PDA

View Full Version : Looks Like Venus May Have A Shot Of Being Seeded Number 2 At Wimbeldon


lizchris
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:27 PM
Tennis-Agassi reaches Stella semis, regains No1 spot
Reuters
Jun 13 2003 1:57PM

LONDON, June 13 (Reuters) - Andre Agassi blasted into the semi-finals of the Stella Artois Championships on Friday, recapturing the world number one ranking along the way.
The 33-year-old's 6-4 7-5 win over Xavier Malisse vaulted him to the top of the rankings after Lleyton Hewitt had earlier lost at Queen's Club for the first time in four years.

"It feels amazing to accomplish it at this stage in my career," Agassi said after becoming the oldest world number one. "When you go out there you are always trying to be the best."

Wimbledon champion Hewitt dropped to number two when he fell in the quarter-finals to Sebastien Grosjean 6-3 6-4.

The Australian had been gunning for an unprecedented fourth straight title here but instead suffered his first Queen's loss since 1999.

"I knew nobody had done it before," Hewitt said of the record. "But it wasn't just winning today, I would have had to win a couple more matches as well.

"When you look at it, three in a row here isn't too bad, mate."

In 1999 it was grasscourt maestro and winner of seven Wimbledon crowns Pete Sampras who beat him.

WIMBLEDON SEEDING

This time it was a French baseliner more comfortable on hard courts and clay courts than grass.

"I tried to stop him getting a rhythm," Grosjean said. "I just ran round my backhands and whacked my forehand. When I had to hit a backhand I sliced it. I felt pretty good."

Grosjean will next meet Britain's Tim Henman. The three-times finalist beat France's Anthony Dupuis 6-1 6-4.

It was the first time Henman had won three matches in a row since reaching the Wimbledon semi-finals last year -- a run of 16 tournaments including this week.

"Yeah, that's pretty good," he said. "There were certainly a lot more plusses today.

"I'm pleased with the way I'm playing, but there's still a lot of work to be done."

Hewitt's defeat denies the Wimbledon champion vital match practice before he defends his crown in just over week.

"I would have preferred to get a couple more matches in, but there you go," he said. "I had a lot of chances and just didn't take them."

Despite relinquishing his ranking, Hewitt may still be seeded one for Wimbledon as the tournament is the only one that reserves the right to deviate from the ATP's entry system ranking list.

Organisers also take a player's grasscourt record over a number of years into account.

Either way, the Australian is not too bothered.

"Number one or two? Top or bottom, mate. I couldn't care less," he said.

Agassi needed just 61 minutes to grab the top spot again this year. He had toppled Hewitt for a fortnight in April to become the oldest world number one since rankings began in 1973.

Malisse, a Wimbledon semi-finalist last year, could not keep up with the American's pace on a scorching centre court.

Agassi will next face the winner of Andy Roddick and Taylor Dent.

06/13/03 13:54 ET


I'm pretty sure that they have the same agreement with the WTA and if that is the case, it would be hard to justify seeding Venus lower than three.

Hurley
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:30 PM
As I said in the other thread, they have a formula for the men. They have not used it for the women. So you cannot compare the two.

Venus Forever
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:31 PM
That's ATP, not WTA. ;)

BUT, I still believe they are allowed to change the rankings to their liking.

As for Andre, they should seed him #1. They have each won a Wimbledon title, but Andre has had a lot more sucess there, and is #1 anyway.

Hawk
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:32 PM
I really doubt they'll deviate from the rankings

Venus Forever
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:33 PM
As I said in the other thread, they have a formula for the men. They have not used it for the women. So you cannot compare the two.

They used it last year with Raymond and Stevenson. Both of their seeds were bumped up a few spots due to past results.

Raymond was seeded 16, but I think she was ranked around 23 or something. And there were not 7 people to withdraw ahead of her.

And Alexandra was seeded #24, but ranked around 30.

Dawn Marie
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:34 PM
They have not used it because it has been awhile since someone has had a good grass court record and is not ranked #1 or #2.

This is Venus Phucking Williams were talking about here. She won this thing twice made the finals. Who else in the past few years has done what she's done on grass?

Hurley
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:35 PM
They used it last year with Raymond and Stevenson. Both of their seeds were bumped up a few spots due to past results.

Raymond was seeded 16, but I think she was ranked around 23 or something. And there were not 7 people to withdraw ahead of her.

And Alexandra was seeded #24, but ranked around 30.

Not because of a formula. Those were gut moves, moving people with previous Wimbledon success into the lowest possible positions in higher seeding sections than they were ranked. They do not use the formula for the women -- or at least DID NOT last year -- and so bringing up the formula as a reason that Venus may be moved up is moot.

If they had used the formula last year, Tanasugarn would have been moved way up. But they didn't, they used their faulty gin-soaked brains.

Infiniti2001
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:35 PM
I still think they should go by the rankings :p

hingis-seles
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:37 PM
But they didn't, they used their faulty gin-soaked brains.

ROTFLMAO! :worship:

The Crow
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:38 PM
*not going into the Venus debate*

About the men, how can they even think of bumping down a former winner? :confused:

Dawn Marie
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:44 PM
Formula ,formula, formula. bottom line:

It is very likely that they will seed Venus Williams higher than her rank. Again it has been a long time since they had this situation on the WTA tour. Venus won this twice and made finals.

I won't be surprised to see Venus seeded higher.

In the end I dont care what her seed is, she has to beat them all to win it anyway.

GO VENUS!

Hurley
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:45 PM
It's actually very unlikely.

Frank_Rulez
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:51 PM
i just dont think Venus can be seeded 2nd,
remember that the formula is represented
in term of ranking points........
now that Venus is 1200 pts from Kim,
if they only take last yr or 2 yrs points in consideration,
Venus wont be seeded,
but 3 yrs is too far off........
so maybe 3rd, but not 2nd...

Hurley
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:52 PM
They haven't used any formula for the women and I haven't heard any indication that they will.

*beats head against wall*

nikita771
Jun 13th, 2003, 06:56 PM
Formula ,formula, formula. bottom line:

"In the end I dont care what her seed is, she has to beat them all to win it anyway."

GO VENUS!


I totally agree Dawn. Even though the road may be less bumpy for some than others, the winner is going to have win 7 matches to take the title.

Cariaoke
Jun 13th, 2003, 07:04 PM
Go Venus! and I agree with Dawn. :D

All-Williams final or not... it all comes down to who wants it.

SJW
Jun 13th, 2003, 07:09 PM
right.....as long as shes got a belgian its all good

1jackson2001
Jun 13th, 2003, 07:10 PM
As long as Venus wins the whole damn thing I don't care what the hell she's seeded (or ranked for that matter).

Couver
Jun 13th, 2003, 07:50 PM
I hope they stick with the rankings, cause they seem fine the way they are to me.

Plus if they change it this board will be full of moannig and screaming and pointless personal attacks on Venus.

Ryan
Jun 13th, 2003, 08:04 PM
Gah! *beats head against wall with Hurley* THERE IS NO formula, they will seed by rankings most likely. *continues to beat head on wall*

King Lindsay
Jun 13th, 2003, 09:29 PM
Formula ,formula, formula. bottom line:

It is very likely that they will seed Venus Williams higher than her rank. Again it has been a long time since they had this situation on the WTA tour. Venus won this twice and made finals.

I won't be surprised to see Venus seeded higher.

In the end I dont care what her seed is, she has to beat them all to win it anyway.

GO VENUS!

Actually, you're wrong about everything. what a huge shock.

It's unlikely she's seeded higher.

No, she does not have to "beat them all to win". that's why the seed is so important.

tyk101
Jun 13th, 2003, 09:37 PM
wt about monica? i think she deserves a top 16 ranking at least

King Lindsay
Jun 13th, 2003, 09:52 PM
wt about monica? i think she deserves a top 16 ranking at least

i don't. based on what? Getting to the finals eleven years ago? The subjective seeds are not for rewarding past performance, they are an attempt to predict future performance based on past performance.

monica's seed will be according to her ranking, as it should be.

great smash
Jun 13th, 2003, 10:30 PM
i don't. based on what? Getting to the finals eleven years ago? The subjective seeds are not for rewarding past performance, they are an attempt to predict future performance based on past performance.

monica's seed will be according to her ranking, as it should be.

I'm not even sure Monica will show up. If she were healthy, chances are quite high she would reach the 4th round, that's why a top 16 seeding could be justified!

King Lindsay
Jun 13th, 2003, 10:36 PM
I'm not even sure Monica will show up. If she were healthy, chances are quite high she would reach the 4th round, that's why a top 16 seeding could be justified!

i don't even know about that.... Three times in her last six appearances she has failed to make the fourth round.

DA FOREHAND
Jun 13th, 2003, 11:36 PM
As I said in the other thread, they have a formula for the men. They have not used it for the women. So you cannot compare the two.

Not true STEFFI was seeded number 2 in 99 over Lindsay, had she not gotten that seed she might have had an easier draw, and we could have seen a Lindsay/Venus showdown in the quarters.

I hope they treat Venus the way so many skeptics on this board do, and seed her @ 16, and let her scalp thier favorites on her way deep into the draw.

auntie janie
Jun 13th, 2003, 11:51 PM
I expect Wimbledon to follow the rankings this year. One person who will NOT be bumped up is Alexandra! They must have felt foolish after making that move! :eek:

Cam'ron Giles
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:12 AM
Tennis-Agassi reaches Stella semis, regains No1 spot

"Number one or two? Top or bottom, mate. I couldn't care less," he said.



:worship: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:

Freewoman33
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:15 AM
DA FOREHAND, Where was Steffi ranked, when they seeded her #2?

TS
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:23 AM
Won't happen.

disposablehero
Jun 14th, 2003, 01:50 AM
*beats head on the wall in conjunction with the others*

Shane54
Jun 14th, 2003, 01:53 AM
I doubt they will seed #2. First of all, I doubt that even the all-england club wants an all Williams final. So at least with her at her true ranking. There is a shot she could be on Serena's half of the draw.

Crazy Canuck
Jun 14th, 2003, 01:59 AM
They haven't used any formula for the women and I haven't heard any indication that they will.

*beats head against wall*
It's a lost cause.

Cam'ron Giles
Jun 14th, 2003, 02:06 AM
It's a lost cause.

:rolleyes:

tennischick
Jun 14th, 2003, 02:07 AM
whatever the seeding, she will end up on the opposite side of the draw from Serena IMO...

Lita's Ex
Jun 14th, 2003, 02:39 AM
I think they should follow the ATP's lead. Wimbledon is essentially a special event (the lowest amount of tournaments of any surface) so they should go by the players' past results.

lizchris
Jun 14th, 2003, 05:00 AM
I doubt they will seed #2. First of all, I doubt that even the all-england club wants an all Williams final. So at least with her at her true ranking. There is a shot she could be on Serena's half of the draw.

That's your opinion.

I know TV wise in the US, the Williams sisters were good. First, their final got higher ratings than the previous years, but the 2001 final was delayed until Sunday because of rain and that could have been a small factor. They also decided to show the William's sisters semifinal doubles match (which they played against Anna and Chanda) and their doubles final against Virgina and Paola, which BTW, rated higher than the men's final.

Dawn Marie
Jun 14th, 2003, 05:47 AM
Well if they put V@S on the same side then it will hurt the Belgian's. I don't see Kim or Juju beating them both to make final and if they (Kim and Juju) are on the same side one of them aint making final.

Face it: By people wanting to see the Belgians do well they have to put Venus and Serena on opposite sides.:)

Get it thru your head headbangers not everyone is going to agree with your wishful thinking.

It is a strong possibility that Venus may be seeded higher but in the long run nobody really cares.. but maybe those ranked above her.;)

disposablehero
Jun 14th, 2003, 05:59 AM
It is a strong possibility that Venus may be seeded higher but in the long run nobody really cares.. but maybe those ranked above her.;)

Apparently Venus fans care. Look again who started this thread.

anton
Jun 14th, 2003, 06:04 AM
I think some people dont want to see another all Williams final.

But guess what, the Justine-Kim final did not set too many hearts to racing...

Venus should get the number 2 seed or number one.

If she does not get it, Im going to sue Wimbledon...

BigTennisFan
Jun 14th, 2003, 06:24 AM
The only reason anyone cares about Venus' seeding is the possiblity of another V/S final. If Serena were not entered, would anyone care about Vee's seed? As stated before if you're gonna win, you gotta beat everybody regardless of seed.

Remember Goran?

Chance
Jun 14th, 2003, 06:40 AM
true true

Dawn Marie
Jun 14th, 2003, 06:40 AM
disposable just cause someone started a thread does not mean that they are up n' arms about the seeding and Vee's rank. The only ones who really give a care are the people who are not Venus fans who are in this thread.

Dawn Marie
Jun 14th, 2003, 06:44 AM
If she does not get it, Im going to sue Wimbledon...

__________________

Anton lol at this comment.:)

Robbie.
Jun 14th, 2003, 07:03 AM
I don't really want an all Williams final, but if ever there is an instance to deviate from the rankings it is this one. 1.Serena 2. Venus 3.Justine 4. Kim. Its fair. I remember them seeding Steffi above Lindsay in 1999 into the #2 seeding, and she hadn't won wimby since 1996. Venus has been a finalist the last three years, is the most credentialed Grass courter going around at the moment, and the two belgians have never beaten her on grass, or won wimbledon.

LucasArg
Jun 14th, 2003, 07:30 AM
I don't really want an all Williams final, but if ever there is an instance to deviate from the rankings it is this one. 1.Serena 2. Venus 3.Justine 4. Kim. Its fair. I remember them seeding Steffi above Lindsay in 1999 into the #2 seeding, and she hadn't won wimby since 1996. Venus has been a finalist the last three years, is the most credentialed Grass courter going around at the moment, and the two belgians have never beaten her on grass, or won wimbledon.


I totally agree with you, except I do want an all Williams final :p

moby
Jun 14th, 2003, 11:54 AM
I don't really want an all Williams final, but if ever there is an instance to deviate from the rankings it is this one. 1.Serena 2. Venus 3.Justine 4. Kim. Its fair. I remember them seeding Steffi above Lindsay in 1999 into the #2 seeding, and she hadn't won wimby since 1996. Venus has been a finalist the last three years, is the most credentialed Grass courter going around at the moment, and the two belgians have never beaten her on grass, or won wimbledon.

yes they moved steffi above lindsay.

then what happened? lindsay ended up beating steffi in the final.
lol @ the seeding committee

Freewoman33
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:03 PM
Where was Steffi ranked when they seeded he #2? Or, maybe I should stop being lazy and go check for myself.

moby
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:05 PM
steffi was ranked no. 3 and 2 weeks before she just beat the world no. 2, 3 and 1 in RG in that order in consecutive matches

Freewoman33
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:09 PM
TY Easy. They may move Venus up to the number 2 or 3 spot.

starr
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:09 PM
*pads the wall

moby
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:12 PM
TY Easy. They may move Venus up to the number 2 or 3 spot.

They shouldnt move her up to no. 2 coz kim is a whooping 1200 points in front of her.

They may move her up to no. 3, but even then I find that unjustified. while justine is only 700 points in front, her final and SF appearance at wimby in the last 2 years means that the gap on grass between her and venus is reduced.

i think its really a toss up and its going to be very hard for the wimbledon committee to decide. they may just stick to the rankings in this case.

starr
Jun 14th, 2003, 12:18 PM
There's really not any advantage to being seeded 3 instead of 4 so there's not much point of making that move.

anton
Jun 14th, 2003, 01:16 PM
yes they moved steffi above lindsay.

then what happened? lindsay ended up beating steffi in the final.
lol @ the seeding committee

Steffi was tired from her previous long match with Venus. Lindsay got the benefit from playing Steffi not at her best...

Please do not think Lindsay is a grass court queen slow as she moves...

Sam L
Jun 14th, 2003, 02:00 PM
They did it in 1999 and I think they should do it again.

Venus should be #2 because of her record (2 wins and last year's finalist) and Kim should be #3 because of her record (never been past the QF).

It's as simple as that but of course the decision lies with the committee, so we shall just wait and see.

Kart
Jun 14th, 2003, 04:44 PM
Steffi was tired from her previous long match with Venus. Lindsay got the benefit from playing Steffi not at her best...

Please do not think Lindsay is a grass court queen slow as she moves...

Actually if Steffi was going to be tired it would have been because Lucic pushed her to three sets the day before.

Lindsay would still have won because she served better and generally was better on the day.

As for Venus being seeded #2 - I could see the argument had she been ranked no.3 in the world but elevating her above Justine based on current form and Wimbledon results would not really be fair as Justine has had some good wins here as well.

Kart
Jun 14th, 2003, 04:44 PM
That's on the basis that Justine is ranked no.3 now which I think she is (?).

Freewoman33
Jun 14th, 2003, 05:52 PM
They shouldnt move her up to no. 2 coz kim is a whooping 1200 points in front of her.

They may move her up to no. 3, but even then I find that unjustified. while justine is only 700 points in front, her final and SF appearance at wimby in the last 2 years means that the gap on grass between her and venus is reduced.

i think its really a toss up and its going to be very hard for the wimbledon committee to decide. they may just stick to the rankings in this case.

Whether or not they should move Venus up, is not subject to what we feel, but to how the officals at Wimbledon feel. Personally, I think Venus can hold her own, regardless of where she's placed. I just think that it is entirely possible, because they've done it in the past, that the officials at Wimbledon may seed her number 2 or 3 based on her results there.

I'm not aware of any formula that Wimbledon uses to seed the male players. I thought it was entirely based on their performance at that particular event. I agree that it isn't fair to tamper with the rankings in order to seed certain players higher than their rankings. But again, it is not up to us to say how tournament officials should go about seeding players. Until the ITF, or some overall governing body, enacts a law that would prevent ALL tournaments from engaging in special seedings, it is bound to continue for years to come.

jenny161185
Jun 14th, 2003, 06:13 PM
Who really cars about the seeding - yes it may stop an all williams final but if Venus is going to win shes going to have to beat the other big girls including serena at some stage anyway