So people are seriously outraged that Federer got seeded above Nadal at Wimbledon. Like, they actually think this is unfair.
Look, if Roland Garros wanted to seed Rafa #1 there from now until the end of time, I would have no problem with that. He totally deserves it. He's won five of the last six and has generally been an all round righteous dude at that tournament. He owns it and he owns it hard.
And guess who owns Wimbledon hard?
Is it so outrageous that the defending champion, the dude who has won it six out of the last seven years and who is #2 by, what, 70 points? should be seeded first?
The #1 Nadal argument seems to be based entirely around the fact that Nadal beat Federer here in 2008. However, epic as that match was, it was one match. One. And the fact remains that overall, Federer's grass court record kicks Nadal's hard in the pants. Just like Rafa's clay court record kicks Federer's. Roger deserves this.
Added to which, it's not as if the Wimbledon formula was rigged to be pro-Roger or anything - it hasn't changed. The data doesn't lie. And common sense doesn't lie either.
I just can't believe that this is even a thing. Seriously.
2 months ago