> > > You may well be right that the U.S. Open is "barred" from doing this, but
> > > they were talking about this possibility on ESPN the other day.
> > Probably thinking back about what they did two years ago. I certainly
> > won't deny that they could produce *better* seedings than those
> > which come out of the computers (though I certainly wouldn't seed
> > Agassi #4 -- not based on his performance in important events).
> > I just don't think they will dare. Even if it is still "legal" --
> > and I don't think it is. These days, only Wimbledon is allowed
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> You don't *think* it is? You sounded like you knew for certain...
> > to alter the seeding list.
> I thought each Grand Slam event reserves the right to change the seeding.
> If the U.S. Open is barred from changing the seeding (based on rank), then
> why "only Wimbledon" is allowed this right?
> TennisTV, do you know the real deal with the U.S. Open?
either tour's rankings. It is an independent tournament, not part of
either tour. Bob Waltz is flat wrong. Wimbledon, the French, and the
Aussie are in exactly the same position as the US Open, vis a vis
This in no way means the US Open will ever again choose to seed
differently than the tour rankings. There is very little up side for
doing so, and it's far easier to "go along". But they certainly don't