ti-amie wrote: ↑Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:28 pm Rafa was expected. Cilic not so much.

Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 11:18 pm Keeping high profile names in the draw until the last minute sells more tickets, people...

Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 11:42 pm It's not just the players that are involved. The tournament obviously benefits more if the high profile players withdraw at the last minute, as they sell more tickets to people expecting to see those players play.
My guess is that, if Alcaraz and/or Medvedev are not going to play Dubai, they have already told the tournament organizers - and the tournament organizers are delaying making the public announcement because, again, they'll sell more tickets and make more money that way. The players likely still get some sort of 'appearance fee' this way - even if they don't physically appear.
This kind of thing has been going on for many years, unfortunately.

An alternative is that the players go to the tournament, and lose very early pretty much deliberately. That way, as well, the tournament sells the extra tickets, the players get their 'appearance money', and they get the rest they want, as well.

That said, I have no idea if Alcaraz and/or Medvedev are planning to play Dubai or not - I'm simply saying that last minute withdrawals never surprise me (though they do anger me) - because it's a trend that has been occurring for quite a while now.

Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 11:57 pm The tournament can claim that they 'didn't know' that the player was going to withdraw - and there's no way to prove that they did know, even if the player advises them 2 weeks in advance. So both parties (players and tournament officials) are complicit.
It's also very possible that the player tells the tournament of their withdrawal several days in advance, and the tournament replies by telling the player that they must not divulge the withdrawal publicly if they want to be paid an 'appearance fee'.
And when players do go to a tournament and tank in the 1st or 2nd round, it could be because the 'appearance fee' has made it financially beneficial for them to do that.

As I said in another thread - business is a dirty business that is almost always void of moral or ethical responsibility these days. Financial profit is the only thing that matters. It's sad.

Deuce wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 12:12 am I hope that you gravitate heavily toward a business that helps people who need help instead of the much more common type of business that screws people.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 5:09 pm Lucky Losers get their spot. The draw is already fixed.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 27, 2023 4:27 pm Taylor won't break Isner's serve, but Isner won't break Taylor's. Expect a couple, or three, sets in the 7-5/7-6 range, in 40 minutes all.
We have seen this movie before. Many times.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 27, 2023 10:06 pm We all are...
(and I don't mind Isner).

Ainsley wrote: ↑Mon Feb 27, 2023 11:29 pm It doesn't look like Medvedev is withdrawing. I wonder how far he will go in this tournament.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 12:01 am

Ainsley wrote: ↑Mon Feb 27, 2023 11:29 pm It doesn't look like Medvedev is withdrawing. I wonder how far he will go in this tournament.

Until he meets Novak. And if Novak is not motivated enough, he has a slim chance.

Ainsley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 12:08 am The little boy who did the coin toss and photo with John Isner and Taylor Fritz barely came up to John Isner's waist.

Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 12:12 am

Ainsley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 12:08 am The little boy who did the coin toss and photo with John Isner and Taylor Fritz barely came up to John Isner's waist.

I thought Diego was playing in Chile this week...

ti-amie wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:15 pm

Ainsley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:19 pm

ti-amie wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:15 pm

They sure did wait til the last minute for that.

Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 1:42 am Ruud is having a difficult time in Acapulco...
He was up 3-0 in the 1st set vs. Taro Daniel, and lost the set 5-7. He looks frustrated - like a man who is at the mercy of external forces that are provoking his errors.

He had a tough time in his first match here, as well, vs. Andreozzi, needing a tiebreak in the 3rd set to win it. He looked quite frustrated with himself in that match, as well.

He and Daniel are on serve halfway through the 2nd set now.

JazzNU wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 9:47 pm

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 12:46 am Good to see Medvedev recovering his confidence, slowly but surely....he played his usual metronomic game and Djokovic seemed a bit impatient...probably the US visa is playing on his mind...Rublev won't be able to beat Med in this form, I don't think ..the court is also reasonably fast, suits Medvedev...

JazzNU wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 1:09 am

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 12:46 am Good to see Medvedev recovering his confidence, slowly but surely....he played his usual metronomic game and Djokovic seemed a bit impatient...probably the US visa is playing on his mind...Rublev won't be able to beat Med in this form, I don't think ..the court is also reasonably fast, suits Medvedev...

Novak is regularly impatient when he is losing. He wasn't distracted, he was annoyed he was about to get beat. No need to take away from Daniil's win, he won the match convincingly.

And if Novax wants a Visa so bad, it'll take him all of 15 minutes to fulfill the entry requirements.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:31 am The western, scientifically CORRECT view.

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:43 amI have a suspicion that if this was Nadal refusing to be vaccinated, you'll rationalize his decision just fine, Western scientific view not withstanding. But as it is now, it's important for Nadal fans to blame Djokovic rather than Australian government of 2022. This is their way of erasing an asterisk that looms over this title.

Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 9:03 am Nadal certainly doesn't have the history of odd beliefs and strange behaviour that Djokovic does, and so Nadal likely would not have been criticized as much as Djokovic was, had Nadal made the same decision to not get vaccinated.
But I would not have agreed with the decision any more if Nadal would have been the one who made it.

Sometimes the rules in life change. And sometimes there are very good reasons for why the rules change. And when that happens, it's up to each individual to decide whether or not to abide by the new rules.
Djokovic was one of the very, very few players who decided not to abide by the new rules. He knew the consequences - and so, he essentially decided that he would not play the 2022 Aussie and U.S. Opens.

I think there is more justification for an asterisk for Wimbledon 2022 than for the 2022 Aussie Open - because A) there were more top players missing from that Wimbledon than there were from that Aussie Open, and, more importantly, B) the Russians and Belarusians who were missing at the 2022 had NO CHOICE - they could not have played under any circumstance; it was a situation that was completely beyond their control.
Whereas with Djokovic, the 2022 Aussie and U.S. Opens were situations that were within his control. He chose not to get vaccinated - ok, that's his personal choice, knowing the consequences. I don't agree that it was the right choice, but I can respect it as a personal choice based on not wanting foreign matter in his body. But if he is not getting vaccinated because he denies that COVID-19 exists... or denies that it is a very serious virus - then, no, I do not respect that.

He made his choice knowing the consequences - and he was barred from participating in the Aussie Open and U.S. Open (and, potentially, from some upcoming U.S. tournaments, as well). Ok - he made his choice. The end. I see no justification for anyone whining about it, and certainly not for anyone complaining that it 'wasn't fair'.

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:27 am Do not agree on Russian/Belorussian players having no choice. First, I have to say that Wimbledon organizers did not think it through very well. IMO the limiting border of Russians supporting or not supporting their terrorist state shall be material rather than some non-biding statements like "please, stop the war". When Russian (like Rublev) says this - it is not even clear who is he addressing. Maybe he does address his government. Maybe in line with Russian propaganda he thinks that "collective West" is conducting the war against Russia and he is proposing the West to stop supporting Ukraine, so that Russia could quickly prevail. His statements were purposely blurred, so that neither party could blame him. By "material" I mean supporting the state financially through paying taxes. If Russian/Belorussian player pays taxes to his state, he effectively contributes to the war they conduct. If he is the resident of another country and pays his taxes for another country and also does not support Russia voluntarily through donations, then he shall be allowed to play. This is what Wimbledon should've done. And it would've presented fair choice to each Russian player. But even as it was in 2022 - they still had a choice to denounce their citizenship and apply for the citizenship of another country. It is a hard choice and IMO it would be comparable to the choice Djokovic was making on whether or not have a vaccine, given how Djokovic approaches his health.
Also the notion that the vaccinated person is less dangerous for surrounding people is not proven to say the least. I've heard some people from the medical field claiming that this is absolutely false. Vaccine may reduce the severity of the illness for the vaccinated person himself/herself, but (s)he would still be contagious to others all the same.

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 11:30 am how many Americans and Brits stood up to their governments when they invaded Iraq and Afghanistan? At least they didnt have to risk their lives to do that - Russians and Belarusians do! Let us give them a break..

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 1:27 pm The terrorists were Saudis, trained in Pakistan..we all know Iraq had nothing to do with them. Was Iraq threatening the US? The war crimes committed in Iraq are comparable to what Russia is doing in Ukraine..this isn't the forum to argue about such things but the hypocrisy of calling for bans on Russians and Belarusians is beyond belief. That is the only reason I mention it here. And, as I said, Russian and Belarusian players would be risking their lives.

Suliso wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 1:34 pm

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 1:27 pm The terrorists were Saudis, trained in Pakistan..we all know Iraq had nothing to do with them. Was Iraq threatening the US? The war crimes committed in Iraq are comparable to what Russia is doing in Ukraine..this isn't the forum to argue about such things but the hypocrisy of calling for bans on Russians and Belarusians is beyond belief. That is the only reason I mention it here. And, as I said, Russian and Belarusian players would be risking their lives.

I'll give you a benefit of a doubt of not being well informed about events in Ukraine here.

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:43 am

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:31 am The western, scientifically CORRECT view.

I have a suspicion that if this was Nadal refusing to be vaccinated, you'll rationalize his decision just fine, Western scientific view not withstanding. But as it is now, it's important for Nadal fans to blame Djokovic rather than Australian government of 2022. This is their way of erasing an asterisk that looms over this title.

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 2:41 pm So to close the issue - I want to understand your position to the fullest. You maintain that if the tennis player lives in Russia and pays taxes to his government, then banning him from tennis tournaments is an act of "vilification"? Is this you stance? I promise it would be my last question on the issue.

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:16 pm

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 2:41 pm So to close the issue - I want to understand your position to the fullest. You maintain that if the tennis player lives in Russia and pays taxes to his government, then banning him from tennis tournaments is an act of "vilification"? Is this you stance? I promise it would be my last question on the issue.

No, the vilification is happening on this forum!

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:22 pm That was a really good win for Paul...I like him for his willingness to come to the net, though he sort of lumbers up there and isn't really that good at volleying..but atleast he tries...

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:28 pm

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:16 pm

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 2:41 pm So to close the issue - I want to understand your position to the fullest. You maintain that if the tennis player lives in Russia and pays taxes to his government, then banning him from tennis tournaments is an act of "vilification"? Is this you stance? I promise it would be my last question on the issue.

No, the vilification is happening on this forum!

Excuse me? This forum was almost unanimous in that Wimbledon had it completely wrong when banning Russians and Belarusians. We were also in agreement that Russian TEAMS should be banned, but not INDIVIDUALS. We were almost in total agreement that, while we felt that Djokovic should not have been allowed to enter Australia, the Aussie Government botched the issue, and mishandled it completely.
And it cuts both ways. We are vilifying Djokovic? How about the opposite position? NOTHING he does is ever wrong. He smacked a ball at a line umpire? Oh, he should have not been defaulted. He crushes the entire field while claiming he had a 30mm hamstring tear? Well, he is that good. Years ago, a ball boy came over to hand him over his towel and Djokovic snapped it to the point the kid got scared? Well, heat of the moment stuff.

We are only calling it for what he does. And, right now, the rules to enter the USA call for vaccination. So, why do you expect those rules not to apply to him? It does not sound to me like we are the ones showing partiality towards the man.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:23 pm In this, I will contradict myself a bit.
ALL the courts in the world are too slow. A 25 stroke rally is nowadays completely usual. If three out of 4 men in their prime physical shape are cramping and throwing up while playing at night in Acapulco, something has to be done to shorten the points.
---0---
They are showing the Dubai final again. Has Rublev evert played a different point? All points are the same: inside out FH's, again and again. And he can't still make a winner.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:29 pm

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:22 pm That was a really good win for Paul...I like him for his willingness to come to the net, though he sort of lumbers up there and isn't really that good at volleying..but atleast he tries...

I actually feel he is good at the net. As you say, he is willing to come in and I have seen him hitting some solid strokes there.
Of course, they are not showing the matches this week so I won't be able to see the final, but I will keep an eye on his volleying skills next time I see him play.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:23 pm In this, I will contradict myself a bit.
ALL the courts in the world are too slow. A 25 stroke rally is nowadays completely usual. If three out of 4 men in their prime physical shape are cramping and throwing up while playing at night in Acapulco, something has to be done to shorten the points.
---0---
They are showing the Dubai final again. Has Rublev evert played a different point? All points are the same: inside out FH's, again and again. And he can't still make a winner.

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 2:05 am

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:23 pm In this, I will contradict myself a bit.
ALL the courts in the world are too slow. A 25 stroke rally is nowadays completely usual. If three out of 4 men in their prime physical shape are cramping and throwing up while playing at night in Acapulco, something has to be done to shorten the points.
---0---
They are showing the Dubai final again. Has Rublev evert played a different point? All points are the same: inside out FH's, again and again. And he can't still make a winner.

Totally agree..slow courts are going to kill tennis if this goes on .maybe time to move to the 'first to 4, no ad ' format...having to hit every ball 20 times will cause injuries to all players. Best of 5 sets needs to be scrapped too...I don't want to see players almost collapsing on the court..this isn't a gladiotarial contest in ancient Rome, after all.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 5:25 pm

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 2:05 am

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:23 pm In this, I will contradict myself a bit.
ALL the courts in the world are too slow. A 25 stroke rally is nowadays completely usual. If three out of 4 men in their prime physical shape are cramping and throwing up while playing at night in Acapulco, something has to be done to shorten the points.
---0---
They are showing the Dubai final again. Has Rublev evert played a different point? All points are the same: inside out FH's, again and again. And he can't still make a winner.

Totally agree..slow courts are going to kill tennis if this goes on .maybe time to move to the 'first to 4, no ad ' format...having to hit every ball 20 times will cause injuries to all players. Best of 5 sets needs to be scrapped too...I don't want to see players almost collapsing on the court..this isn't a gladiotarial contest in ancient Rome, after all.

No, please, never move to "first to 4, no ad". We have seen how insipid those matches at the NEXT GEN exo are.
I have to agree with Deuce. Time to regulate the racquets. Start with limits on the head size. Maximum size: 95 sqin (I would make it smaller, but that would be impossible). And as they do in golf: they have to regulate the strings to limit the power. You cannot have the luxilons or new strings allowing you to be Medvedev and hit a return with enough power still from 8 meters behind the base line.

But it will never happen. It is too late (for example, Alcaraz and Rune would have to relearn their strokes. Cressy would benefit, though).

Owendonovan wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 4:47 am Shall we introduce racket size to GOAT debate to skew it some more?

Owendonovan wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 4:47 am Shall we introduce racket size to GOAT debate to skew it some more?