Wimbledon seeding is disrespectful, says Rafael Nadal

Thoughts?
https://sportstar.thehindu.com/tennis/rafael-nadal-wimbledon-seeding-disrespectful-roger-federer-no-3/article28134270.ece

He knows the score and has always known Wimbledon uses a different formula. 

He does have the right to be pissed off about it as his chances of winning being honest have been served a blow as potentially he has to face Federer and Djokovic to win rather than facing one guaranteed.

Conversely part of me says just get on with it. It's the hand your dealt. Embrace your "indominable" spirit!

Oooh I had assumed that Federer would be #3, not #2.  That makes a difference on paper - a Djoko vs. Nadal SF would be, interesting...

It should be possible to work out the seeding from what we know now, and other than from the purely partisan point of wanting to have a better chance (on paper) of winning, I can't see what Nadal would be complaining about.  Grass is a very different surface to the others, the season is very short, and Wimbledon have a v. clear published formula for seeding whereby they add extra value to points won on grass over the last two years.

Team Nadal probably just putting pressure on organisers to give him as easy a draw in week one as possible.

noleisthebest wrote:Team Nadal probably just putting pressure on organisers to give him as easy a draw in week one as possible.

but draw is random (apart from the seed order)

What's disrespectful is having so many clay court Masters tournaments on tour and no grass, you bell end.

naxroy wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Team Nadal probably just putting pressure on organisers to give him as easy a draw in week one as possible.

but draw is random (apart from the seed order)

Do we ever see it drawn?

legendkillar wrote:He knows the score and has always known Wimbledon uses a different formula. 

He does have the right to be pissed off about it as his chances of winning being honest have been served a blow as potentially he has to face Federer and Djokovic to win rather than facing one guaranteed.

Conversely part of me says just get on with it. It's the hand your dealt. Embrace your "indominable" spirit!

He doesn't have a right to be pissed off.  That formula is there because grass points are so skewed over the year and you can't have other surfaces dictating the greatest slam seedings in totalility. If there were equal grass points, then he might have a point.  He doesn't.  Just more self serving whinging from this utter clown.

Federer's seeding is correct for this tournament.

Daniel2 wrote:

legendkillar wrote:He knows the score and has always known Wimbledon uses a different formula. 

He does have the right to be pissed off about it as his chances of winning being honest have been served a blow as potentially he has to face Federer and Djokovic to win rather than facing one guaranteed.

Conversely part of me says just get on with it. It's the hand your dealt. Embrace your "indominable" spirit!

He doesn't have a right to be pissed off.  That formula is there because grass points are so skewed over the year and you can't have other surfaces dictating the greatest slam seedings in totalility. If there were equal grass points, then he might have a point.  He doesn't.  Just more self serving whinging from this utter clown.

Federer's seeding is correct for this tournament.

He does. He has given an opinion. Doesn't mean he's right.

he has an opinion and expressed it in a very calmed and respectful way

Does not matter, his opinion is pointless and he has known the system for the ~20 years he has been on tour or at least the past 15 years. This is the thing with Rafa, he has always been a bit of a baby/diva   Wanting a 2 year ranking system when it was helping his cause, or WTF to be played on clay, or generally more clay tournaments, now unhappy as his relatively poor results on grass as of "late" now mean he is seeded 3 instead of 2 (otherwise obv. he would not have complained)... There are already way too few grass tournaments, so it makes sense that the few that are played should count more than the mere points they get the players (there is not even a master 1000 ffs) 

If anyone is being disrespectful, it is him. Wimbledon has its traditions and who does he think he is to try and change them? 

He can be as pissed off as he likes but it's staggeringly stupid. They've not exercised any subjectivity, they've applied the formula. What did he expect? Them to suspend it for him?

Don't mind Fed being #2, but Anderson seeded 4 shows the flaw in the system.

Wimbledon may be doing a few things wrong but this is not one of them.

At least (unlike RG), the first seed will play on day one not on day 3-4.

Let's hope LTA want a Fedal match so they have them in the same half.

Let's start putting bets on here who's going to have an easiest draw in week one?

Nadal's going to get injured grass players or Spaniards. 

But it doesn't really matter any more. 

So long as Nole lifts the trophy on that Sunday. 

IDEMOOOOOOOO!

bogbrush wrote:He can be as pissed off as he likes but it's staggeringly stupid. They've not exercised any subjectivity, they've applied the formula. What did he expect? Them to suspend it for him?

I think it was more hope than anything else that they would give him a favourable ranking. For me the timing of his comments aren't great given he hasn't participated in any grass events leading into it. 

Wants the same treatment other tournaments have bestowed on him. Can't have all your own way. 

I am sure he'll get over it as will the posters on this site (I hope!)

I agree, he could have played but chose not to. Still he can express his opinion. At least he Is not throwing chairs or raquets to people

All his life he has had to cope with the adversity of having injuries and now this.

Poor boy.

Anyway, it's confirmed now.

Hopefully we get the right draw now and Federer can have the smoother run.

Fingers cross for Nadal to be on the same side of the draw as Djokovic...

Well Dustin Brown bit the dust in the qualifiers....

It's ok there's lots more rank 100s to take the one trick pony out.

Somehow I do not expect all Big Three to make the SF.  And if they do not, the seeing is of much lesser importance.

summerblues wrote:Somehow I do not expect all Big Three to make the SF.  And if they do not, the seeing is of much lesser importance.

Not in every situation.  If its Djokovic and Nadal who make it to the SF whilst world #1 and #2 but seeded #1 and #3 and they are on the same side of the draw the seeding is arguably of even greater importance.  And no, we would not hear the end of it.

It’s clearly not disrespectful. That’s total nonsense. I do have a little bit of sympathy though because of the inconsistency. He gets bumped down by Wimbledon but, when his ranking is lower, RG refuse to bump him up. My view is that it’s RG who should change though, not Wimbledon.

Slippy wrote:It’s clearly not disrespectful. That’s total nonsense. I do have a little bit of sympathy though because of the inconsistency. He gets bumped down by Wimbledon but, when his ranking is lower, RG refuse to bump him up. My view is that it’s RG who should change though, not Wimbledon.

RG have been giving Nadal easy draws for years, no seeding could beat that favour.
Wimbledon, too took all the potential landmines last year, and I expect nothing different this year.

And he still won't win it.

It's the rules, known about by everyone for years.

There is no question of respect.

He wasnt bitching when he had 3 days off and other were playing 2-3 day matches at RG few weeks ago.

Look, what are people missing here?

There aren't enough grass points in a year to properly work out the correct rankings for the players.  Nadal is a self serving bellend who has nothing to say about the reason the altered rankings exist in the first place!

bogbrush wrote:It's the rules, known about by everyone for years.

There is no question of respect.

Do you know how long ago those rules exist?
do you know what was it like before those rules?

do you know what happened so that those rules were implemented?

naxroy wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's the rules, known about by everyone for years.

There is no question of respect.

Do you know how long ago those rules exist?
do you know what was it like before those rules?

do you know what happened so that those rules were implemented?

1) 17 years ago
2) Day was still called Day as Night was still called Night. So nothing was massively different, apart from I was younger. 
3) Who knows!

naxroy wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's the rules, known about by everyone for years.

There is no question of respect.

Do you know how long ago those rules exist?
do you know what was it like before those rules?

do you know what happened so that those rules were implemented?

1. My recollection is consistent with lk's post
2. There was a seeding committee who exercised their discretion and only 16 seeds, so someone who was, say, #11 in the world largely on the strength of success on the clay and slower surfaces might find himself unseeded and drawn against a very fancied high seed whilst a guy several places below him in the world ranking would have a much more favourable draw because he was seen as a good grass court player
3. Leading clay players said they'd stop going to Wimbledon since the system was opaque and they were not being seeded commensurate with the ranking that their year-long efforts had earned so they were being knocked out early on and could not see the point in subjecting themselves to such treatment on a surface they were not particularly comfortable on anyway.  The ATP (and WTA presumably) and Wimbledon agreed on a more transparent system.  Whether at about the same time, or earlier, I don't recall, the seeds went up from 16 to 32 so high-ranked clay-courters whose seeding was below their ranking were still more protected from bruising early round encounters than in the past.  It is also the case that the conditions on grass became less uneven, low-bouncing, and greasy at about the beginning of the 2000's too - but whether that was by design is, of course, a source of debate.

naxroy wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's the rules, known about by everyone for years.

There is no question of respect.

Do you know how long ago those rules exist?
do you know what was it like before those rules?

do you know what happened so that those rules were implemented?

Yes, yes, and yes.

summerblues wrote:Somehow I do not expect all Big Three to make the SF.

Idiot

Well Wimbledon showed Nadal that there is method in their madness this tournament.  The pecking order of the top 3 is currently Djoko/Fed/Nadal away from clay, and Nadal/Djoko/Fed on the dirt.