Re: Randomized Seeding in Tennis
Yes randomization is very important and seeding even in slams should be limited to 16, not 32. That makes early rounds more interesting. Problem with 32 seeding (even more so if it was fixed) is that it also provides ranking protection. The top guys gets easiest possible route. Is that good? NO because it becomes almost impossible to overtake them in the rankings.
Some say the top4 is the only thing that hasnt changed. But how much did the top8 change the past 3 years or so? Ferrer isn't going anywhere and hasn't in a long time. Soderling was ahead of Ferrer and just as locked into his top position before he went down to mono. Berdych has been in the top8 for what? 3 years in a row now? Del Potro would just like Soderling definitely been locked into top8 if he hadn't gotten an injury.
top8 has been almost as safe as top4. It's not a coincidence that 9-10 has seen more changes. Mostly because of how the seeding system works where actually entire top8 gets bye in R1 in many tournaments and cakewalk until QF in most slams. Only way to ever displace someone in top8 would be to do one of those magical runs like for example Soderling achieved in RG 2009 where he had to beat a nr1 in R3 but also backed it up and somehow made final as a 20is seed.
It's VERY HARD to fight your way into top8 due to the seeding advantage they hold in all the M1000 and slams and reaching QF in most of them (like for example Berdych) if enough to keep everyone else behind unless they do magical runs and gain big paydays like winning a M1000 or reaching a slam final.