I'm neither opposed nor in favor of seeding. In my opinion, it's all how it is done. Seeding is inappropriate in pool as pool is now, because there's no clear, definitive rankings and system for determining player rankings. Who is to say who is #1 or 1-25?
That requires a tour, where all the players play regularly, and there's a tour card system, but at the same time it is open to all competition with regular qualifiers to keep the tour members constantly challenged. Eventually, there can be a solid ranking system, and then and only then is seeding appropriate.
Otherwise, seeding is just a way by which to protect or keep the money amongst a particular group of players. Nothing wrong with that, assuming there's something established that determines with some kind of reasoning as to who constitutes that group of players. And, what do those players do to MERIT that seeding?
If say there's a solid tour, that can be determined. The guys at the top have battled, fought, worked and earned their spot at the top. They are the top dogs, and seeding is fair at that point. Since why should #1 and #4 try and knock each other out in the first round, and some unranked player from a qualifier get a first round bye or play another player from a qualifier? That's not fair either. It's a sort of paying one's dues to be "in the big time" ...It would also be expected of tour members to give back to the tour and the sport by working for the tour, doing promotional work etcetera.
What can an alleged top player claim as their right to prize money protection today when no such exchange of services exists? What can they claim they did for the sport, that earns them this right? There's no such tour. There's nothing of the sort. They are tournament players like anyone else. It is irrelevant that they might win many tournaments internationally, and be recognized as top pros. Just being a winner alone isn't enough.
I think seeding is appropriate for tours with pros who are more than just pros, but who promote the sport and work to grow it. The IPT had that vision. Being seeded is a lot like being a shareholder or having a stake in it all. To earn seeding, the players ought to have a duty and responsibility to the tour, the sport as a whole and more.
I think it is utterly absurd that some players feel entitled to being seeded in tournaments. But, that's up to the promoters and people putting up the cash. If it's an invitational, or even if it is open and the players paying to enter are willing to put up with seeding, more power to them.
