I posed the same question to a friend of mine yesterday and he couldn't give me an explanation either. He didn't even understand what difference it makes. Is it a French Open thing?
If I remember right, the last time I asked, it was at Wimbledon and I wondered if it was a Wimbledon thing. So really, I have no idea what tournaments do it or why.
Well, Google finally explained it to me: http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/20...-explanation-of-seeding-in-grand-slam-tennis/ Tennis’s Grand Slams aren’t concerned with giving the top seed the most favorable path to the championship (or the second seed the second most favorable path, etc.). But they do take care to ensure that, if the higher seeds keep winning, the top 16 seeds will all be in the round of 16, the top eight seeds will advance to the quarterfinals, and so on. Here’s how to seed a Grand Slam tennis tournament: Cut the bracket in half. Put the No. 1 seed in one half and the No. 2 in the other half. Then chop the bracket into fourths. The No. 1 seed will be in one fourth and the No. 2 in another. Place the No. 3 seed at random in one of the remaining fourths and the No. 4 seed in the other remaining fourth. Then split the bracket into eight sections. Four of the sections will already include a top-four seed. Randomly place each player seeded No. 5 – No. 8 into one of the remaining four sections. Continue until all 32 seeded players are in the bracket. Under this arrangement, no seeded player has to face another seeded player until the round of 32. A player seeded No. 9 - No. 16 will not have to play an opponent seeded No. 1 - No. 8 until the round of 16. A player seeded No. 5 – No. 8 won’t face a player seeded No. 1 – No. 4 until the quarterfinals, and so on. Unseeded players are placed in the remaining slots at random. If you’re the 33rd best play in the draw, you could end up playing the top seed in the first round, but you could just as easily end up facing the 128th player. So that’s seeding in tennis. Tournament brackets are put together with a mixture of balance and randomness. Tennis’s Grand Slams don’t always give us the No. 1 vs. No. 4, No. 2 vs. No. 3 match-ups that we’re used to seeing in other sports (though they sometimes do). But the draws always ensure that the top two players won’t meet until the championship.
That Nadal/Novak match was one of the best played matches I've ever seen. Almost every single point was full of great shots and "would've been" winners that was only extended because of both of those guys were playing such amazing tennis. It started in the first set, and except for the third set it was like that the whole time. That match has to rank among the top of high level of play ever. I was pulling for Djokovich, but I was applauding both guys the whole time because nearly every point deserved appreciation. I was so worn out just watching it, that I'm only now getting to the Ferrer/Tsonga match that I recorded.
i think Serena's the better overall player, Steffi is just more decorated in singles Steffi has nothing for Serena on the tennis court
the womens game is way better now than when Steffi played, after Monica's stabbing., Steffi's biggest rival was Sabatini( a player who wouldnt even be top 15 in todays game). Serena is the better overall player, who went up againist better overall players, i can count 9 plus HOF caliber female tennis players that Serena has competed againist( Henin, Davenport, Clijsters, Sharapova, Venus, Hingis, Capriati, Mary Pierce, Vika, etc).. these players are simply better than any player in Graf's era( im not counting an aging Martina, and Evert), and then their are lesser known talented players who would have dominated in Graf's era like Vidasova, Safina, Li Na, Caroline Wozniacki, Jelena Jankovic, Ana Ivanovic, and others Serena's qf opponent this tournament had 2 majors and is arguably more talented when motivated than any player in Graf's era other than Seles. Evert, Billie Jean, McEnroe, all say that Serena is the greatest ever, and i agree. you like to bring up 22-16, well Bill Russell has 11 rings, Jordan has 6... but who do most consider better. LeBron has 1 ring, and many say he is on Jordan's level( few say better). Just because they are more decorated doesnt make them better players Serena has beaten the most #1 players in WTA History
Serena most athletic player in the WTA History, best returner in WTA History, best server in WTA History... how would Steffi win? Steffi accumulated her stats beating a bunch of "pushers" who simply had not even decent power, whenver Graf went up againist a player who could match her power( i.e. Seles) she crumbled and had a ton of errors Graf would be a borderline top 5 player circa 2002-2010... too many hard hitters, and too many good ballstrikers, in the 90's, serves were 88-90 mph( tops) Azarenka and Sharapova would blow Steffi off the court, heck even a lesser known Petra Kvitova
http://bdegiulio.hubpages.com/hub/Top-10-Greatest-Female-Tennis-Players-of-All-Time Steffi Graf #1 Serena Williams #5 But Serena is still playing, so let's see where she ends up when her career is over.
in what ways is she better than Serena, is she a better returner.. NOPE... better server...NOPE, more athletic... NOPE... better quickness... NOPE... she's a better volleyer, and had better touch around the net, but most players have that over Serena lol prime would beat prime Steffi in 2 sets, she would crush those weak serves back in her face, like Seles did
lol thats a terrible list... Court over Serena wow Martina is really the only player i would say is on the level of Serena because of career in doubles as well as singles.. she is a complete player Court won 11 majors before the open era
http://tennis-champions.findthedata.org/compare/15-62/Serena-Williams-vs-Steffi-Graf I think Serena's data there is quite outdated, but when you look at the win/loss ratio, you get the idea. Steffi about 9-1, Serena about 4-1. Head-to-head, they are 1-1, with Steffi being at the end of her career. Both very close matches. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YcJHcNZ3YVo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Anyway - Steffi Graf - best ever.
Serena was a terrible player back then, nice argument.. what was she 17 years old.. and Serena beat her as a teenager as well. Serena usually doesnt lose to the same person too many times, thats why many of her h2h with opponents are usually so lopsided.. but oh well you are free to believe that Steffi is the GOAT, and im free to believe that Serena is not better, but Steffi played in a weak era and benefited from her only rival being stabbed..
One was still young, the other one was already old. Steffi at 17 had already won a lot - when Evert, Navratilova were still playing. Steffi also had Seles, Hingis, Arantxa Sanchez, etc. as opponents. You underrate the level of competition she had. Steffi also set a record by destroying Natasha Zvereva in the French Open Final 1988 in 32 minutes, 6-0/6-0. Zvereva had previously beaten Navratilova in that same tournament, so she was clearly not a bad player. Steffi also won the Golden Slam that year. Nobody else has ever managed to do this. Steffi Graf - best ever. Serena - somewhere in the top 10. But she is a good player, very powerful.
lol Chrissie and Martina were dinosaurs at that point and yes Steffi's competition was weak, the womens game RIGHT NOW mirrors what Steffi had for the majority of her career. Serena is a much better player now, but also these younger players only know ball bashing and how to blow players off the court, the few "pushers" like Radwanska and Wozniacki are struggling because of the big hitters, these are the same kind of players that Steffi dominated in her career. Imagine Serena playing players with no power, and could barely crack 90 mph on their first serve( like Errani) It would be no contest, Steffi along with Seles were only players with power back then, the rest were serve and volleyers and pushers.
