Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
553 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
All,

What say y'all?

Check it out in the last five paragraphs.


WTA, ATP exclude fans from highlights of Aussie Open

Malcolm Aboud

Printer-friendly version Tuesday, January 29, 2008


At the conclusion of an exciting Australian Open, which saw top seeds Roger Federer and Justine Henin upset by eventual champions Novak Djokovic and Maria Sharapova, tennis fans witnessed a changing of the guard.

Well, at least that’s true for tennis fans in Australia, Asia and Europe. North Americans missed many of the most important matches of the tournament, which took place at 3:30 a.m. EDT.

That’s because organizers opted to schedule matches such as Djokovic’s semi-final upset for 7:30 p.m. Melbourne time, allowing Europeans to watch but forcing North Americans to stay up all night or miss the match.

Same for Europeans during top women’s matches. For example, Sharapova’s championship match versus Ana Ivanovic took place at 1:30 p.m. in Melbourne. That meant Serbs hoping to catch Ivanovic were left with a 3:30 a.m. start and Sharapova’s Russian fans had to wake up at 5:30 a.m.

Tennis’ widespread popularity makes it tough to find ideal times, but something is clearly wrong when neither North America or Russia — two of the strongest tennis markets in the world — can’t tune in for a Grand Slam final.

The obvious solution is to schedule the most important matches — semi-finals and finals — at a time that is reasonable in each time zone.

That means scheduling matches for 8:30 a.m. Melbourne time, allowing them to start at 4:30 p.m. in Toronto and New York, 10:30 p.m. in Paris and 12:30 a.m. in Moscow (not ideal but certainly reasonable).

This places that unbearable 3:30 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. start time squarely over vacant portions of Russia’s tundra and over the Middle East. New Delhi and Beijing both miss out, but they are not exactly the centres of the tennis universe.

The time zone issue wasn’t the greatest frustration of this year’s Aussie Open. That’s because even viewers who did see Djokovic’s semi-final upset over Federer didn’t get to do so under proper circumstances. That matchup — likely the best of the tournament — should have been in the finals.

The reason Djokovic and Federer met in the semis is that tennis’ current seeding system has the third seed matching up against the first, with the fourth seed meeting the second. That pitted third-ranked Djokovic against first-seeded Federer, with fourth seed Nikolai Davydenko set to face Rafael Nadal.

In what other sport does the third seed get a tougher matchup than the fourth? Common sense and sporting convention dictate Djokovic should have been lined up on Nadal’s side of the bracket, waiting until the finals to face Federer.

This is especially relevant in this case, since Djokovic has been the de facto number two hard-court seed for the past year. Nadal’s ranking points are mostly accumulated in the clay and grass portions of the year, and Djokovic — by far the superior hard-court player — has for some time been the heir apparent to Federer’s hard-court dynasty.

It was inevitable for Djokovic to beat Federer eventually — he’s simply been too good on hard court over the past year. This past weekend was earlier than most expected, but you’ll see tennis fans watching closely if Federer and Djokovic meet at the US Open.

Hopefully then it will be under better circumstances – during the day and in the finals.

http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=Sports&articleID=1150&month=01&day=29&year=2008
 

·
I DON'T LIKE DJOKOVIC
Joined
·
41,217 Posts
All,

What say y'all?

Check it out in the last five paragraphs.


WTA, ATP exclude fans from highlights of Aussie Open

Malcolm Aboud

.........

The reason Djokovic and Federer met in the semis is that tennis’ current seeding system has the third seed matching up against the first, with the fourth seed meeting the second. That pitted third-ranked Djokovic against first-seeded Federer, with fourth seed Nikolai Davydenko set to face Rafael Nadal.

In what other sport does the third seed get a tougher matchup than the fourth? Common sense and sporting convention dictate Djokovic should have been lined up on Nadal’s side of the bracket, waiting until the finals to face Federer.

This is especially relevant in this case, since Djokovic has been the de facto number two hard-court seed for the past year. Nadal’s ranking points are mostly accumulated in the clay and grass portions of the year, and Djokovic — by far the superior hard-court player — has for some time been the heir apparent to Federer’s hard-court dynasty.

It was inevitable for Djokovic to beat Federer eventually — he’s simply been too good on hard court over the past year. This past weekend was earlier than most expected, but you’ll see tennis fans watching closely if Federer and Djokovic meet at the US Open.

Hopefully then it will be under better circumstances – during the day and in the finals.

http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=Sports&articleID=1150&month=01&day=29&year=2008
:retard: It's random. The seeding system doesn't mean that #1 plays #3.

I suppose this writer is one who wants the draw to play #1 vs #128, #2 vs #127 etc etc in the 1st round.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
95,412 Posts
I agree with it

when it comes to the semis it should be 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 ...

why should No.1player get a harder Semi than no.2? or in the same way why should no.4get an easier SF than no.3

also, it coulda stopped that pathetic injustice at 2005 Wimbledon when Hewitt, ranked 2 in the world, had to play Federer in the Semis - but no one can make any excuses for how many idiots are at the All England Club.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
:retard: It's random. The seeding system doesn't mean that #1 plays #3.

I suppose this writer is one who wants the draw to play #1 vs #128, #2 vs #127 etc etc in the 1st round.
Not only that he says in the last line AO is the first time Nole beat Fed - I could have sworn in Canada last year he did it :rolleyes:

I am guessing tennis isn't his main sport.
 

·
I DON'T LIKE DJOKOVIC
Joined
·
41,217 Posts
I agree with it

when it comes to the semis it should be 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 ...

why should No.1player get a harder Semi than no.2? or in the same way why should no.4get an easier SF than no.3

also, it coulda stopped that pathetic injustice at 2005 Wimbledon when Hewitt, ranked 2 in the world, had to play Federer in the Semis - but no one can make any excuses for how many idiots are at the All England Club.

But then how would Evil Tio Toni and the ATP bigwigs rig the draws in Rafa's favour the drama would be taken out of the draw. You couldn't just draw like that for the semis, it would have to be done with all 32 seeds at least, maybe the whole draw.

I prefer the system they use now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
The rule for positioning of seeds is number II.B.4.b. in the USTA Friend at Court Tennis Rules and Regulation Handbook 2007 edition. For a 128 person draw with 32 seeds, Seed 1 is placed on line 1 of the bracket, Seed 2 is placed on line 128, Seeds 3 and 4 are drawn at random for line 33 or 96 in the bracket. This means that 3 and 4 are randomly placed at either the bottom or top halves of the draw. It just worked out how it did this year.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
95,412 Posts
l_mac said:
You couldn't just draw like that for the semis, it would have to be done with all 32 seeds at least, maybe the whole draw.

I prefer the system they use now.
Nah, just do it with the top4 until the Semis i say

even if it meant ruining that exciting part of a draw to see who gets Nole in a Semi - Federer or Nadal ...

also it would mean Nole and Rafa in the same half at Roland Garros :woohoo: :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,866 Posts
I stopped reading when the author said that the matches should be played at 8:30 am Melbourne time. At that point I figured this was from one of those spoof sites.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,732 Posts
Im sure Djokovic would love the easier matchup with the #2 seed at RG
Thats exactly what I just wanted to write. It depends. It really depends what is tougher and what is not. The good thing is that the 4 top seeds dont meet before the semis. And well. I hope that soon Nadull wont have the luxury of being #2 seed anymore :devil:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,153 Posts
Im sure Djokovic would love the easier matchup with the #2 seed at RG
:rolls:

Tennis does it right. 1v4 and 2v3 all the time would end up being a disaster. There are times the rankings don't change much all year. If you think some players never face off now, imagine the scenario with unchanging seeds and fixed brackets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
For Escude: Rules for positioning seeds 5-32
Seeds 5-8 Drawn at random for line 17,49,80, or 112
Seeds 9-16 Drawn at random for line 9, 25, 41, 57,72,88,104, or 120
Seeds 17-32 Drawn at random for line 5,13,21,29,37.45,53,61,68,76,84,92,100,108,116,or 124
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
942 Posts
This Malcolm Aboud is a joke, did Europeans or Australians complain for the 94WC or for the Atlanta or Salt Lake City Olympics?

8.30 am in Melbourne, so basically players can't warm up??? what a douche this journalist is
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,484 Posts
8.30am Melbourne time :retard: :spit:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,530 Posts
How stupid do you have to be to write an article critiquing a set of rules when you don't even know those rules.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
The time thing is crazy. The big fans will stay up or get up early. I put the big matches that I couldn't watch on DVR. Matches can't be rescheduled for people half the world away.
This joker makes a fundamental thing like time differences seem like a conspiracy.:cuckoo:
 

·
Ace Loveforty
Joined
·
83,408 Posts
who makes this guys write for newspapers and magazines?
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top