Why is Hewitt playing Federer in the Semis?

[94_Eagles]

In every other sporting even I've watched or partaken in it has always been 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 in the semi's. Seems in this tournament it's 1 v 3 and 2 v 4 for some rediculous reason. I mean, the number one seed has earnt his right to the easiest game, shouldn't it be 1 v 4? That way the number 1 seed has the best possibility (on paper) of making it through to the final which is best for the tournament organisers and the fans. Everyone wins.

I can't understand it.

 

[Total Power]

Its never 1v4 and 2v3 in MENS tennis mate.Although i want this to happen.The draw in done in a random manner where the number 1 seeded player will draw either 3 or 4 in the semis.Similarly the top seeded player will draw number 7 or 8th seeded player in the quarter finals.Thats the way their draw works.In WTA they tried that for a few years and now they are back the traditional way

 

[JohnF]

A more pertinent question is why the phark is the first ranked player playing the second ranked player in the semi final?

I can't believe Wimbledon gave Roddick the second seeding. What's extra insulting is that Roddick has been Hewitt's bitsch: 6-1 head to head.

 

[red+black]

Its never 1v4 and 2v3 in MENS tennis mate.Although i want this to happen.The draw in done in a random manner where the number 1 seeded player will draw either 3 or 4 in the semis.Similarly the top seeded player will draw number 7 or 8th seeded player in the quarter finals.Thats the way their draw works.In WTA they tried that for a few years and now they are back the traditional way

Are you sure about all that.

I thought that the only guarantee was 1v2 in the final, therefore, in the semis 1 meets 3 or 4, and in the quarters, 1 meets 5, 6, 7 or 8.

At Wimbledon now, Fededer (1) was due to play Davydenko (8) in the quarters, but Roddick (2) was due to play Henman (6). And Hewitt (3) was due to play Safin (5).

What's the point of being seeded if it isn't an advantage relative to other seeds?

What Hewitt's seeding and terrible draw has done is make it harder for him to keep him #2 ranking which he has rightfully earned over the past 52 weeks.

 

[bunsen burner]

The officials got this one wrong. Lleyton has won Wimbledon before and has won Queens at least 3 times. He's the second best grass court player in the world at the moment and is ranked higher than Roddick. Bad decision.

 

[celtic_pride]

I am so looking foward to watching Federer destroy the brat .... GO ROGER !!!!

 

[Ljp86]

In every other sporting even I've watched or partaken in it has always been 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 in the semi's. Seems in this tournament it's 1 v 3 and 2 v 4 for some rediculous reason. I mean, the number one seed has earnt his right to the easiest game, shouldn't it be 1 v 4? That way the number 1 seed has the best possibility (on paper) of making it through to the final which is best for the tournament organisers and the fans. Everyone wins.

I can't understand it.

They do it so 1 plays 2 in the final, the idea is to make the top 2 seeds have easier semi-finals so the Final is the best match and also close.

 

[Ricketts]

It's random.

1 and 2 go in different halves, and it's random which halves 3 and 4 go in.

And Wimbledon seed based on grass court performances in the last 12 months. Roddick made the Wimbledon Final and won Queens last year, Hewitt did squat.

 

[Funkalicous]

It's based on a formula. It takes your ranking and results on grass in the last 12 months. Roddick came out ahead of Hewitt. No big deal really. Safin and Nadal had to beat Federer in the semis for the title....

 

[RW]

Even though he should have been seeded #2 and not #3, Hewitt probably has a better chance of beating Federer in the semis than in the final - Federer's grand slam semi final record in 2005: 0-2

Lleyton's overdue for another grand slam, I feel - love him or hate him.

 

[Total Power]

Are you sure about all that.

I thought that the only guarantee was 1v2 in the final, therefore, in the semis 1 meets 3 or 4, and in the quarters, 1 meets 5, 6, 7 or 8.

From 2002 onwards, No! They changed the format for all ATP and ITF draws. I suggest you look at aussie open, french open draws this year, you will see what i am talking about..but back in 2001 it was quite d different.For example take a look at masters cup.You can either have #7 or #8 seeded player in one group..#6 or #5 seeded player in one group and so on.The format changed quite significantly since 2002

 

[spring6]

I love him but he won't beat Federer. I think the 2 and 3 thing is a bit irrelevant anyway (unless you just love seeing him in a final) cause he wouldn't have beaten him in the final either.

It may sound bizarre but if i was leyton and his coach I would be putting all my effort into finding a way to get round Federer in matches. He is capable of beating every other man on the tour but he will win only the odd (ie where the draw falls right for him and then someone else knocks Federer out for him before the final, and he has played best tennis and gotten to the final )
grand slam until he finds a way to beat Roger at least occassionally.

Maybe it can't be done, who knows.