- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Spain's Rafael Nadal, left, hugs Switzerland's Roger Federer during the awarding ceremony after winning the Men's singles final match at the Australian Open Tennis Championship in Melbourne, Australia, Sunday, Feb. 1, 2009. (AP Photo/Rick Stevens)
Those planning hours in front of the idiot box watching the Australian Open can save themselves a week of insomnia curing boredom and one-sided contests by waiting until week two of the Asia Pacific Grand Slam before tuning in.
Admittedly, there is occasionally an upset result or more likely the annual Channel Seven inspired fairytale to follow, almost always involving an Aussie female battler who can be featured for a week on Sunrise and Today Tonight. Odds on that this year it will be the returning Alicia Molik.
They build upon the underdog status before the likes of Casey Dellacqua mysteriously find themselves on Centre Court during prime time night sessions while Dinara Safina and Svetlana Kuznetsova, ranked #2 and #3 respectively, are forced to play in the blazing heat of the day on court 14.
Barring the fairytales and rare shock results, the tournament only truly gets interesting from the round of 16 onwards.
Until that point, the best players in the world are unnecessarily protected from facing each other by the seeding process.
Is anybody truly struggling to sleep with the anticipation of crackerjack opening matches between Andy Murray and a qualifier? Lleyton Hewitt and a qualifier? Or perhaps Ana Ivanovic (whether you’re watching for tennis purposes or otherwise…) who has drawn, you guessed it, a qualifier.
During Friday’s final of the Sydney International, commentators Sam Smith and Todd Woodbridge lamented the likely collision of eventual Sydney victor Elena Dementieva and former number one Justine Henin in the second round in Melbourne.
For the sake of the tournament and particularly those unable to attend in person, therefore reliant on television coverage to follow the event, such a pairing in the early rounds is music to the ears of all tennis lovers.
However, the match up is nothing more than a quirk in the draw given Henin, despite once being the best player in the world and a seven time Grand Slam champion, enters the Australian Open unseeded as she has only recently returned from premature retirement.
A similar match up provided rare pleasure in the first week at Wimbledon in 2008, when Marat Safin, returning from a long injury lay off, upset third seed Novak Djokovic in just the second round in a match worthy of a final and in the process, rescued what had been a tedious opening four days.
Likewise Serena Williams’ success in 2007, when she stormed the field to clinch the Aussie Open crown despite being ranked 81 in the world after an extended injury break.
Unseeded, the draw forced Williams into quality match ups against seeded players from round one, including fifth seed Nadia Petrova, eleventh ranked Jelena Jankovic and young gun Nicole Vaidisova before defeating Maria Sharapova in the final.
To find the true Australian Open champion (and likewise for all the Grand Slams), the seeding system should be abolished and a truly random draw conducted.
Yes, Federer v Nadal will be a brilliant semi final or even final but why not in round three? Sharapova and Venus Williams would be a great way to kick off the tournament and squillions would tune in to see Hewitt against Roddick in a second round slugfest.
The best players, particularly in the women’s field, would be forced to genuinely work for their victories instead of the usual drudgery of 6-1 6-1 in 50 minutes over a no name from Absurdistan.
These matches are not an illustration of tennis at its best, which surely the four Grand Slams are intended to be.
Conversely, the poor bloke ranked 128 would not always be drawn against a Federer or a Del Potro in the first round, giving the battler’s greater opportunity to progress at least a few days into the event.
They may well still cop a top 32 player for that is the luck of the draw yet the 128th and last ranked entrant could just as easily be drawn to battle player 127.
Even first round losers at the Australian Open pick up a lazy $19 400 and the eventual champion will benefit to the tune of $2 000 000.
Let’s make them earn it.
Abolition of the seedings would make little difference to attendance figures, which are always strong in Melbourne, yet would generate greater television interest and deliver tennis at its best to a larger audience.
Most importantly, the champions of the respective Grand Slams would be just that – genuine champions, having beaten all comers to achieve the ultimate success in the game rather than rolling through the motions for eight of the 14 days of competition.
Whether it’s aces or races, try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp for great odds and a great punting experience. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.