The Seeds of Disagreement

The clay season is in full swing on both the ATP and WTA tours. Nadal and Sharapova have both defended clay titles and Djokovic played spoiler to Nadal in Monte Carlo (on a side note, it has to be nice for Djokovic to be able to win the trophy and then just take it down the street to his house and watch a movie.) With the French Open rapidly approaching, an interesting topic has come up. There have been rumblings and discussions about whether or not Nadal should be given a seed at the French that is higher than his current ranking (#5). Let's play Yay and Nay with this idea:

Yay: I think by now we all know what Nadal's record on clay and at the French is. He definitely can't be considered the #5 player in the world when it comes to playing on the dirt. He has collected multiple titles on the surface this year and has throttled all the best clay court players with the exception of Djokovic. Taking history, injury layoff and recent performance into account, he would easily be above #5 when it comes to seeding. Allowing him to be #5 creates early match ups that would otherwise be later into the tournament. He could potentially see Djokovic in the quarters. Tennis needs its big names in big matches. The quarters are simply not going to cut it in terms of getting eyeballs tuned in. If Wimbledon can do it, why shouldn't another Grand Slam be allowed to use their own formula to create their seeding?

Nay: The idea of giving Nadal a higher seed into the French is the definition of a slippery slope. There is a reason that Wimbledon is the only Grand Slam allowed to utilize their own formula for seeding. Grass is an outlier when it comes to the playing surfaces on tour these days. The Wimbledon formula take into account current ranking, plus all current grass results and the best grass result from the previous season. Clay is a much larger portion of the tour schedule and should not be considered in the same light as grass as the percentage of play on the two surfaces is vastly different. The other portion of the issue involves the concern over match ups  What exactly is everybody worked up about if Nadal is seeded #5? It is an issue for the sole reason that it makes it likely for him to play Djokovic in the quarters. Obviously, everybody wants that match up to be deeper into the tournament than that. But allowing the seeding to be changed in deference to to the match up just opens way too many doors. By altering the seeding, the ATP would create a precedent for tournaments to be able to manipulate their draws more than they should. Tournaments could then shift seeds, etc to try and create their dream final. I'm not saying that this is guaranteed to happen but i think it makes it more difficult for the ATP to block if they have allowed the French to do it. There comes a point where everybody needs to simply play the hand they are dealt. Nadal is #5 for a reason. He was off for an extended period and has also had mixed results on surfaces other than clay in the last couple years. Despite his record against some of the players in front of him (17-4 against #4 Ferrer), he should have to play his way up the ladder just like anyone else would be expected to.  

Bottom line, I disagree with any seeding modifications for the French Open. Wimbledon is the lone established exception to how the seeding format works. The age old saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," applies here. Nadal was broken, not the ranking system. If he should be seeded higher, then he needs to play, stay injury free and get results that warrant a rise in the rankings. Get your popcorn ready, it should be a heck of a quarterfinal round in a few weeks!!                                                                  

Davis Cup Post Mortem

I am a bit behind the times this week but I still need to get my thoughts on Davis Cup out. It was such a great event for the city of Boise and for tennis in Idaho in general. I think we were all witness to a watershed moment for the sport in our state last week. Let's cover some winners and errors in review:

WINNERS:

1. Sam Querrey can battle. Early on, it did not look good for Sam on Friday afternoon. He was struggling to find his range and was a bit flat overall. But boy did he turn it on and make a comeback. His win on Friday to even the tie at 1-1 put the US team in the position I think everyone figured and hoped to be in heading in to Saturday.

2. The crowd. While it may not have been a sellout, I thought the crowd was great. The arena, especially on Saturday and Sunday, was loud and into the match. I also thought the Serbian contingent that was able to make it to the matches was very vocal and supportive of their team. I think the crowd support and excitement was everything the USTA could have hoped for.

3. Novak Djokovic showing why he is the world number 1. Whether it was his domination on Friday or his sheer will to come through turning his ankle on Sunday, you have to be impressed by the guy. His competitive fire is second to none. For a guy who early in his career had a reputation for going "walkabout" and retiring from matches if he didn't feel exactly perfect, he has shown over the last couple of years that he has become the complete player both on court and mentally.

4. Ilija Bozoljac. How could anybody walk away from the doubles match and not be at least mentally rooting for him? He came in ranked in the 1100's in doubles and played absolutely out of his mind in a match they had to have. I now dream of being able to hit anything remotely resembling his backhand return down the alley. That thing was a display of sheer beauty and violence. Even if his win resulted in disappointment for the US squad, the trues tennis fan should be able to tip their hat and acknowledge one of the gutsiest performances in recent memory.

ERRORS:

1. U.S. team engagement. Hopefully I won't get nailed for this opinion. I thought the American team showed a real lack of engagement on the bench. Between the singles guys just up and disappearing and them texting and playing around on their phones during matches, I was severely underwhelmed with the team's enthusiasm. To me, they all just looked obligated to be there. Even when they were engaged, it was not to the level that the Serbian team was. Passion is a must for Davis Cup. It gets the crowd into it and can definitely swing the momentum. It nearly cost the U.S. in the last round against Brazil and I think it was a factor here.

2. Altitude/Court Surface. Well, this was a choice that seemed to backfire. The altitude and faster court seemed to help the Serbians more than the U.S. squad. In singles, we looked like we struggled to find our range while Djokovic and Troicki played smart, opportunistic tennis.. In doubles, the Serbians were hitting out on the ball while the Bryans looked a bit tentative.

3. Strategy. I felt like the Serbian team made the better adjustments throughout the weekend. They played to their own strengths and found weaknesses in the Americans game. On the U.S. side, some of the decisions were kind of head scratchers. I think at some point, I would have been done giving Bozoljac backhand side serves on crucial points.......

Overall, this was the most exciting weekend of tennis in Idaho ever. To have the #1 player in the world and the #1 doubles team of all time in our city playing for their countries was just an awesome sight to see. I got to meet players and coaches from both sides and all of them were 100% genuinely excited to be in Boise and had a great experience. Hats off to Serbia for pulling through and my hopes are that the U.S. will come out strong and hungry in next year's World Group. How did you feel about the Davis Cup tie in Boise?