PDA

View Full Version : Doubles and Williams Sisters - Seeding


Volcana
Jul 10th, 2002, 04:52 PM
You have to play 3 tournaments in the last twelve months to have a doubles ranking. So the Williams2x doubles team doesn't have a ranking. Unfortunately, they're the best doubles team on the Tour. (Or at least, they should be favored against any opponents currently on tour.)

If you don't seed them, the #1 seeds could get them in the 1st round. If you seed them low, one of your top seeds can get them in the QFs. I'm sure Lisa and Rennae wouldn't be wild about either of those options. Wimbledon seeded them #3, protecting the top two ranked teams, but bumping an otherwise deserving team from a seed.

It's an open tournament, so you can't just bar the Williams Sisters from playing.

What's the solution that results in the best tournament, AND the fairest treatment of the players? Remember, doubles NEEDs participation form the top players. They'll be leery of any rules that dissuade Lindsay or Martina or Venus or Serena from playing.

saki
Jul 10th, 2002, 05:01 PM
I liked Wimbledon's solution. #3 is about the right seeding to give Williams/Williams at a slam. And the same, IMO, should hold for say Davenport/Morariu if they should happen to enter a doubles slam without a ranking.

BigTennisFan
Jul 10th, 2002, 05:05 PM
Whenever they don't play enough to have a ranking, they should always be seeded #3. True, another team that probably should be seeded 3 will have to miss out but that would be the fairest to everyone.

On the other hand I personally don't care whether they are seeded or not, they are probably going to win the thing anyway.:D

But for the sake of the top two seeds, the number # seeding is probably best.

venusfan
Jul 10th, 2002, 05:35 PM
Seed them 16th or 1st.. The sisters will win, no matter what. rankings don't matter when it comes to the Williams Sisters.

Gallofa
Jul 10th, 2002, 05:44 PM
I am sure we have discussed this before ;)

I still think rankings are there for a reason. You earn a ranking, you get your seeding. I don't believe in exceptions. If the Williams play the GS and they do well in them, that'll be 4 tourneys, and therefore, enough to have a ranking and a seeding. If they play less than 3 tourneys, then, they can't have a seeding, since they won't have a ranking.

Maybe Lisa and Rennae wouldn't like having to play the sisters in a 1st round, but I doubt the deserving n.16 seeds would enjoy having to play Lisa and Rennae in the first round either if they lost their hard earned seed in favor of the sisters.

Kart
Jul 10th, 2002, 05:48 PM
I'm not very knowledgeable on doubles rankings - is it completely unreasonable to change the rules to allow teams that play one tournament have a ranking ?

Whether you seed them 1-4 there's no real difference. Wherever you seed Williams sisters, they are going to take the place of someone else. You can't make everyone happy.

I suppose the ultimate answer is for the tournament directors to consult with the doubles teams to see what they'd be happy with. Of course if the directors don't much care about the players and are only interested in ratings then why seed them at all ? - they don't have a ranking and they'll get to the final anyway.

Volcana
Jul 10th, 2002, 06:04 PM
That Davenport-Morariu comment is well made. Leaving them unseeded is just a time bomb for some seeded team. My guess is Martina Hingis will have 3 tournaments til at least OZ. But if she doesn't play doubles the rest of the year to get her singles game in shape, she could be in the same position.

It almost comes down to saying they'll seed 14 teams and then two 'wild seeds' who can be any team they want. At least the #16 team wouldn't have therir hopes of a seed dashed.

Volcana
Jul 10th, 2002, 06:08 PM
Kart - The tournament directors don't want Venus-Serena or Chanda-Anna playing Lisa-Rennae or Lindsay-Corinna in the 1st round. It means a source of ticket sales is eliminated early.

It's like getting Venus vs Anna in the 1st round of the USOpen. All it does is cost you money.

eshell
Jul 10th, 2002, 07:32 PM
Good thinking, Volcana. Tennis is a sport BUT the WTA, ATP, ITF, the Grand Slams, and tournaments all want to make money as well.

The Williams Sisters vs. Anna K/Chanda Rubin generated great ticket sales and viewership (in the States at least). If both teams had been unseeded, this matchup may have occured earlier in the tournament and women's doubles may have garnered far less publicity.

During a time when the ATP Tour is thinking about eliminating doubles for financial reasons, it makes sense to encourage top players into the doubles bracket and to seed them. Maybe it's not fair but it's economically viable.

Raj
Jul 10th, 2002, 07:47 PM
WIMBLEDON came up with the best solution.
Would the number 16 seeds rather play the unseeded Williams?

Raj
Jul 10th, 2002, 07:49 PM
POINT: to be the best doubles team your body has to be able to take more than 2 doubles tournaments a year.
YES the Williams are always the favourties even in doubles, but maybe we would see more upsets if they played more tournaments as doubles!

Callie
Jul 10th, 2002, 09:10 PM
Raj, I believe that Venus and Serena as a doubles team would only get better.;)

Gumbycat
Jul 10th, 2002, 09:20 PM
The 3rd seed was a good solution. Face it, the Williams will only play doubles at Grand Slams and when they are both healthy!

BigTennisFan
Jul 11th, 2002, 04:12 AM
Originally posted by Raj
POINT: to be the best doubles team your body has to be able to take more than 2 doubles tournaments a year.
YES the Williams are always the favourties even in doubles, but maybe we would see more upsets if they played more tournaments as doubles!

Isn't this the same line of thinking that was thrown at Venus and Serena about their lack of singles play? I mean people were having fits, strokes and hay babies opining that if they played more matches, their bodies would break down.
Surprise! :D

It seems that the more they play, the better they get and the more they win.:D

Be careful what you wish for.

They just might decide to play 6 or 7 tournaments. Then the complaints will start that Williiams winning all the trophies is "a little bit sad" for women's tennis.:rolleyes:

Volcana
Jul 11th, 2002, 05:02 AM
Raj - That is TOTALLY a false syllogism. They ARE the best doubles team. So obviously the fact that they only play twice a year is irrelevant.

They aren't the #1 team. '#1' is ranking. They don't play enough for a ranking. But the simple truth is they are favored in every match they play and justifiably so. That makes them the best.

They're just plain better than everybody else. The one team I thought could really challenge them long term was Hingis-Seles.

Ask any other team who's the favorite to win the US Open.

Buitenzorg
Jul 11th, 2002, 07:05 AM
Will VENUS/SERENA Williams competing at The Championships!

(I saw Their currently #.8 at the race Team for Championships)

For me The BEST Doubles Team in The WTA Tour are:

01. Lisa RAYMOND/Rennae STUBBS
02. Martina HINGIS/Anna KOURNIKOVA
03. Venus WILLIAMS/Serena WILLIAMS
04. Virginia Ruano PASCUAL/Paola SUAREZ
05. Daniella HANTUCHOVA/Arantxa Sanchez VICARIO
06. Cara BLACK/Elena LIKHOVTSEVA
07. Elena DEMENTIEVA/Janette HUSAROVA
08. Janet LEE/Wynne PRAKUSYA
09. Nicole ARENDT/Liezel HUBER
10. Silvia Farina ELIA/Barbara SCHETT

ajayares
Jul 11th, 2002, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Volcana
They aren't the #1 team. '#1' is ranking. They don't play enough for a ranking. But the simple truth is they are favored in every match they play and justifiably so. That makes them the best.

They're just plain better than everybody else. The one team I thought could really challenge them long term was Hingis-Seles.

Ask any other team who's the favorite to win the US Open.

Oh, obviously you have forgotten about another team that plays on the circuit too :rolleyes: when they are not injured or when they are not having a few disagreements..

64-3 career record isn't too bad and I dare say is a little better than the Williams sisters..

Sure you are going to say that the Williams sisters have won 5 GS titles together where the other team has only won 2 and you are going to say that the Sisters lead 1-0 in the head to head..

Yeah that is all true an 8-6 in the third win at the French, however the other team has only played in 3 GS's together..

But to say the Williams sisters are clearly the best team out there is rubbish and clearly bettter than everyone else is also rubbish, might be true is you say clearly better than everyone else except for this team...

For example if both these teams played each other 10 times I would dare say both would win 5 times each or something very similar to that, it would be a toss of the coin on who would win..

I am sure you know the team I am refering to here aswell, without me saying who it is, but hey just for the few out there who don't, it is Hingis/Kournikova...

Oh I am sure you mean't Hingis and Kournikova as the team that could and would challenge them :rolleyes:

Nimi
Jul 11th, 2002, 09:44 AM
Seles/Hingis will have no real big effect, not in odubles. Its like putting Hingis/Capriati, last in the US Open last year, when they lost in the quarters (i think).

btw, the Williams' fell before them. Just food for thought.

per4ever
Jul 11th, 2002, 09:52 AM
just follow the rules I would say...If they don't play enough tournaments then they don't deserve to be seeded.

and the fact that they are THE best or one of the best, is always a personal opinion.... it's like giving the organisators of the tournaments the opportunity to give their favourite players a seeded place.

Williams Rulez
Jul 11th, 2002, 09:56 AM
Venus and Serena are at least the number 2 team in the world, even if they're not number 1. They've a 80-13 record in 30 tournaments played.

Anna and Martina are the only active team that can claim to have a better record. But I think they shouldn't be seeded... that way they can claim more quality points... ;)

But players might protest if they're unseeded. I'm such Lisa and Reanne will... they complained when Hingis and Seles weren't seeded didn't they?

Volcana
Jul 11th, 2002, 12:26 PM
Niminator - I know W2X lost to them. That was the reason I hoped they'd stay together. There would have been some great matches.

ajayares - I didn't forget. I give Kournikova-Hingis zilch, zero, nada chance of beating Williams2X. And everytime they play, the Williams will be favored, regardless of seed or surface, because they are better.

ajayares
Jul 11th, 2002, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by Volcana

ajayares - I didn't forget. I give Kournikova-Hingis zilch, zero, nada chance of beating Williams2X. And everytime they play, the Williams will be favored, regardless of seed or surface, because they are better.

Umm yeah based on what???
Obviously you are blinded by your bias towards the Williams Sisters and other things, which I don't think I need to mention.

Blind freddy knows that Hingis/Kournikova would beat the Williams sisters atleast 50% of the time..
Doubles is more than just power, unlike singles..
But don't make out that they are invincible on the doubles court, becuase they are not

saki
Jul 11th, 2002, 03:44 PM
Erm, I have to say that ajayares is quite right here.

Williams/Williams and Hingis/Kounikova have only played once, and that went to 8-6 in the third. It seems a little unreasonable to give H/K NO chance at all to beat Williams/Williams. What possible justification do you have for saying that, Volcana?

saki
Jul 11th, 2002, 03:45 PM
And, just to throw something else into the discussion, I've always thought that if Raymond/Davenport were to play together permanently they'd be certainly one of the top three doubles teams & possibly the best.