The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Seeds sown will dramatically alter grand slam rankings from 2019

22nd January, 2018
Advertisement
Australia's Nick Kyrgios celebrates. (AP Photo/Dita Alangkara)
Expert
22nd January, 2018
9
1031 Reads

On Sunday night, Australian Open third seed Grigor Dimitrov defeated 17th seed Nick Kyrgios.

It was an exciting match, and one worthy of a fourth-round billing – but what if I told you that, from next year, we could be seeing Dimitrov and Kyrgios play off in the first round of a Grand Slam?

Under the new seeding system to be introduced from the start of 2019, that’s exactly what could happen.

The current system sees the top 32 players in both draws receive a seeding, protecting them from meeting any other seeded players until the third round. However, tennis’ Grand Slam board announced late last year that from 2019, Grand Slams will revert to having only 16 seeds.

This was the case up until Wimbledon 2001, when the number of seedings was doubled to 32, largely to provide more protection for clay court players who argued that they received unfavourable draws at Wimbledon compared to grass-court specialists.

This also guaranteed the top players would not face anyone ranked in the top 32 in the world until the third round.

Under the new model, the top 16 seeds could face anyone ranked 17 upward from the first round. Thus, Dimitrov facing Kyrgios in the opener becomes a possibility.

Some support the change on the basis that it will bring variety to the competition, while others argue that the competition is even enough as it is.

Advertisement

I place myself firmly in the former camp – the change can only mean good things for the game.

[latest_videos_strip]

Firstly, let’s take the reason why the change was instigated – to help give those who specialise on one surface and at one type of play a chance to succeed at all Grand Slams. The game has changed since then, such that there are very few ‘specialists’ of any terrain (perhaps Rafael Nadal aside).

Today, players need to adapt to all surfaces, and the majority can.

Secondly, while there’s an argument to be made that the competition now is as even and open as it has been for a decade, this has more to do with the cyclical nature of sport than any long-lasting structural changes.

Players get injured and have peaks and troughs in form – as we’re seeing at the moment with Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic – which allows others to step up. But let’s not forget that in the last decade, only two men outside the ‘Big Five’ (including Stan Wawrinka) have won Grand Slam titles – Juan Martin del Potro and Marin Cilic, both at the US Open.

We’re so used to seeing the top players easily reach the fourth round of a Grand Slam, which is when the tournament really starts to get interesting. The competition may be going through a phase of evenness now, but history suggests this won’t last.

Advertisement

In that vein, reducing the number of seeds has the potential to bring interest back to the first few rounds. If Kyrgios and Dimitrov are drawn in the same quarter, why wouldn’t we want to see them play in the first or second round, rather than wait until they’ve dispatched two or three lower-ranked opponents?

Grigor Dimitrov

Grigor Dimitrov (AAP Image/Darren England)

Yes, it means that one of them would be eliminated from the tournament early, which would affect their rankings points, but that’s tennis. The sport is fighting for eyeballs and participation in the global sporting landscape, and everything we can do to keep it relevant and appealing is warranted.

Making the first few rounds of major tournaments more exciting would definitely fit this bill.

This leads to the fact that seeding changes shouldn’t affect the fact that good players usually find a way to win. Many smaller tournaments frequently pit top players together from early on. Case in point, this year’s Sydney International featured 15 of the world’s top 25 women (and six former Grand Slam champions), and a direct entry cut-off of 33. Despite this, Ash Barty (ranked 17) and Angelique Kerber (ranked 14) still found their way to the final.

I’d wager that, aside from Serena Williams, the top 16 would more likely than not beat those ranked 17-32, regardless of when they meet in a tournament.

Finally, there is also an argument that reducing the number of seeds could see all seeded players knocked out early in the tournament if they’re facing those ranked 17-32.

Advertisement

This is unlikely – for one, at the moment the seeds are doing a pretty good job of knocking themselves out, and for another, the nature of the draw is that it will change each match. While some high seeds may be drawn to face the number 17 in the world in one Grand Slam, in the next they may not face a seed until the third round.

Reducing the number of seeds at Grand Slams can only benefit tennis. Hopefully, at this tournament next year, we’ll see Dimitrov and Kyrgios square off in the first round.

close