. the history of it..... but it might have something to do with the fact that theres only 2 grass court tournaments in the year... theres no build up to switching to grass and clearly some players (Venus) play better on the grass so they only get like 2 tournaments to build onto their ranking on their best surface where hard/ clay get months of tournaments. Of course thats just the rational they could use.......

But its prolly something "tradition" blah blah.... who knows....:lol:

choi15
Jan 30th, 2010, 09:20 PM
Im not sure how long they have been doing it. the history of it..... but it might have something to do with the fact that theres only 2 grass court tournaments in the year... theres no build up to switching to grass and clearly some players (Venus) play better on the grass so they only get like 2 tournaments to build onto their ranking on their best surface where hard/ clay get months of tournaments. Of course thats just the rational they could use.......

But its prolly something "tradition" blah blah.... who knows....:lol:

Ahhh ok thanks :lol:.

@Brickhouse - ahh good point. I forgot about Serena at the 07 AO, although she only held 2 AO prior vs Justine 4. Cayhill just seemed so adament on seeding Justine 1-4, even shocked if not done, so that's why I was wondering if it was even at all possible for ITF to step in and do something. Guess not :lol:.

treufreund
Jan 30th, 2010, 09:24 PM
If she continues to make finals of tournaments on a pretty consistent basis throughout the next few months, then they ought to seriously consider that option. Either way, she is great on clay and can handle any draw she gets if she is healthy.

Cookie Power
Jan 30th, 2010, 11:02 PM
So one of the commentators, I'm horrible with names but he's Australian, said Justine SHOULD be ranked within 1-4 at the French Open.

No, the cheater should not be given any more special privileges than she already has (hi Carlos).

choi15
Jan 30th, 2010, 11:53 PM
No, the cheater should not be given any more special privileges than she already has (hi Carlos).

Directed at me :eek:? As in Spencercarlos :lol:? Im chinese...;)