Originally Posted by
Mal
I think it's interesting that this has now come into play yet again. Djokovic as the top seed at Wimbledon gets to once again face the prospect of having to beat both Nadal and Federer, the 2 and 3 seeds, to retain his title. I don't think he's made any noise about this, but it strikes me as grossly unfair at this point that the coin flipping on this keeps working out so as to not give him the boost a No. 1 seed would expect. And it turns out that when he was stuck at 3 behind Roger and Rafa, he kept getting dropped in Roger's half, too, making it harder to just break through to the finals by beating a more evenly-matched Nadal instead of the guy winning 16 Slams. Since taking over the top ranking, Djokovic has now had Federer as the third seed fall in his half of the draw three out of four times at the Slams. The one time it didn't happen Federer may have done enough to tire out Rafa that it helped him survive that marathon in this year's Aussie final.
Out of curiosity, since I'd asked before and since I think it takes a touch of the sheen off of Nadal's hardcourt titles, I went to see whether Rafa had ever beaten the two top seeds (other than himself, of course) to win a hardcourt Slam. I didn't bother to look at the French, since it doesn't matter who he plays there unless that person's temporarily turned into a superhuman with Bjorn Borg tennis skills. Turns out he's not beaten two high seeds consecutively in the Aussie, Wimbledon or U.S. In both 2008 and 2010 at Wimbledon, Federer got the unlucky bounce in the draw that Djokovich's now getting, being the top seed and having the 3 (Novak both times) in his half of the bracket. In 2008 it didn't matter, as Roger and Rafa both faced unseeded surprises in the semi's. In 2010 it may have made a difference, depending on how much it took out of Tomas Berdych to upset both Fed and Djokovic in the quarters and semi's. At the 2009 U.S. Open, Nadal earned the top seed and benefitted by watching Federer and Djokovich fight through a grueling 5-setter before the winner faced him. And at the '09 Aussie, the seeds again went according to number so Nadal got the benefit of his top spot and got 14 Verdasco in the semi's. It's not that often that the results go according to seed and the top 4 make the semi's, of course, so grains of salt, etc. But the pattern is rather surprising - when Nadal's the top seed, the seeds consistently fall into predictable 1/4 and 2/3 order. When he's the 2 seed, they keep going 1/3 and 2/4.
I don't quite see this the same way that I inevitably think a little less of Federer's one French Open title, since it didn't involve personally beating Nadal. But it strikes me as pretty fortunate for Nadal that there have been far more times than math would predict that, regardless of what his seed is, he's seen a path to a hardcourt Slam title that can't possibly include having to beat both of the two best hardcourt players of the last decade. We'll see what impact the draw has on Wimbledon, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if you see the winner of another Djokovich/Federer slugfest facing the daunting prospect of playing the Energizer Bunny himself in the finals after he's whipped Murray or some other lesser player again. I don't think Federer's got it left in him to beat them both in the same tournament. Should Djokovic beat them both again, it'd be pretty impressive, and twice in the last four Slams.
I'm hoping for a Tsonga/Nadal quarters matchup, as that could make for a fascinating match. Tsonga's one of the few guys with the tools to present a stylistic danger for Nadal, but he'd need to make the tactical decision to put his chips on a full-on serve and volley attack. If he just stays back and tries to baseline it, he'd be out in two hours, of course, but with his big serve, size and coverage, if he decided to play at the net it could force Nadal out of his usual position well behind the baseline and/or neutralize his inhuman ability to get to everything hit his way.