Unseeded Stars Present a Doubles Dilemma
by Prip

Take one look at the doubles draw on both the men's and women's side at this year's Australian Open and you will notice something terribly amiss. The top seeds Lisa Raymond and Rennae Stubbs are due to face Martina Hingis and Monica Seles in the first round, while the Williams sisters remain unseeded. At the same time, Sonya Jeyaseelan and Karina Habsudova hold a seeded position, as do Tina Krizan and Irina Selyutina. Common sense would immediately call for a change of seed allocations, and yet tennis officials have neglected to do so.

Using the doubles rankings as a definitive guide despite the top women players being active in doubles, is simply not enough. Just because Martina Hingis chooses to play a light doubles schedule, as does Monica Seles, it doesn't mean that they are going to come on court and play like the 100th ranked players in the world. Having teams like these floating in the draw pretty much defeats the entire purpose of having a seeding system in the first place, and it is unfair that two top teams have to take each other out so early in the tournament. Surely tournament organizers would drool at the thought of such a match played in the finals, let alone the semis or quarters. On the men's side, Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi take on Joshua Eagle and Andrew Florent, simply because the Indian pair is left unseeded after Leander's year of battling injuries.

Talking about seeding, the ITF needs to seriously think about increasing the number of seeds in the draw. The men's game has had this a long time coming, and it is ridiculous to have matches like Kucera-Sampras, Rios-Moya and Hewitt-Bjorkman in the first round of such a big tournament. With 8 out of 32 (or a quarter) of the players being seeded at the regular tournaments, it isn't so ridiculous to also seed a quarter (32 out of 128) of the players at a Slam.

The next thing the ITF needs to do is to compile an internal rankings list by surface, if only to help in the allocation of seedings. Surfaces play a big role in many players games, and the general consensus would have to be that rankings and seedings should consider performance by surface. The best example would have the be the Spanish players and their affinity to grass.

And then there is the issue of the mixed doubles being switched to a third-set tie-breaker. With the tennis world being more and more subservient to commercial ideals, the governing bodies need to take a step back and realize that they're destroying the purity of the game. With tennis being one of the most traditional sports in the world in many senses, it is ridiculous how silly changes like bigger and heavier balls, third set tie-breakers, playing serve lets, and other ridiculous ideas such as giving a player only one serve are even being considered. Where does that leave the reason given for only seeding 16 players in the main draw (lamely enough, the word "tradition" was used in the excuse)? The excitement and demands of playing a match through to three sets is what keeps the fans interested and coming for more. Logically thinking, would the fans turn up to see a match they know will end in straight sets, short of all the sets going to tie-breakers?

The ITF, WTA and ATP have to seriously consider what they can and should be doing for the players. In fact, the WTA and ATP have to seriously reconsider their function in the world of tennis today. Forget about the glitz and the glamour a little, go back to actually taking care of the players and their tennis.