{"id":3538,"date":"2013-08-24T23:59:42","date_gmt":"2013-08-25T03:59:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.tennisfrontier.com\/?p=3538"},"modified":"2015-09-20T02:04:46","modified_gmt":"2015-09-20T06:04:46","slug":"luck-of-the-draw-us-open-2013","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tennisfrontier.com\/archive\/blogs\/jesse-pentecost\/luck-of-the-draw-us-open-2013\/","title":{"rendered":"Luck of the Draw: US Open 2013"},"content":{"rendered":"

The draw for the US Open has been released in the traditional fashion, which is to write the names of every eligible player on little slips of paper, place them all in an antique cannon in the middle of Arthur Ashe Stadium, and fire them straight up. From there the strong prevailing winds take over, and a player\u2019s placement is determined by where in the tri-state area his name flutters to rest. It is for this reason, one presumes, that the year\u2019s final Major is always contested during hurricane season. Sadly, the USTA has announced that in 2017 there will be roofs over the main stadiums at the Billy Jean King National Tennis Center.\u00a0The US Open will have to find a new way of conducting the ceremony (since it is unthinkable that something as momentous as populating a tournament draw could be achieved without due pomp). It\u2019s always a shame when old traditions disappear.<\/p>\n

[divider]<\/p>\n

Discuss this article, the match and lots more with fellow tennis fans in the forums.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

[divider]<\/p>\n

Of subsidiary interest, the placement of the very highest seeds is decided by where their names fall in relation to David Ferrer\u2019s. As it happened, Rafael Nadal was the luckiest one. We can safely ignore scurrilous rumours that the slips of paper bearing the two Spaniards’ names had been stuck together with adhesive. Meanwhile, Novak Djokovic\u2019s name turned up in Stamford, Connecticut. It could have been worse, I suppose.<\/p>\n

Once again we\u2019re invited to marvel at the vagaries of the ATP rankings, especially the situation whereby Andy Murray, reigning US Open (and Wimbledon) champion and eternal saviour of British tennis, is ranked number three in the world. This is one place lower than Nadal, who holds only a single Major (Roland Garros), lost in the first round at Wimbledon, and didn\u2019t even play at the others. It is two places lower than Novak Djokovic, who holds only the Australian Open. As a result the Scot is seeded lower than both those men at the upcoming US Open. As far as the population of the small island positioned off the extreme western coast of the Eurasian landmass is concerned, this is nothing short of a cosmic injustice.<\/p>\n

Although Sky Sports have never attained the febrile derangement of their compatriots at the\u00a0Daily Mail<\/i>, they have nonetheless elevated cheerleading on Murray\u2019s behalf into something of an art form, and will reliably ascend to heights of outrage when they feel he\u2019s been hard-done-by. While raucous advocacy presumably doesn\u2019t reflect management\u2019s\u00a0official<\/em>\u00a0position, it certainly isn\u2019t discouraged, and any failure to address Britain\u2019s top player in sufficiently rapturous terms presumably results in disciplinary action. (This policy, incidentally, isn\u2019t limited to Sky: word is that John McEnroe received a stern talking-to from ESPN after he repeatedly excoriated American players on air during last year\u2019s US Open. He and his brother really did go to town on Donald Young one evening. Here in Australia, failure to sing the praises of either Lleyton Hewitt or Bernard Tomic will earn the offender a baleful visit from John Newcombe.) Anyway, Peter Fleming pronounced the latest rankings to be “crazy”. Marcus Buckland suggested it “seemed unfair”. Others were less circumspect, in each case betraying a deliberate ignorance of how the rankings actually work. It is understandable that the average punter\u2019s knowledge of the sport ends with the Majors \u2013 we shouldn\u2019t necessarily be thrilled at this, and American coverage in particular can grow pathetically grateful at any public interest at all \u2013 but for those paid good money to follow professional tennis from week to week, the Majors should merely be the start. There is no mystery why Nadal is ranked higher than Murray: there\u2019s more to tennis than Grand Slam events.<\/p>\n

Anyway, the reason why the second and third seedings matter so much at this US Open is that David Ferrer is seeded fourth. There are probably kinder ways to say it, but the reality is that even when Ferrer was in decent form he represented a more benign semifinal opponent than whomever the alternative happened to be. Right now, however, he is in execrable form, and still troubled by a lingering injury. Not only that, but these are the potential quarterfinal match-ups based on seedings:<\/p>\n