Wimbledon's seeds of discontent

Kuerten has threatened to boycott Wimbledon

BBC tennis correspondent Iain Carter believes The All England Club may be forced to compromise over its continued policy of seeding by surface.

Wimbledon continues to struggle with the vexed question of which players should be seeded for the men's Championship, but has so far failed to realise that if it were to bow to player pressure British tennis could be the ultimate beneficiary.

Here are the battle lines: on one side the players and their governing body, the ATP, who believe the seedings should follow the rankings.

On the other side sit the All England Club who want the unique demands of a grass court and past results to be reflected.

On that basis it appears the two camps are poles apart, particularly when the militant views of leading Spaniard Alex Corretja are taken into account.

Cordial dialogue

He and his compatriot Albert Costa pulled out of last year's Championships in protest at Wimbledon's policy, and French Open champion Gustavo Kuerten has indicated he might follow suit this year.

Thankfully dialogue between both sides is most cordial thanks to the diplomatic skills of the Chairman of the All England Club, Tim Phillips.

Costa(l) and Corretja(r) gave SW19 a miss last year

He holds the highest respect for all of the leading players and has been involved in long talks with the ATP, Corretja and the President of the Players' Council Jonas Bjorkman.

Philips is worried that failure to take into account past successes on grass could give the draw a lopsided look.

If, for example, Pat Rafter had not been elevated from his ranking of 23 to a seeding of 12, the match that was last year's final might have been played in the first round.

Further statistics back up Phillips' theory. Since 1990 those seeded in the top four have had a 52% chance of reaching the semi-finals on the grass at Wimbledon.

Seeding on merit

This compares with 50% on the hard courts of the US and Australian Opens and just 18% on the clay of the French Open.

The discrepancy between SW19 and Roland Garros provides a compelling argument for seeding by surface.

The players counter by saying that if performances have been good enough to land a top 16 ranking you deserve a seeding at the sport's biggest event.

Frankly, this is the argument that, to me, holds more merit. The French Open survives, nay thrives, even though the top seeds are less likely to make it to the latter stages.

In my opinion it positively benefits from the fact that certain players, who aren't clay court specialists, are given a high seeding and therefore a higher profile.

The Parisian crowds know all about the specialists on the red stuff, then by seeding they are made aware of the other leading stars.

Compare that with Britain where only those who succeed at Wimbledon tend to command headlines.

Compromise solution

Seeding by surface relegates the significance of events as the same old faces get seeded status.

It also compounds the myth that tennis is a two-week a year sport. This in turn can only harm British attempts to popularise the sport.

Of course, there is a risk of a lopsided draw, but the fact that Todd Martin, who might have been seeded last year but wasn't, played Andre Agassi in the second round actually enhanced the first week of the Championships.

Sampras has won a record seven Wimbledon titles

Whatever decision is taken - and already we know the old seedings committee has been scrapped - it will be on a trial basis for this year only.

Wimbledon is unlikely to follow the other Grand Slams and seed by ranking, but is confident it can come up with a solution to suit all parties.

That might mean ground will have to be given with the top sixteen in the rankings being given seedings, but with the order altered.

Therefore seven-time champion and current world number four Sampras could still be top seed, while the player ranked 16 would still be guaranteed a preferred place in the draw regardless of his grass court pedigree.

Most importantly, all concerned are still talking and this could be the compromise solution that prevails.