It's totally moronic. What's the point of switching the rankings to seed Fed #1 and Rafa #2? Or switching Roddick from #6 to #5? There's absolutely no point to it, doesn't make a difference in the draw. It's just smoke and mirrors and pomp and circumstance. Rafa couldn't play last year, he was injured. And because he couldn't play last year, like that wasn't punishment enough, he's losing his well-earned #1 spot this year? Ridic. And don't say "well Fed is seeded #1 bc he won 6 Wimbledons" because it's not just about that, or you'd have to say "well, Roddick has made finals and Murray and Djokovic haven't so he should be #3" and on and on down the list of history.
The system is flawed. If the system was a reliable measure of grass prowess, Roddick would be in the Top 4. He'd have his own quarter- which is one thing that actually WOULD change the draw, probably for the better.
Some of this stuff is crazy. Putting Jo below Ferrer on grass? Give me a break. Putting Isner down 5 spots under his ranking...why? Because he didn't do well a year or two ago? He's got a better shot to make it far with his game than a lot of people above him. If anything, he should go up and not down.
Rankings are in place for a reason. The rankings represent the hard work players have gone through all year to get where they are. It's stupid for good all-surface players who have busted their ass all year to get into the top 8 or top 16 of the rankings to lose their spot bc someone did better than them for one month on grass a year or two ago. It's unfair.
I'm glad the other Slams don't do this. And by the way, if they adjusted RG for clay prowess, it wouldn't make a damn difference. It wouldn't stop non-clay specialists like Melzer, Soderling and Berdych from making the semis. Only thing it would do is rob players of their rightfully earned seed position. The whole thing is