PDA

View Full Version : Roddicks special treatment


Chadwixx
02-19-2005, 03:16 PM
i know this is out of his hands but why hinder the other semi final match just so he can play on tv?

quoted from the yahoo article

"Mirnyi and Haas played Saturday morning because Roddick was scheduled for the prime afternoon slot for television."

"I wasn't sharp enough,'' Haas said. ``I don't want to use any excuses. I've never played a semifinal match before at 10:30.''

i wonder if the tournament director told these guys to finish quickly so they can get the stadium cleaned up for the roddick match :)

davey25
02-19-2005, 03:27 PM
Roddick has always gotten special treatment. Remember the U.S open in 2003 when he was allowed to play one of his rounds, I believe his 4th round match, before some women had even played their 3rd round match! I dont believe that had ever happened before. If I became president of the ATP tour I would change the result of his semifinal cheating win over Nalbandian to a loss, have Nalbandian and Ferrero play for the 2003 U.S open title, have Roddick's year-end ranking dropped to #3, with Ferrero being #1 and Federer #2 if Ferrero won, and Federer #1 and Ferrero #2, if Ferrero lost that U.S open final to Nalbandian(the year-end points between Ferrero and Federer were mathematically as such that Ferrero's U.S open final with Nalbandian would have decided). Also the ATP and ITF titles of Roddick be stripped, since he never would have won them without his cheating U.S open win, automatically given to Ferrero if he won the U.S open delayed final with Nalbandian, and given to Federer if he loses. Unfortunately they would never do that since nobody has the balls to do what is right. He is allowed to get away with more cheating and special treatment than any player on tour, it is a joke!!!!!!

tykrum
02-19-2005, 06:01 PM
Ah, nevermind...

VamosRafa
02-19-2005, 06:10 PM
Yeah, a huge nevermind.

Neither Haas nor Roddick is in it.

Datacipher
02-19-2005, 06:26 PM
In this sense (scheduling and some other perks) indeed, Roddick gets some special treatment....but this is nothing new. Unfortunately in tennis and other sports sometimes marquee players have gotten slight but unfair advantages because of the money they bring in. Unfortunate as you would like a completely impartial level playing field.

There have been incidents many times before in tennis where an advantage was given to a big name player where the motivations were suspicious. I remember not too many years ago, Becker accused Agassi of getting special treatment partly because of his connections through Nike....I doubted that one....I think any advantage given to Agassi was because he is Agassi...I don't think Nike would even have to pull strings....lol

VamosRafa
02-19-2005, 06:55 PM
I made a duplicate response by mistake.

No worries. they are basically the same. Just trying to save some space.

VamosRafa
02-19-2005, 06:58 PM
In this sense (scheduling and some other perks) indeed, Roddick gets some special treatment....but this is nothing new. Unfortunately in tennis and other sports sometimes marquee players have gotten slight but unfair advantages because of the money they bring in. Unfortunate as you would like a completely impartial level playing field.

Although everything was rendered moot in this instance, as neither Haas nor Roddick got to the final (Who is playing the final, btw?),

You are right. The marquee players are giving scheduling edges.

I think that's done to sell tickets, to promote the sport, and some such nonsense.

It's not fair at all.

Especially to the people who buy the tickets, hoping to see Haas or Roddick or another name player.

Better that they buy a ticket and just know it's all up to the luck of the draw, the weather, injuries and such.

Fee
02-19-2005, 07:25 PM
Tennis is a money making venture...

Back to that USOpen thing... I think one thing people seem to forget is why Andy and Andre got to play matches during the rain delay - because they were willing to stick around and wait it out all day for the opportunity. A number of players were apparently given that option and chose to be released from the grounds at 6 pm (or whatever the cutoff time was).

As for scheduling, all tournament promoters will put the players that sell in the prime places. This is true for all countries, and it's different players in each one. Here in the US, that will mean Andy and Andre, and to a lesser extent Mardy, James, and even Tommy sometimes. In France, it will be Amelie Mauresmo or Grosjean.

Now, let's get back to complaining about Andy's ugly service motion or one-dimensional game......

@wright
02-19-2005, 07:39 PM
We were all dissappointed that Roddick coouldn't play Carlsen. Roddick did come out to address the crowd and apologize for not being able to play. The crowd was glad he did it.

VamosRafa
02-19-2005, 07:49 PM
Just as Gaston Gadio came to the Brasil Open to explain why he couldn't play this week.

And Guga, who is still recovering from his surgery, also made a press statement on how he hopes to play the tournament again.

They are class players, just as Andy is.

But injuries do happen; it's a fact of the sport.

ford oliver
02-19-2005, 08:38 PM
Chadwixx, you are indeed a rookie. Haas played the previous day at 3:30 pm while Roddick played later, at 6:30 pm. Also, Haas' opponent (Mirnyi) had a doubles semi-final to play as well. That is why Haas got the 10:30 am slot and Roddick was scheduled for 3:00 pm.

IOP
02-19-2005, 08:39 PM
Whatever... A.Dick lovers are all high school virgins. His presence of any kind is always an unsurpassed inspiration to all of them.

VamosRafa
02-20-2005, 01:14 AM
Give me an f-ing break.

@wright
02-20-2005, 06:21 AM
I don't consider myself a Roddick lover by any means. He has gained a little respect from me in the past year by making some classy gestures. He is a good sport, you can't deny that. He also does what he can for the sport that has given him so much, just like Federer does.

andfor
02-20-2005, 07:02 AM
This post does not deserve a response. But I do get one clear impression. When it's an american player male or female they get blasted by the haters for whatever is the Soup de Jour.

I have yet to see one complete post about the Chilean crowd so roucus in which they overwhelmingly cheer for F.Gonzloz and against Gaudio. That's just one example. If it was the an american on american soil you who are the vultures of this kind of topic would have your little trolling lines out as fast as you could.

Get over it. American players playing in the US and are selling the most tickets get the nod for some favoritism. Can anyone here show us how it's different anywhere else on the planet. Tell me how Henman or Schrichipan does not get special treatment when they play in their country. You can't.

Remember this, in big time pro tennis and other sports money and TV ratings makes the world go around, like it or not. Those who are the marquie players in their home country or regions and are the main ticket draw are going to get some favorite treatment. Fair or not.........that's the way it is and always will be.

Chadwixx
02-20-2005, 08:24 AM
This post does not deserve a response. But I do get one clear impression. When it's an american player male or female they get blasted by the haters for whatever is the Soup de Jour.

I have yet to see one complete post about the Chilean crowd so roucus in which they overwhelmingly cheer for F.Gonzloz and against Gaudio. That's just one example. If it was the an american on american soil you who are the vultures of this kind of topic would have your little trolling lines out as fast as you could.

Get over it. American players playing in the US and are selling the most tickets get the nod for some favoritism. Can anyone here show us how it's different anywhere else on the planet. Tell me how Henman or Schrichipan does not get special treatment when they play in their country. You can't.

Remember this, in big time pro tennis and other sports money and TV ratings makes the world go around, like it or not. Those who are the marquie players in their home country or regions and are the main ticket draw are going to get some favorite treatment. Fair or not.........that's the way it is and always will be.

kinda like his us open in 2003?

i recall the last multi page thread about roddick easy draws and its funny none of this came up, did u learn something from that thread or did u sober up?

ford please read freaking quote, haas wasnt playing at 10:30 because of the doubles, he was playing so roddick can play on tv.

here is the link to the orig article

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpNDU1cml1BF9TAzk1ODYyNTg0BHNlYwN0 aA--?slug=ap-memphis&prov=ap&type=lgns

andfor
02-20-2005, 10:22 AM
kinda like his us open in 2003?

i recall the last multi page thread about roddick easy draws and its funny none of this came up, did u learn something from that thread or did u sober up?

Now you are saying the draws are rigged? Pretty clear who's not thinking clear this time.

barry
02-21-2005, 02:46 AM
I would have to agree the draws are setup in Rodnicks favor. Look at the Australian Open, he played one played in the top 20 and lost. Last week he won a tournament and never faced a player in the top 50. How does he keep the number 3 ranking. When he slips to 4, you think they will put him in the Federer side?

Seeding by ranking should be enforced. I say seed 64 / 128 and you eliminate easy draws. Rankings are earned, Seeding are appointments by tournament committee members. The tournament committee has one thing, put the most number of butts in the stands, and ESPN has hyped up Roddick so much it is a joke.

Camilio Pascual
02-21-2005, 03:32 AM
i know this is out of his hands but why hinder the other semi final match just so he can play on tv?
quoted from the yahoo article

"Mirnyi and Haas played Saturday morning because Roddick was scheduled for the prime afternoon slot for television."
"I wasn't sharp enough,'' Haas said. ``I don't want to use any excuses. I've never played a semifinal match before at 10:30.''

i wonder if the tournament director told these guys to finish quickly so they can get the stadium cleaned up for the roddick match :)

To answer your first question: To maximize profits and make more money. Perfectly sensible reason and any TV programming or tournament director who did otherwise is not doing his job properly.

It always cracks me up when a player says something like Haas did, Mirnyi was out there early in the day, too. Personally, I'm a morning person and would be delighted to play in the morning, getting more rest before the next match, maybe more than Roddick, eh?

Rabbit
02-21-2005, 04:34 AM
Although everything was rendered moot in this instance, as neither Haas nor Roddick got to the final (Who is playing the final, btw?),

You are right. The marquee players are giving scheduling edges.

I think that's done to sell tickets, to promote the sport, and some such nonsense.

It's not fair at all.

Especially to the people who buy the tickets, hoping to see Haas or Roddick or another name player.

Better that they buy a ticket and just know it's all up to the luck of the draw, the weather, injuries and such.

Not taking sides here, but I thought you weren't into exacerbating the situation here...this looks/reads/is fairly argumentative (even for a lawyer) and nothing short of antagonistic.

devila
02-21-2005, 05:16 AM
I watched the Haas/Mirnyi match, and I'm supposed to be real angry that
Federer and all the other poor players don't get special treatment. I hope I can troll more often!

barry
02-21-2005, 07:50 AM
devila

I guess Federer does not need special treatment to beat up on Roddick, seems to be automatic these days. Interesting in the heat Federer is playing afternoon matches, while Roddick plays night matches against lesser opponents.
Let’s face it, the hype is on for Roddick and he is not making it on his own merits, but only through easy draws and scheduling. Not sure he belongs in the top 10 anymore, lets give Agassi the easier shedule / Draws much better tennis.

Chadwixx
02-21-2005, 08:29 AM
To answer your first question: To maximize profits and make more money. Perfectly sensible reason and any TV programming or tournament director who did otherwise is not doing his job properly.

It always cracks me up when a player says something like Haas did, Mirnyi was out there early in the day, too. Personally, I'm a morning person and would be delighted to play in the morning, getting more rest before the next match, maybe more than Roddick, eh?

so the integrity of the game comes 2nd to making money? WWE here we come.

btw i find it amusing that the roddick fans explain why he is getting special treatment yet they cant admit he gets special treatment.


i do find it highly amusing that the tournament director got screwed by this. im sure very few showed up to see the 10:30 semi final, while his marquee match at 3pm was a default.

IOP
02-21-2005, 08:47 AM
Okay, so the first goal is to make money. No wonder USTA has been losing money promoting the game.

Anyway, little things can be done to make US tennis look less pathetic with such being the mentally.

Camilio Pascual
02-21-2005, 09:06 AM
so the integrity of the game comes 2nd to making money? WWE here we come.

btw i find it amusing that the roddick fans explain why he is getting special treatment yet they cant admit he gets special treatment.

i do find it highly amusing that the tournament director got screwed by this. im sure very few showed up to see the 10:30 semi final, while his marquee match at 3pm was a default.

Yes, that is funny. How oft the plans of both mice and men...

@wright
02-21-2005, 09:46 AM
More on Roddick's special treatment: He had his own parking spot right next to the front door to the Racquet Club of Memphis, how fair is that?!?!? Tommy Haas had one too, although not as close as Roddick's. You'd think they only want the big name guys to win the tournament! Where was Kenneth Carlsen's spot? I'll tell you where it was, nowhere!

andfor
02-21-2005, 02:15 PM
More on Roddick's special treatment: He had his own parking spot right next to the front door to the Racquet Club of Memphis, how fair is that?!?!? Tommy Haas had one too, although not as close as Roddick's. You'd think they only want the big name guys to win the tournament! Where was Kenneth Carlsen's spot? I'll tell you where it was, nowhere!

Carlsen will have a Mercedes and parking spot right next to Roddick's next year. All past Memphis Champions get a Mercedes and a front row parking spot during the week of the tournamment. Awright I know your joking but most of the "the shooter was on the grassy knoll" folks don't. They take themselves a little to serious.

As for tournament directors screwing themselves trying to put one match in front of the other for TV and ticket sales it happens. Not just in the USA.

All of you who think that tennis associations and promoters world-wide are not trying to trying to maximize their revenues are living in a dream world.

Those who believe there's a conspiracy to make the draws easier for certain players have a little to much time or your hands. The best players who sell the most tickets get perks. If that means playing during primetime than what's so bad with that?

Chadwixx
02-21-2005, 02:50 PM
andfor, so u agree that roddick did get special treatment over the other players in this case? simple yes or no is fine.

u have tap danced around the orig post, its not why he gets special treatment, its that he gets special treatment.

Chadwixx
02-21-2005, 02:52 PM
btw, which network was scheduled to carry the roddick semi final match?

andfor
02-21-2005, 03:31 PM
andfor, so u agree that roddick did get special treatment over the other players in this case? simple yes or no is fine.

u have tap danced around the orig post, its not why he gets special treatment, its that he gets special treatment.

In this case he may have. I am sure if I talked with the right folks I bet they would most likely say he did. What I am trying to say I just don't see the big deal about a US tournament taking care of a US player who is selling the heck out of tickets and is a boost to the TV ratings. I would expect and I am sure special treatment happens to all the top players world-wide. Draw fixing is another story and I don't buy it. It's luck plain and simple.

Look I am not some kind of VamosRoddick or anything, but have you ever been to a match of his? Or for that matter Aggassi, McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Phillipouses, Patrick Rafter or Guga Kuerten? I have and Roddick and all those players put a**'s in the seats big time. If I was a tournament director I'd give them special treatment.

Why do you think Coria was in Europe instead of Brazil last week? Not just to work on his hard court game, money was the main reason he was over there getting shelled instead of comfortably on dirt 15 ft. behind a baseline in Brasil. And when Coria was in Europe I bet he got a ton of cash and perks.

Don't forget last years Memphis defending champion Jochim Johannson did not come back to Memphis but instead went to Rotterdam. Did he do this because of tournament fairness? No, Rotterdam pays huge appearance fees, they always have. I don't know that to be the sole reason but I bet it was a major factor. No one here is blasting JJ for that. If it was Roddick or a US player they would. JJ lost early while chasing the cash in Rotterdam, why doesn't anyone blast off on that? I think it's funny he lost those points chasing the cash. Did JJ get special treatment while at Rotterdam, you bet your bottom he did. Still got beat.

I bet Rotterdam offers more appearance fees than Brasi or Memphis. I commend those players who cold have run for the cash and stayed home or in region to support tennis in their area.

The tournament directors world-wide have heavy competition against each other. Often they are up against 1 or 2 other tour stops. Sadly most top players go play where the bucks are and I am not talking about just prize money.


btw, which network was scheduled to carry the roddick semi final match?

Here in Memphis, a local TV station carried the singles final live. I missed it. I saw the double on the Tennis Channel live. Do you know if the Tennis Channel is going to carry the Memphis final re-run?

We all just see things different sometimes..........lol

Exile
02-21-2005, 03:59 PM
I'm just mad that he is a 22 year old has-been and the media is still treating him like a tennis god(at least americans) They all want to have a big serve like him and the forehand but forgot about the basics that people like Laver and Federer have shown: style and grace beats sheer power any time. I'm glad this has been brought up though. The attention that surrounds Roddick is absurd, but he is an American, and he is one of the few Americans that has made a name for himself. The American media likes to hype up any player of this kind. But that has been said already. There's just nothing we can do about it, except not watch. (read sig)

devila
02-21-2005, 04:45 PM
Expect me to feel sorry for Federer, the object of Patrick McEnroe's love fest? LMFAO!!! How ironic.
I'm VERY glad that the U.S. cares a lot about basketball, golf, baseball and football.

I certainly am not afraid to criticize the players or media.
Too bad, the clowns in tennis forums are so predictable. Years of this manure only make me laugh. I am not so obsessed with tennis players that I have to lie to rile people up.

goober
02-21-2005, 04:57 PM
I'm just mad that he is a 22 year old has-been and the media is still treating him like a tennis god(at least americans) They all want to have a big serve like him and the forehand but forgot about the basics that people like Laver and Federer have shown: style and grace beats sheer power any time. I'm glad this has been brought up though. The attention that surrounds Roddick is absurd, but he is an American, and he is one of the few Americans that has made a name for himself. The American media likes to hype up any player of this kind. But that has been said already. There's just nothing we can do about it, except not watch. (read sig)

The hype surrounding Andre Agassi during the 1990s far exceeds any hype that currently surrounds Roddick. Anyways I am not sure what the problem is. Roddick is currently the best player in the US. Who exactly should the US media take an interest in? Vince Spadea, Taylor Dent? Mardy Fish? Kevin Kim?

goober
02-21-2005, 05:07 PM
I would have to agree the draws are setup in Rodnicks favor. Look at the Australian Open, he played one played in the top 20 and lost. Last week he won a tournament and never faced a player in the top 50. How does he keep the number 3 ranking. When he slips to 4, you think they will put him in the Federer side?
.
Umm

The tournament he won last week the SAP open he beat Tommy Haas who was the #3 seed and ranked #17. The only other top 50 player on his side of the bracket was Max MIRNYI who lost to SAULNIER. The tournament did not have enough top 50 players that he would have had to face more than 2 of them no matter how the draws were done.

In the Australian open he didn't face any top 20 players because all the top 20 players lost on his side of the bracket until he faced Hewitt. Safin had a far easier route to the semifinals than Roddick had. I don't see anybody saying there was a conspiracy for him. BTW why exactly would the Aussies help Roddick? Wouldn't they want to help Hewitt instead?

andfor
02-21-2005, 05:21 PM
....Safin had a far easier route to the semifinals than Roddick had. I don't see anybody saying there was a conspiracy for him. BTW why exactly would the Aussies help Roddick? Wouldn't they want to help Hewitt instead?

Paranoia by some jealousy by others. Take your pick.

alienhamster
02-21-2005, 05:56 PM
I'm just mad that he is a 22 year old has-been and the media is still treating him like a tennis god(at least americans)
Why exactly is he a "has-been"? Last I checked he was #3 in the world and still winning tournaments, making the semis of slams pretty consistently. And what American media are you talking about? They don't even talk about tennis enough to create hype for any player. (Well, except maybe the Williams sisters . . .)

They all want to have a big serve like him and the forehand but forgot about the basics that people like Laver and Federer have shown: style and grace beats sheer power any time.
Talk to Martina Hingis and get back to me.

Rabbit
02-21-2005, 06:51 PM
Professional tennis....the words themselves define the purpose....tennis for money.

Let's not forget that Wimbledon has two locker rooms. It's not until you become marquee that you get the good locker room.

Tennis is a Darwanistic sport. You don't have a team to rely on. You're out there by yourself.

Breaks? This was never better exemplified than the Senior Tour a few years ago. When Connors started it, there was one guarantee; Connors would be in the finals and so would Borg or McEnroe. Think about it guys, tennis is entertainment....who wants to see Tim Wilkinson play John Lloyd in the finals of a tourney? Connors wouldn't let his good buddy Nastase on the tour because he was too fat. All of the seniors who were out of shape got into shape to present a product. Now it's turned into quite a nice, competitive tour that doesn't base its results on predefined finalists. Now it has a good enough draw of players that they can play straight up.

If Roddick gets a good parking place and Myrni has to take the bus, well that's because Roddick puts butts in the seats. Given the choice of the final that was played in Memphis versus Haas versus Roddick, how many of us would choose the former? I know I'd rather see Haas/Roddick. I do agree though that seeing Roddick (or the Williams) every time ESPN broadcasts is frustrating, but the casual viewer (which outnumbers the serious fan) would rather see one of the three, not some European that they don't know.

The reference to the WWF reminds me of the argument of the men's tour versus the women's. Both tours are trying to put out as good a product as they can. Yet the women's tour is constantly knocked as being an inferior product. If we're going to be completely fair, then the women's tour should get equal prize money to the men's. I don't agree with that assessment by the way.

I suspect it's a fact that the Slams help scheduling to favor the home boys. I know they give wild cards to players from the home nation, and they should. The Slams are interested in putting butts in seats as well. I mean really, how much favorable can a draw be? You still have to win every match regardless of who it's against.

Max G.
02-21-2005, 07:10 PM
PGiven the choice of the final that was played in Memphis versus Haas versus Roddick, how many of us would choose the former? I know I'd rather see Haas/Roddick.

Oooh!!! Me!

Go BEAST! ^_^

Lessee... a match between two baseliners or a match involving a serve-volleyer. What a difficult decision!

Fee
02-21-2005, 08:25 PM
Small point, but as far as I know, EVERY player in the main draw that wanted one was given a car in Memphis (but not a Mercedes). And yes, the defending champion gets the parking spot by the door. Since Joachim was not there, Andy was the most recent champion. (Taylor Dent was also not there, choosing the cash over the easy draw).

Draws are done in public (except that odd Australian computer thing), so once again, could someone please explain to me how they are fixed? That's what I thought...

devila
02-21-2005, 10:18 PM
The good looking Europeans, South Americans and Australians suffer in great, hard-fought matches. In order to become a beautiful clone, the ugly, evil robotic has-been is supposed to magically change what happened in his life.
Change his body type, life style, tennis courts, parents and coaches.
Don't kill tennis! Don't pay players to throw matches in easy U.S. tournaments!

Camilio Pascual
02-22-2005, 03:32 AM
Andy Roddick and many other players get special treatment for the tournament's sake, not necessarily for their own sake. People here have cried about Pete, Andy, and Andre getting special treatment with night (primetime) matches. Do you really think this is for their sake or the tour/tournament's sake? I'd be screaming my lungs out having to play night matches, I want to play somewhere between 6AM and noon, myself. Especially against Tommy Haas.
Nice post, Rabbit, for telling it the way it really is. We TW fans who want to watch claycourtiers (made up new word)Alberto Fonzo v. Giuseppe Bertagenui are unimportant to the mainline broadcasters, the wants of the vast majority should be served. The Tennis Channel is for serving our wants.

andfor
02-22-2005, 06:52 AM
The good looking Europeans, South Americans and Australians suffer in great, hard-fought matches. In order to become a beautiful clone, the ugly, evil robotic has-been is supposed to magically change what happened in his life.
Change his body type, life style, tennis courts, parents and coaches.
Don't kill tennis! Don't pay players to throw matches in easy U.S. tournaments!

You've got some real issues don't you?

RoddickRulez
02-22-2005, 07:01 AM
goober Quote:
Originally Posted by barry
I would have to agree the draws are setup in Rodnicks favor. Look at the Australian Open, he played one played in the top 20 and lost. Last week he won a tournament and never faced a player in the top 50. How does he keep the number 3 ranking. When he slips to 4, you think they will put him in the Federer side?
.


Umm

The tournament he won last week the SAP open he beat Tommy Haas who was the #3 seed and ranked #17. The only other top 50 player on his side of the bracket was Max MIRNYI who lost to SAULNIER. The tournament did not have enough top 50 players that he would have had to face more than 2 of them no matter how the draws were done.

In the Australian open he didn't face any top 20 players because all the top 20 players lost on his side of the bracket until he faced Hewitt. Safin had a far easier route to the semifinals than Roddick had. I don't see anybody saying there was a conspiracy for him. BTW why exactly would the Aussies help Roddick? Wouldn't they want to help Hewitt instead?
Yesterday 08:57 PM



Great Post goober

davey25
02-22-2005, 07:09 AM
goober Quote:
Originally Posted by barry
I would have to agree the draws are setup in Rodnicks favor. Look at the Australian Open, he played one played in the top 20 and lost. Last week he won a tournament and never faced a player in the top 50. How does he keep the number 3 ranking. When he slips to 4, you think they will put him in the Federer side?
.


Umm

The tournament he won last week the SAP open he beat Tommy Haas who was the #3 seed and ranked #17. The only other top 50 player on his side of the bracket was Max MIRNYI who lost to SAULNIER. The tournament did not have enough top 50 players that he would have had to face more than 2 of them no matter how the draws were done.

In the Australian open he didn't face any top 20 players because all the top 20 players lost on his side of the bracket until he faced Hewitt. Safin had a far easier route to the semifinals than Roddick had. I don't see anybody saying there was a conspiracy for him. BTW why exactly would the Aussies help Roddick? Wouldn't they want to help Hewitt instead?
Yesterday 08:57 PM



Great Post goober

Yeah but you have to admit Henman as a quarterfinal, Melzer as your round of 32, and Grosjean, Canas, Massu the highest seeds in your area other than Henman(your other considered 4th or quarterfinal opponents) is about the easiest draw on paper any of the top 4 guys could hope for. Compare that to the draws Hewitt and Federer started the tournament with you and you will see whose is tougher.

Of course the SAP was a weaker field to begin with. I dont know why he enters easier tier 2 and tier 3 events, rather than the ones with tougher opposition. It is like he is happy to avoid them and rack up the points like grocery coupons.

Chadwixx
02-22-2005, 08:46 AM
Draws are done in public (except that odd Australian computer thing), so once again, could someone please explain to me how they are fixed? That's what I thought...

can u provide me with a link to exactly how the public draws are done? im yet to see how this works.

i was under the impression the each tournament has a seeding committee and they choose who is seeded and where they are placed.

andfor
02-22-2005, 09:18 AM
....Of course the SAP was a weaker field to begin with. I dont know why he enters easier tier 2 and tier 3 events, rather than the ones with tougher opposition. It is like he is happy to avoid them and rack up the points like grocery coupons.

Davey, what's your definition of tier 2 and 3 vs. what you think are tier 1 events? I tried to make it out but got confused(imagine that). Is this your definition or the ATP Tours?

http://www.atptennis.com/en/tournaments/fullcalendar/

From what I gather some of the tournaments are either equal to others elsewhere on the planet and some look equal by definition but differ in prize money during any given week. Yes sometimes there is a lower rated tournament vs. a higher one during the same week. International, International Gold, Master Series and Grand Slams. What's the difference? If I guess right the order I placed them is lowest to highest for accumulating points purposes.

By that and by looking at the ATP calendar until I stand corrected it does not look as if Roddick is as you stated avoiding anyone or any tournament. Most weeks there 2 or 3 tournaments world-wide. As much as they have to travel can you blame the Euros, South American and US players for staying home/in-region given the schedule? Sure there are exceptions, Spaniards in SA last 2 weeks to play on clay. Why was Nadel and Martin not in Rotterdam? Would Nadel have won Rotterdam? Does anyone here blame them for that? JJ for stayed in Europe and did not defend his 1st ATP title which he won in Memphis. Why was he not in Memphis? Some of the more hard-court style Euros come to the US to play because the draws (at this time) allow for it more than in Europe (at this time). Should they stay at home and play in the qualies?

Is yours another case of underlying dislike for certain players or do you want every pro to unrealistically chase Federer until the end of the earth?

As for the rest of the bashers it's clear your making a stretch with your reasoning. It's all coincidence, you know, it does happen and can happen more than once. Just wait the luck will change. That's one thing you can count on in life is change.

Rabbit explained it well. Read his post again.

andfor
02-22-2005, 09:24 AM
can u provide me with a link to exactly how the public draws are done? im yet to see how this works.

i was under the impression the each tournament has a seeding committee and they choose who is seeded and where they are placed.

Good question. I was under a different impression. I thought some tournaments and a very few at that seeded at their own digression i.e. Wimbledon and maybe a GS or two. The majority of tournaments use the ATP entry system. That's why I can't understand the conspiracy theorist here.

Heck I don't know! Someone tell us how it works. No guessing about it please we get enough of that. Me included......

Chadwixx
02-22-2005, 09:42 AM
nono, seeding isnt done according to ranking. each tournament has a seeding committee, they no longer have to follow the rankings. kinda like wimbledon, someone showed me the atp rule and i was astonished how it works now.

andfor
02-22-2005, 10:05 AM
nono, seeding isnt done according to ranking. each tournament has a seeding committee, they no longer have to follow the rankings. kinda like wimbledon, someone showed me the atp rule and i was astonished how it works now.

It would be interesting to know which tournaments use their own seedings and which tournaments use the ATP Entry System. If what you say is the case I guess each tournament could use either system based on what the think is a greater benifit. Imagine that?

Anyway, even if a players seed is different from his actual ATP entry rank the rest of the non-seeded draw is randomly done so luck of the draw to a large degree still applys.

andfor
02-22-2005, 10:19 AM
nono, seeding isnt done according to ranking. each tournament has a seeding committee, they no longer have to follow the rankings. kinda like wimbledon, someone showed me the atp rule and i was astonished how it works now.

Look, I am not trying to bust your chops, really. But could you be mistaken? As for the GS's I can see your most likely correct because they are not ATP events, they fall under the ITF, right?

I copied this from the ATP Website. Read the last paragraph.

INDESIT ATP 2005 Race

What is it?

An easy-to-understand, simple-to-follow annual race from season start to season end. Every player starts at zero at the beginning of the year and the player who accumulates the most points by season's end is the World Number 1.

How does it work?

Every player, regardless of his performances in the previous year, starts with zero points. Players count 18 performances in their INDESIT ATP 2005 Race total. Players eligible to enter the Grand Slams and Tennis Masters Series events must count those events and their best five other results from the International Series events. The Tennis Masters Cup will count as an additional 19th tournament for the eight players who qualify.

Why should Grand Slam and Tennis Masters Series results count no matter what?

Men's tennis has become a powerful game with a considerable and rapidly growing depth of talent. No longer is it possible for a handful of players to dominate the game and the headlines. To help build rivalries and showcase the game of tennis, it is necessary for the top players to face each other on a regular basis and to do it in a clearly defined elite level of events at the top of the game.

What if a player is injured and can't play?

If eligible to play in one of the Grand Slam or Tennis Masters Series events, a player must count the points from these tournaments, even if it is a zero because he missed the event. Just as in Formula One and numerous other sports, if a competitor misses a race or an event, he loses his chance to earn points.

Will a lengthy injury break result in a player's ranking plummeting so low he can't enter events after recovering?

No. Players will still have the benefit of a protected Entry System ranking that will allow them a period of protected entry status. However, the INDESIT ATP 2005 Race total will reflect only what they have achieved on the court during the year and will not be protected.

How does a player qualify for tournaments?

His entry status will be determined by his standing on the ATP Entry System, a rolling 52-week calculation based on the same 18 tournament rules that apply to the INDESIT ATP 2005 Race.

Why continue with a 52-week rolling system at all?

To determine seedings and tournament entry status, it is not practical to use the INDESIT ATP 2005 Race. The Race, while indicating the hottest players in the game at any stage, does not necessarily indicate an overall standing in the game. This is especially valid at the start of the year when early tournament winners may well be leading the Race but are not yet established top players for the purposes of seeding and tournament entry.

andfor
02-22-2005, 10:34 AM
For those who care this is what's currently on the ATP website. Also this is for those who make mountains out of mole hills and speak without knowing.

1. Indesit ATP Race 2002


Tournament/ Commitment W F SF QF R16 R32 R64 R128 Add'nal Q. Pts
Grand Slam 200 140 90 50 30 15 7 1 3
Tennis Masters Series 100 70 45 25 15 7 1(3) (1) 3*
IntÍl Series Gold $1,000,000 60 42 27 15 5 3 1 2*
IntÍl Series Gold $800,000 50 35 22 12 5 3 1 2*
International Series $1,000,000 50 35 22 12 5 3 1 2*
International Series $ 800,000 45 31 20 11 4 2 1 2*
International Series $ 600,000 40 28 18 10 3 1 1
International Series $ 400,000 35 24 15 8 3 1 1
Tennis Masters Cup 150 If undefeated (20 for each round robin match win, +40 for a semifinal win, +50 for the final win)
*1 pt only if the Main Draw is larger than 32 (International Series) or 64 (Tennis Masters Series)



2. Entry System

Tournament/ Commitment W F SF QF R16 R32 R64 R128 Add'nal Q. Pts
Grand Slam 1000 700 450 250 150 75 35 5 15
Tennis Masters Series 500 350 225 125 75 35 5(15) 5 15*
IntÍl Series Gold $1,000,000 300 210 135 75 25 15 5 10*
IntÍl Series Gold $800,000 250 175 110 60 25 15 5 10*
International Series $1,000,000 250 175 110 60 25 15 5 10*
International Series $ 800,000 225 155 100 55 20 10 5 10*
International Series $ 600,000 200 140 90 50 15 5 5
International Series $ 400,000 175 120 75 40 15 5 5
Challenger $150,000 100 70 45 23 10 1 3
Challenger $ 125,000+H 90 63 40 21 9 1 3
Challenger $ 125,000 80 56 36 19 8 1 3
Challenger $ 100,000 70 49 31 16 7 1 3
Challenger $ 75,000 60 42 27 14 6 1 3
Challenger $ 37,500+H 55 38 24 13 5 1 2
Challenger $ 50,000 50 35 22 12 5 1 2
Futures $ 15,000+H 24 16 8 4 1
Futures $ 15,000 18 12 6 3 1
Futures $ 10,000 12 8 4 2 1
Tennis Masters Cup 750 If undefeated (100 for each round robin match win, +200 for a semifinal win, +250 for the final win)
*5 pts only if the Main Draw is larger than 32 (International Series) or 64 (Tennis Masters Series)

Dedans Penthouse
02-22-2005, 10:43 AM
ONE:.Roddick has always gotten special treatment...... TWO:If I became president of the ATP tour I would change the result of his semifinal cheating win over Nalbandian to a loss, have Nalbandian and Ferrero play for the 2003 U.S open title, have Roddick's year-end ranking dropped to #3, with Ferrero being #1.....THREE: Also the ATP and ITF titles of Roddick be stripped, since he never would have won them without his cheating U.S open win.... FOUR: Unfortunately they would never do that since nobody has the balls to do what is right. He is allowed to get away with more cheating and special treatment than any player on tour, it is a joke!!!!!!

ONE: "Roddick has always gotten special treatment."

ALWAYS!! Why do we bother arguing the point. YOU'VE said so, therefore it's ordained knowledge--it MUST be true!!

TWO: "If I were president of the ATP tour, I'd change his cheating win to a loss...have Ferrero & Nalbandian play for the U.S. Open title....drop Roddick to #3......

MOVE OVER VINCE MCMAHON!!!

THREE: I'd have the ATP and ITF titles of Roddick STRIPPED since he NEVER would have won them without his cheating U.S. Open win."

MOVE OVER VINCE MCMAHON??!! Make that WATCH OUT VINCE MCMAHON!!!! YOU'D DO WHAT??!! Gee, you forgot to say: "If I were ATP President, I'd have him boiled in oil!" Unbelieveably bitter. Such anger! Btw, what about his "cheating" win over Nalbandian? Was Andy Roddick cheating? Did Andy Roddick incorrectly change the score himself? Did Andy Roddick call a ball out that was in? Was he getting away with blatant footfaulting? You throw around the word "CHEAT" very casually....very casually when it comes to Andy Roddick. Oh btw, davey25......I DON'T think you're biased against Andy Roddick. You've never given me reason to believe that--why you've ALWAYS been a ******* of objectivity when it comes to Roddick, Sampras, et al.

I vividly recall the U.S. Open final match vs. Ferrero. I was rooting for Ferrero (in the midst of a group who overwhelmingly were favoring Roddick--just to let you know where my "agenda" is at, i.e. it doesn't exist). Anyway, I kept waiting and waiting for Ferrero to "get going" ....... the fact remains: Andy Roddick HAMMERED Jenny C. Ferrero in the U.S. Open final. You'd have Nalby vs. Ferrero in the finals while Roddick sat on the sidelines? Yeah....that would fly---just like pigs. You really should seek professional help pal--you're so obsessively bitter regarding members of your little "hate" list (Roddick, Sampras, et al), that you're losing all sense of reality. You're going to change the results of completed matches at a Grand Slam? You may want to er...... re-think your position?

FOUR: "He is allowed to get away with MORE CHEATING THAN ANY PLAYER ON TOUR"
In the words of Ronald Reagan: "Well, THERE you go again!"
You've lost ALL, not some, not most of, but ALL credibility as far as I'm concerned. That has to be the most mean-spirited, distorted piece of agenda-driven b.s. I've ever read on these boards. I set a "trap" months ago by starting a thread entitled: "Sampras-most overrated player in history" and the Fed-o-philes were tripping over themselves in their eagerness to slam-dunk ol' Mr. "overrated" 14 Grand Slam title holder Pete.

[i] Whatever.....A.Dick lovers are all high school virgins. His presence of any kind is always.....
Why do your sisters dispise Andy Roddick? .......... btw, classy post, newbie. You hail from "San Francisco Bay?"
You sound "bay" ............. veddy, veddy "bay"

Give me an f-ing break
Amen to that Susie-kins, but I don't think he's capable of it to tell you the truth......;-)

I'll respect opinions no matter what they are --- but it seems that you respect no one when you post nothing but bitterness driven drivel and expect people to swallow that without question. Divorce yourself (emotionally) from your feelings just for a minute and "objectively" re-read your comments davey25 and IOP ...... they're so pathetic they're almost (almost) funny. such bitterness....whew!.....

Rabbit
02-22-2005, 10:50 AM
Oooh!!! Me!

Go BEAST! ^_^

Lessee... a match between two baseliners or a match involving a serve-volleyer. What a difficult decision!


Well, I'd only want to watch Haas/Roddick because of Haas. And I really dont' think Haas is a baseliner, he's more of an all-courter. The guy's one of the most stylish players on tour and reminds me of the old schoolers.

Dedans - very well put.

rhubarb
02-22-2005, 10:58 AM
I really don't want to get into this argument again, but I will say this: as far as I know, of the all the ATP tournaments, only Wimbledon departs from the entry ranking and even their seeding uses a formula based on the rankings with a specific weighting for grass-court results; this formula is published each year. All other GS, MS and general tournaments use the rankings.

andfor
02-22-2005, 10:59 AM
Well done Dedans. I don't know why I bother here sometimes with the people who just think because they typed something on the internet that everyone should believe them.

andfor
02-22-2005, 11:01 AM
I really don't want to get into this argument again, but I will say this: as far as I know, of the all the ATP tournaments, only Wimbledon departs from the entry ranking and even their seeding uses a formula based on the rankings with a specific weighting for grass-court results; this formula is published each year. All other GS, MS and general tournaments use the rankings.

I am with you and what the ATP website says. See my post # 50 last paragraph.

I gotta get some work done.

Kevin Patrick
02-22-2005, 11:02 AM
andfor,
Wimbledon in the only tournament that doesn't use the entry system for seeding purposes(yes chadwixx, the rules say seedings are up to the tournament's discretion, but no other tournament has ever dared to go against the entry stystem, except at the '96 US Open & the controversy of that event makes it unlikely ever to happen again)
You should check the rankings every week to compare with that week's seedings, you'll see that they match up.

rhubarb
02-22-2005, 11:04 AM
andfor, you made a valiant effort there indeed. I've found from past attempts that no matter what evidence one presents, some people will always believe what they want to believe.

Chadwixx
02-22-2005, 11:15 AM
im referring to the placement of the seeds. the tournament committee can put the number #6 seed vs the #1 seed if they want to in the quarters. the only two seeds they have to put in the proper place is the #1 and #2. this is one place where the draw rigging occurs. the seeding comittee gives roddick the easiest possible route to the semi's.

from the semi's on its hard to rig a draw, so u do it with scheduling. like keeping roddick on schedule while juan carlos has to play 4 consecutive days. or in this case making haas wake up 2-3 hours earlier so he is run down the next day (sleep has like a 24 hour delay, if u wake early today u feel like crap tomorrow, but make it through today fine). u gotta remember these guys are all pro's. change a few variables and u get a different outcome.

Chadwixx
02-22-2005, 11:18 AM
andfor, you made a valiant effort there indeed. I've found from past attempts that no matter what evidence one presents, some people will always believe what they want to believe.

i gotta agree, u link ppl to an article which clearly shows roddick getting special treatment and ppl still ignore it.

andfor
02-22-2005, 11:23 AM
andfor, you made a valiant effort there indeed. I've found from past attempts that no matter what evidence one presents, some people will always believe what they want to believe.

Kevin and rhubarb, thanks for the support.

Chadwixx, don't take offense, but get a ahold of yourself man! :mrgreen:

Chadwixx
02-22-2005, 11:31 AM
so u disagree that the seeding comittee's can place seeds where ever they want?

or the part about favorable scheduling? the us open should be enough proof they will do just about anything on us soil to get roddick a win.

andfor
02-22-2005, 11:42 AM
i gotta agree, u link ppl to an article which clearly shows roddick getting special treatment and ppl still ignore it.

That's one article. Explain to me again why Roddick, the tournaments top seed and main ticket draw should have played at 10:30 and why Haas should have played at 3. I'm a little slow but do want to learn.

Now we find out Haas pulled out of Scottsdale today so what good might he have been even if he beats Mirnyi? I guess your going to tell me that he would not have got hurt playing later in the day, huh? See there, coincidence, it happens, luck changes. Just like I said earlier. You're making a big deal out of nothing dude.

No I don't think that tournaments can manipulate the placing of every seed as the wish. If they could I would like to see proof as I have shown you in proof that the entry system is used for seeding.

Sheeesh.........

Kevin Patrick
02-22-2005, 12:14 PM
Chadwixx,
I'm that's incorrect about seed placements, everything is random & in public(except at the '96 US Open, I'm not a conspiracy theorist like you, but you might get a kick out of what the USTA did that year to help out AA)

here's a link:

http://www.asapsports.com/tennis/1996usopen/082296US.html

Chadwixx
02-22-2005, 03:55 PM
That's one article. Explain to me again why Roddick, the tournaments top seed and main ticket draw should have played at 10:30 and why Haas should have played at 3. I'm a little slow but do want to learn.

Now we find out Haas pulled out of Scottsdale today so what good might he have been even if he beats Mirnyi? I guess your going to tell me that he would not have got hurt playing later in the day, huh? See there, coincidence, it happens, luck changes. Just like I said earlier. You're making a big deal out of nothing dude.

No I don't think that tournaments can manipulate the placing of every seed as the wish. If they could I would like to see proof as I have shown you in proof that the entry system is used for seeding.

Sheeesh.........

i have no idea what ur talking about with the seeds based on the entry system, i made a post a week ago (where yahoo said federer was trying to get back to #1) saying the same thing, u just re hashed what i stated.

semi finals are usually around 12-1pm, after friday night they usually let the players and fans have a few extra hours. im not saying roddick should of been playing the 10:30 im saying neither should be playing at that time. when the tournament director made haas play that early so roddick can be on tv he compromised the draw.

kevin do u have any more details on what random and public means? interesting read though, thanks for the link

i just wanna see the best possible tennis as a fan, what they have been giving me over the past few years is garbage. i wanna see ppl ranked high based on quality wins and good play, not popularity.

andfor
02-22-2005, 07:01 PM
Chadd, did you know the women played at Memphis last week the same time as the men? Maybe thatand all the doubles had something to do with the scheduling. You ever think of that? The womens final was a 7 that night.

The Haas/Myrni match was on local Memphis televison. At least it was supposed to be but the production company had difficulty with the brodcast feed. The 3:30 Roddick match never made to to the screen for the same reason but it did not matter when Roddick defaulted. The Tennis Channl carried the Womens final that night and it was barley pulled off. Anyone who watched that match saw the technical difficulties.

One last thing, Mirnyi had to play at the same time as Haas so you have no argument. What, Mirnyi didn't have an excuse, oh yeaaaa he won, thats right.

Chadd your reaching...............

Fee
02-22-2005, 10:56 PM
Okay, its late and I'm tired, so I'm going to do this from memory because I have a slow dial-up connection and I'm not in the mood to go back and forth to the atp site...

The Grand Slams abide by their set of rules, I believe under the ITF. They are allowed to have seeding committees that alter the seeds based on surface or whatever. Wimbledon is most famous for this. I've never looked at their rules. I'm not sure what rules the Masters tournies use, they seem to be a mix of the two.

Weekly tournaments (optionals or whatever you want to call them) such as San Jose, Rotterdam, Dubai, Stockholm, etc, etc, are governed by the ATP and the ATP rulebook. That rulebook states that seeds are based on the ENTRY system ranking of the current week (no adjustments that I'm aware of), the top seed is placed on the top line, #2 is placed on the bottom line, #3 and #4 are then drawn to see which will go in the top half and which will go in the bottom. There is a method for placing the remaining four seeds in a 32 player draw, but I'm not exactly sure what it is. The goal is that the top 8 seeds will make it to their respective locations in the QF's, but of course this doesn't happen very often. Unseeded players and qualifiers are then randomly drawn to fill the remaining lines. Many tournaments do this in public and I actually know someone who has participated and picked a player's name out of a bowl or whatever it was. (I really wish I could give you page or section numbers, but today has been a really really bad day...)

Explain again how the draws are rigged? Please, before you even try, look at the ATP and ITF rulebooks (not the stupid Champions Race).

PJVA
02-23-2005, 07:03 AM
IMO Roddick gets special treatment because promoters in the US are still too stupid to realize that we American tennis fans can actually get excited over foreign players. They don't realize that what is exciting is seeing excellence regardless of what country the player is from.

Free_Martha
02-23-2005, 08:48 AM
Yawn. Same old trolls, same old whining over nothing.

andfor
02-23-2005, 08:52 AM
IMO Roddick gets special treatment because promoters in the US are still too stupid to realize that we American tennis fans can actually get excited over foreign players. They don't realize that what is exciting is seeing excellence regardless of what country the player is from.

This is getting silly. You speak as an authority for the american tennis public? Sure most tennis fans like some viewing diversity. Have you ever been a professional tennis tournamnet promoter and know what your up against getting player commitments when you are one? Did you know that most TD's and Promoters work year around chasing player commitments for their one week event. What foreign players do you suggest american pro tournament directors get come to the US? Remember GS and MasterSeries TD's don't have to chase players, the players are required to attend their tournaments. How do you wrestle the SouthAmericans away from the clay to play on US hardcourts/indoors? How do you compete against the larger appearance fees most Euro tournaments pay players? Are you familer with appearance fees and that you would have a budget? You most likely will be up against a tournament that has a much larger appearance fee budget than you do.

My point is, is that your statement while it may have a grain of truth to it regarding player diversity at american tournaments is a little more complicated than your statement implies.

andfor
02-23-2005, 08:56 AM
Yawn. Same old trolls, same old whining over nothing.

You know your right Martha. I don't know why I bother with these guys. But I do, kind of like an addict.

I really need to let go and move on and let those who want to live in their own little fantasy world figure out reality for themselves.

Thanks for helping me wake up.

Out.

davey25
02-23-2005, 11:31 AM
I vividly recall the U.S. Open final match vs. Ferrero. I was rooting for Ferrero (in the midst of a group who overwhelmingly were favoring Roddick--just to let you know where my "agenda" is at, i.e. it doesn't exist). Anyway, I kept waiting and waiting for Ferrero to "get going" ....... the fact remains: Andy Roddick HAMMERED Jenny C. Ferrero in the U.S. Open final. You'd have Nalby vs. Ferrero in the finals while Roddick sat on the sidelines? Yeah....that would fly---just like pigs. You really should seek professional help pal--you're so obsessively bitter regarding members of your little "hate" list (Roddick, Sampras, et al), that you're losing all sense of reality. You're going to change the results of completed matches at a Grand Slam? You may want to er...... re-think your position?

The final with Ferrero has nothing to do with the semifinal with Nalbandian. In the semifinal with Nalbandian there was a blatant wrong line call in the 3rd set tiebreaker, and a fan screaming out on a key point while the point was not replayed. Roddick won a tiebreaker he would not have won otherwise, after losing the first two sets, and that was that. So would Nalbandian and Ferrero playing in the final while Roddick sat on the sidelines make perfect sense? Yes absolutely, what happened in the final has nothing to do with that whatsoever.

davey25
02-23-2005, 11:35 AM
By that and by looking at the ATP calendar until I stand corrected it does not look as if Roddick is as you stated avoiding anyone or any tournament. Most weeks there 2 or 3 tournaments world-wide. As much as they have to travel can you blame the Euros, South American and US players for staying home/in-region given the schedule? Sure there are exceptions, Spaniards in SA last 2 weeks to play on clay. Why was Nadel and Martin not in Rotterdam? Would Nadel have won Rotterdam? Does anyone here blame them for that? JJ for stayed in Europe and did not defend his 1st ATP title which he won in Memphis. Why was he not in Memphis? Some of the more hard-court style Euros come to the US to play because the draws (at this time) allow for it more than in Europe (at this time). Should they stay at home and play in the qualies?

Look at the tournaments Roddick plays in, that are generally a level below a Masters Series event, and the tournaments of similar stature with stronger fields going on the same week. If you were to look over those weeks in the calender over the last two years, you will find he selects the easier field regularly, and if top players that he likes to avoid(Federer, Hewitt, etc...)he usually chooses the other option. It does nothing to help his confidence against top players it would seem, but it is his perrogative.

Dedans Penthouse
02-23-2005, 12:32 PM
The final with Ferrero has nothing to do with the semifinal with Nalbandian. In the semifinal with Nalbandian there was a blatant wrong line call in the 3rd set tiebreaker, and a fan screaming out on a key point while the point was not replayed. Roddick won a tiebreaker he would not have won otherwise, after losing the first two sets, and that was that. So would Nalbandian and Ferrero playing in the final while Roddick sat on the sidelines make perfect sense? Yes absolutely, what happened in the final has nothing to do with that whatsoever.

davey25: as I previously said, I was not rooting for Roddick vs. Fererro (who cares who I was rooting for), what I was focusing on was that THAT line call --- THAT WAS RODDICK'S FAULT??! Andy Roddick was personally responsible for a linesperson possibly blowing a call? That line call, even if blatently wrong (recall Serena's bum call recently?--it does happen), was not Roddick's doing nor was that jerk yelling out from the stands Roddick's doing. You wanna talk about jerks in stands? Borg vs. Panatta -- Italian Open final -- beyond jerkdom; outright outrageous.

It isn't the first or last time someone's going to get jobbed on a call or some jerk will yell out in the middle of a point---and my point is that you took these unfortunate happenings and spun it with the words "RODDICK'S CHEATING" as if Andy Roddick held a gun to that linesperson's head and said "screw Nalby or else!" or arranged to have some guy yell out in the middle of a point -- of course knowing upfront that there would be a tiebreaker involved --- come on man, be reasonable. Unfortunate happenings? It happens......but you attributed it (with your words) as RODDICK'S CHEATING. That's not cricket davey25. That's reckless rhetoric and a hate-hatchet job on Andy Roddick. He didn't cheat. As to "he would've lost" ..... can you assume a double play in baseball? Was this a "done deal" for Nalby--Nalby would've NO DOUBT WON? Was it done deal?? Why didn't he "close" the deal then? Because Andy Roddick CHEATED????????

davey25
02-23-2005, 12:41 PM
davey25: as I previously said, I was not rooting for Roddick vs. Fererro (who cares who I was rooting for), what I was focusing on was that THAT line call --- THAT WAS RODDICK'S FAULT??! Andy Roddick was personally responsible for a linesperson possibly blowing a call? That line call, even if blatently wrong (recall Serena's bum call recently?--it does happen), was not Roddick's doing nor was that jerk yelling out from the stands Roddick's doing. You wanna talk about jerks in stands? Borg vs. Panatta -- Italian Open final -- beyond jerkdom; outright outrageous.

It isn't the first or last time someone's going to get jobbed on a call or some jerk will yell out in the middle of a point---and my point is that you took these unfortunate happenings and spun it with the words "RODDICK'S CHEATING" as if Andy Roddick held a gun to that linesperson's head and said "screw Nalby or else!" or arranged to have some guy yell out in the middle of a point -- of course knowing upfront that there would be a tiebreaker involved --- come on man, be reasonable. Unfortunate happenings? It happens......but you attributed it (with your words) as RODDICK'S CHEATING. That's not cricket davey25. That's reckless rhetoric and a hate-hatchet job on Andy Roddick. He didn't cheat. As to "he would've lost" ..... can you assume a double play in baseball? Was this a "done deal" for Nalby--Nalby would've NO DOUBT WON? Was it done deal?? Why didn't he "close" the deal then? Because Andy Roddick CHEATED????????

There was also scheduling manipulation througout the whole event. I already mentioned Roddick played a round before some women had even finished the previous round, something I had never seen them do in the last 10 years at the U.S open. They arranged his matches in a way to keep him fresh, and delayed matches of chief rivals. If you are completely unaware any of that happened then you were living in a vacuum, or not watching any of the event until the final. As for knowing Nalbandian would have won the match without the two cheating points, well the tiebreak was 7-7 at one point and ended 9-7. You draw your own conclusion, a pretty easy one with any use of brains.

Roddick did not cause all the cheating done in his favor at that U.S open, but he certainly did not do anything to reduce it, nor did he acknowledge it any way. Oh well it is sport, win at all costs when you arent good enough any way else.

Rabbit
02-23-2005, 12:56 PM
By your logic then Capriati should not have defeated Williams last year at the Open? That should be overturned as well?

Also, the tiebreaker at Wimbledon when the ump called the score out incorrectly putting Venus Williams at a disadvantage to Karoline Sprem? That should be overturned as well, even though neither of them caught the error? Does this make Sprem a cheater too? How then to negotiate the finals? By arbitration?

John McEnroe related a story about playing Phil Dent at the French. He overturned a couple of calls that went against Dent. Dent failed to do the same for him. Dent, on a changeover, explained to McEnroe "we play the calls in this league, sonny". It is professional tennis and while overturning calls is great sportsmanship, no one knows, especially in the case of Roddick if he even saw the ball.

Baron Gottfried von Cramm once chastised Fred Perry for overturning a call in the late 1930s. He told Perry that while he was being fair to the other player, it was demeaning to the line judge.

andfor
02-23-2005, 01:06 PM
Look at the tournaments Roddick plays in, that are generally a level below a Masters Series event, and the tournaments of similar stature with stronger fields going on the same week. If you were to look over those weeks in the calender over the last two years, you will find he selects the easier field regularly, and if top players that he likes to avoid(Federer, Hewitt, etc...)he usually chooses the other option. It does nothing to help his confidence against top players it would seem, but it is his perrogative.


Read your key word in your last sentence "seem". Your making huge assumptions about everything you've said.

No need to argue you're getting pounded by so many others here it's laughable.

davey25
02-23-2005, 01:09 PM
By your logic then Capriati should not have defeated Williams last year at the Open? That should be overturned as well?

Also, the tiebreaker at Wimbledon when the ump called the score out incorrectly putting Venus Williams at a disadvantage to Karoline Sprem? That should be overturned as well, even though neither of them caught the error? Does this make Sprem a cheater too? How then to negotiate the finals? By arbitration?

John McEnroe related a story about playing Phil Dent at the French. He overturned a couple of calls that went against Dent. Dent failed to do the same for him. Dent, on a changeover, explained to McEnroe "we play the calls in this league, sonny". It is professional tennis and while overturning calls is great sportsmanship, no one knows, especially in the case of Roddick if he even saw the ball.

Baron Gottfried von Cramm once chastised Fred Perry for overturning a call in the late 1930s. He told Perry that while he was being fair to the other player, it was demeaning to the line judge.

As there was preferential and manipulative treatment in Roddick's favor the whole event, not just in one match that I am referring to. Secondly it is clear with the calls being in a 9-7 tiebreaker that had been tied 7-7 they decided the match. It is not clear at all the calls determined the Capriati-Williams match which was 6-4, and only definitively determined one game, possably making it 5-5. The Sprem-Venus W. match it is clear the officiating cost Venus the 2nd set but not the match, there still would have been a set left to play.

It is interesting you also point out two incidents involving a Williams as well. I sometimes wonder if there is any sign to why the Williams always seem to be victims of some strange calls, decisions, etc.... :confused: I cant recall them ever being the beneficiary of one, but several times in recent years some of the most famous victims of ones.

davey25
02-23-2005, 01:16 PM
Read your key word in your last sentence "seem". Your making huge assumptions about everything you've said.

No need to argue you're getting pounded by so many others here it's laughable.

LOL, you are too funny. If three people trying to argue my points is your definition of getting pounded then it must be a regular routine for you around here. It "seems" I am right since Roddick's head to head with top players speaks for itself. Nuff said.

Rabbit
02-23-2005, 02:17 PM
As there was preferential and manipulative treatment in Roddick's favor the whole event, not just in one match that I am referring to.

This is laughable.


Secondly it is clear with the calls being in a 9-7 tiebreaker that had been tied 7-7 they decided the match. It is not clear at all the calls determined the Capriati-Williams match which was 6-4, and only definitively determined one game, possably making it 5-5.

You've never seen the spirit of a competitor broken by one event?


The Sprem-Venus W. match it is clear the officiating cost Venus the 2nd set but not the match, there still would have been a set left to play.


A set left to play....are you then saying that there weren't sets, games, or points left to play in the Roddick/Nalbandian match? Or was the events so devastating ot Nalbandian that his fragile psyche couldn't recover? You seem to have an inside track here as to the innermost workings and motives of not only the USTA, but Andy Roddick and David Nalbandian.

davey25
02-23-2005, 02:29 PM
This is laughable.

Obviously you didnt watch the event or ignored everything that was happening.


You've never seen the spirit of a competitor broken by one event?

It could have happened. I said it wasnt certain Serena would have won the 3rd set had she won that one game, not that there is no chance she would have.




A set left to play....are you then saying that there weren't sets, games, or points left to play in the Roddick/Nalbandian match? Or was the events so devastating ot Nalbandian that his fragile psyche couldn't recover? You seem to have an inside track here as to the innermost workings and motives of not only the USTA, but Andy Roddick and David Nalbandian.

What happened in the 4th and 5th set is irrelevant to the discussion since the match would have been over in the 3rd set. In the case of the Sprem
/Williams match there still would have been a set left to play even had Williams won the 2nd set. Thus the two draw no parralel. I did not speak to as any particular reason why Nalbandian lost the 4th or 5th set, or any emotional devastation contributing to it. Then again putting words in other person's mouth is one of your favorite habits, so I am not surprised.

Rabbit
02-23-2005, 02:35 PM
Nope, not putting words in your mouth, just trying to understand how in the world Roddick cheated his way to a U.S. Open victory when he didn't control the circumstances around him. Trust me, I'm no big fan of Roddick, I just don't understand where this is coming from. Roddick played the calls and yes, he's been guilty of gamesmanship in the past, but I don't recall any evidence of that in the Open the year he won it. He had the crowd in his corner, but Nalbandian has played Davis Cup and conditions there are far worse than the Open. I don't know why you have such a hard time with Roddick winning the Open. I agree that he is one dimensional, I'd even go so far as to say (and have said) that the rest of the field has probably figured him out and he's going to have to find something else in his game to keep in in the top ten. Hell, I'd even agree that when he came on tour he was a punk.

He's also matured and learned to lose as evidence by his losses to Federer. The guy is gracious in defeat at least publicly. This ire directed toward his victory is misplaced and certainly not based in fact, IMO.

davey25
02-23-2005, 02:42 PM
If there was a grand slam called the Swiss Open and Federer won under the same circumstances I would be annoyed as well. It doesnt matter if I like a player or not, I like to see the running of a tournament, the officiating in a match be fair. I don't want to see it so slanted the people running the tournament, will scramble and dig for anything they can to help a player win a tournament, it is tennis not figure skating. Using the crowd and the atmosphere is fine. There are limits though.

Rabbit
02-23-2005, 02:59 PM
The only way that Roddick was given preferential treatment was in the respect that he was showcased to put him before as many fans as possible. You reference a woman's match that was delayed. I believe that match was a continuation. Roddick currently is the only hope for American tennis and as such probably will get marquee attention until someone supersedes him.

The part of your comments that I don't understand, still is how Roddick himself cheated his way to a win. Was he to deny the scheduling that the tournament director gave him? I still don't see how he cheated anyone. At best, I can understand taking advantage of a situation, but what athlete wouldn't? I have never heard of Stefan Edberg being asked to be moved to an outside court or to play at midnight or to play at 10:30 AM. As a matter of fact, even Edberg when he played Wilander at the Open was scheduled earlier than he thought he should. He and Wilander got together and staged a mini-protest...they both showed up 15 minutes late for their match.

Chadwixx
02-23-2005, 03:05 PM
remember the davis cup when roddick was against moya? moya at least had the class to replay the pt. too bad roddick isnt a classy player, or he would have done the same for nalbandian.

btw wait til the summer hardcourts series come around (the biggest joke of all). major pts on us soil, i cant wait to post more articles on how roddick gets special treatment. i wonder how many times someone has to point this out til the dense roddick fans get it.

i dont think federer needs the same treatment as roddick to maintain his lvl. he was like 25-0 vs top 10 opponents while roddick is sub 500. hard to beleive ppl are dumb enough to think they are in the same league.

roddick beats the moya's and coria's on a hard court, but on a neutral surface its not even a match. compare moya vs roddick on hard and then re comapre on clay. its clear moya is the better player. cause moya plays very competitive on hard and blows roddick away on clay.

u wanna talk about roddick maturing, what about his tank job vs hewitt? u call that maturity?

Chadwixx
02-23-2005, 03:13 PM
As a matter of fact, even Edberg when he played Wilander at the Open was scheduled earlier than he thought he should. He and Wilander got together and staged a mini-protest...they both showed up 15 minutes late for their match.

wilander and edberg were major players, they maybe able to get away with stuff like this, but lesser known unpopular players would be defaulted in a min if they tried that.

i hadnt heard of that before thanks for the read. i just wonder how many things like this have been happening at the open. i personally think sampras had many us open titles handed to him towards the end of his career. id like to hear more story's of the corruption that takes place at the open.

andfor
02-23-2005, 03:19 PM
LOL, you are too funny. If three people trying to argue my points is your definition of getting pounded then it must be a regular routine for you around here. It "seems" I am right since Roddick's head to head with top players speaks for itself. Nuff said.

Say what you want to make yourself feel good. Fact is your getting pounded.

As for Roddick's record against the to 10. You missed that discussion in another thread. He's not alone in having a poor record in that department. Since you're so fair and impartial post the records of the top 10 vs. the top 10. Less than half of the current players have a winning record.

Next time you post to argue this troll. Post all top 10 players records vs. each other. Then let's talk. Bet you won't do it..........cause you are a blind hater with a big mouth who has not backed up one thing except with assumption and everyone here knows it.

Good luck with your Roddick v. the top 10 argument.

andfor
02-23-2005, 03:39 PM
wilander and edberg were major players, they maybe able to get away with stuff like this, but lesser known unpopular players would be defaulted in a min if they tried that.

i hadnt heard of that before thanks for the read. i just wonder how many things like this have been happening at the open. i personally think sampras had many us open titles handed to him towards the end of his career. id like to hear more story's of the corruption that takes place at the open.

I just typed a long reply and then deleted it. Waste of energy. You and Davey25 could very easy be the same person. Neither has a shred of credibility left nor any self dignity. Just your opinion and that's OK cause when this post goes away that's all you have is an opinion. Everyone is entitled to that, right, wrong or indifferent.

Chadwixx
02-23-2005, 04:01 PM
explain how u have more credibility than me and davey?

btw if u are ever in orlando let me know, we can play a set or two and u can see my credibility and dignity, btw if u win a game i wont charge u for a lesson :)

andfor
02-23-2005, 04:12 PM
explain how u have more credibility than me and davey?

btw if u are ever in orlando let me know, we can play a set or two and u can see my credibility and dignity, btw if u win a game i wont charge u for a lesson :)

Thanks for the offer, you have a deal. Don't be suprised when I come calling.

Free_Martha
02-24-2005, 10:07 AM
davey25 is a typical brainwashed Federer fanatic who's always bashing Roddick and any other player who threatens his Tennis God at Federer's official forum. How sad is that?

Rabbit
02-24-2005, 11:10 AM
wilander and edberg were major players, they maybe able to get away with stuff like this, but lesser known unpopular players would be defaulted in a min if they tried that.

i hadnt heard of that before thanks for the read. i just wonder how many things like this have been happening at the open. i personally think sampras had many us open titles handed to him towards the end of his career. id like to hear more story's of the corruption that takes place at the open.

The only thing Sampras had handed to him at the Open was the trophy and the winner's check. Every time he won it, just like every other champion who's won the Open, he's won it legitimately. I don't know how you equate to Swedish players agreeing to show up late with corruption, and any two seeded players who were playing each other could do the same without being defaulted. What are they going to do? Default both? Highly unlikely.

StupidCupid
02-24-2005, 11:25 AM
Actually, the real problem started because MAJORITY of REAL tennis fans ARE NOT attracted to, nor wish to have anything to do with, nor care about, nor want to watch on TV, nor have respect for, Roddick.

The fact that he is the only promotable item thats American, forces EVERYONE to have to go through agonies they never experienced before in their tennis life: turning on the TV and face the chance of seeing him > 75% of the time and in RERUNs when there is rain delays or taped sessions or bonus coverages.

If the American promoters want him to be liked more (remotely), AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, PROMOTE TENNIS SO THAT SUCCESS WILL COME, stop showing him on TV every round he plays in taped slots.

If tennis interests in the US decline, I believe the media's choice of broadcast is the cause. Dispute this all you want. I don't care what you'll say. Do people at USTA, ESPN, and USA get the message or not ? Thats what I wonder.

Since all those myopic people took over the positions at USTA, ESPN, etc., and there is no Fab-4 left, anger arise, things fall apart.

Chadwixx
02-24-2005, 11:31 AM
davey25 is a typical brainwashed Federer fanatic who's always bashing Roddick and any other player who threatens his Tennis God at Federer's official forum. How sad is that?

and someone who starts personally attacking those who make negative comments towards roddick arent?

Chadwixx
02-24-2005, 11:34 AM
The only thing Sampras had handed to him at the Open was the trophy and the winner's check. Every time he won it, just like every other champion who's won the Open, he's won it legitimately. I don't know how you equate to Swedish players agreeing to show up late with corruption, and any two seeded players who were playing each other could do the same without being defaulted. What are they going to do? Default both? Highly unlikely.

the one thing i remember about that us open was the sisters finally played a real match vs each and the mens final was an exibition.

go watch agassi bounce balls into the net, its the only time i have ever seen him do that. what about his lethal forhand that was landing 4 ft from the hash mark to forhand side, not exactly the pinpoint accuracy agassi is know for. sampras played 5 straight night matches vs clay courters, shalken, then agassi. go back and watch it, its exibition quality.

Kevin Patrick
02-24-2005, 01:09 PM
StupidCupid,
I don't agree with that, & I'm basing it on actual info you can find, not my opinion.

I've said this before in another thread:non-"real" fans do not care about Andy Roddick anymore than they do Roger Federer or Marat Safin or Hewitt.
Example: The Roddick-Ferrero US Open final was the lowest rated final in history. The Roddick-Federer Wimbledon final was very lowly rated as well. I've been following the sport very closely for many years. Since tennis started it's severe decline in the early 90s only one player has caused a significant spike in the TV ratings in the US:Andre Agassi.

Every GS final he was involved in from '90 to '02 was double or triple of any GS final he wasn't involved in. Also if you look at Agassi's endorsments early in his career, they blow Roddick's away(let alone now, Agassi's earnings from endoresments are only behind major US sports stars like Jordan or Woods. Roddick is no where to be found on the Forbes list of worldwide athletes who have the most earnings)

So what conclusion can be drawn from this info? If the ratings are pretty much the same(close to nothing) from the '03 Roddick-Ferrero US Open Final & the '04 Federer-Hewitt final, that means the only fans that are watching are Hard-Core tennis fans, i.e. real tennis fans. If espn thinks that Roddick helps them slightly increase ratings, they are doing so because real tennis fans seem to care about Roddick, while casual tennis fans & fans of other sports could care less about him. They sure cared about Agassi, though.

It amuses me that American & non-American fans on this board are convinced that Roddick's appeal is such in the US (i.e. that he's financially significant to the sport in the US) that the USTA would resort to 'cheating.'
The only time I've thought that something fishy was going on was at the '96 US Open when the USTA decided not to use the ATP rankings for seedings & to place the seeds in the draw privately, not publicly. Guess who received a boost in the rankings(managing to avoid a likely QF with Sampras)? Agassi.
All the other players flipped out, of course (kafelnikov boycotted the event), so the USTA re-did the draw(but kept their unfair seedings). All their efforts at guaranteeing a Sampras-Agassi final didn't work out though, Chang beat Agassi in the semis.

Chadwixx
02-24-2005, 03:49 PM
no offense kevin but i teach alot of beginners who want to be like andy roddick and the williams sisters. just go down to ur club and listen to what the beginners (rabbits peer group :)) are talking about.

im not sure if u can base ur whole arguement on the ratings of one television final. after all the whole tournament was screwed up due to the rain and ppl probably just lost interest.

why is roddick always on espn if he draws the same ratings as lesser known players? wouldnt the public get tired of seeing the same ole guy they dont really like over and over, thus killing the ratings?

andfor
02-24-2005, 06:51 PM
no offense kevin but i teach alot of beginners who want to be like andy roddick and the williams sisters. just go down to ur club and listen to what the beginners (rabbits peer group :)) are talking about.

im not sure if u can base ur whole arguement on the ratings of one television final. after all the whole tournament was screwed up due to the rain and ppl probably just lost interest.

why is roddick always on espn if he draws the same ratings as lesser known players? wouldnt the public get tired of seeing the same ole guy they dont really like over and over, thus killing the ratings?

With all due respect ask an exec. at ESPN. All you'll get from us since I do not know any of us to be television executives is opinion. If ESPN doesn't give you the answer you like tell them how you and all your friends hate Roddick and his style of play and that they should show more Euro/SouthAmerican/Asian/Journeyman type players nobody in the US has heard of and they might agree with you. Sell em Chadd sell em! Next thing you know they'll offer you a job as VP of Tennis Broadcasting, you can kick Pmac off the air, take his place and fix the world of tennis according to you and the rest will be history.

Now if you want my opinion and I'll give it to you anyway why Roddick is on ESPN so much, how about this? Roddick is American and ESPN is American. Hmmm that's novel isn't it? Call me crazy but that could have something to do with it. LOL :mrgreen:

devila
02-24-2005, 07:15 PM
Espn is eager to hire these idiots. Come on kids, watch your heroes. Pat Mc, John Mc, Drysdale, Carillo, Mal, Courier, Shriver, Ryan, Fowler...and the greatest player ever! *swoons, drools

Rabbit
02-24-2005, 07:55 PM
go watch agassi bounce balls into the net, its the only time i have ever seen him do that. what about his lethal forhand that was landing 4 ft from the hash mark to forhand side, not exactly the pinpoint accuracy agassi is know for. sampras played 5 straight night matches vs clay courters, shalken, then agassi. go back and watch it, its exibition quality.

You're not actually implying here that Agassi gave away the finals of the Open to Sampras are you?

to what the beginners (rabbits peer group ) are talking about.


Beginner? I guess if I were to play tennis for 150 years, 34 years would be a beginner..... :)

Dedans Penthouse
02-25-2005, 07:51 AM
You draw your own conclusion, a pretty easy one with any use of brains.
davey25goingon15: You want to attempt to argue/spin o/b/o some "RODDICK CHEATING" standpoint? Feel free--I enjoy reading your "monsters! monsters! everywhere!" rants regarding Roddick. You want to be "cute" and take it a step further by slinging comments such as "a pretty easy on with any use of brains" in my direction, feel free to do so as well. Though I don't view myself as some exaulted wordsmith, nevertheless in reading your posts, the phrase "rhetorical grandiloquence" doesn't exactly jump into my head, i.e. I suspect that you're not a descendent of Shelley or Byron. Long story short: I don't suffer fools gladly, especially obnoxious "agenda-driven" nitpickers such as yourself. Bottom line: YOU HAVE REPEATEDLY CLAIMED THAT ANDY RODDICK CHEATED. PERIOD.

Roddick did not cause all the cheating done in his favor at that U.S open, but he certainly did not do anything to reduce it, nor did he acknowledge it any way. Oh well it is sport, win at all costs when you arent good enough any way else.

So Roddick "did NOT cause all the cheating?" Well my little ******* of objectivity, what do we have here: "A Tale of Two Cities?" ("it was the best of times...it was the worst of times")??

"Roddick cheated!" ....... vis-a-vis ....... "Roddick did NOT cause all the cheating." Sounds like: "Will ya, won't ya, do ya, don't ya" ... don't 'cha think? Translated, this reads as "Roddick: damned if you DO and damned if you DON'T." Talk about covering all your bases--whew! Do you hold the same candle (the SAME candle) to ALL the other players as the one you hold up to Roddick?

Yeah, sure you do. Lay off the L.S.D. Zippy; hallucinations and objectivity do not mix.

Free_Martha
02-25-2005, 08:16 AM
and someone who starts personally attacking those who make negative comments towards roddick arent?

Nope. Because I don't spend half my life hating on certain players and starting numerous threads about other players in other players forums.

Kevin Patrick
02-25-2005, 08:46 AM
chadwixx i don't think you understand my point(how old are you by the way, just curious how long you've been teaching tennis)
when you mention beginners wanting to play like Roddick or the Williams, are you aware of how many more new people wanted to play tennis from '88 to '95 solely because of Agassi?

My point is every year tennis participation declines in the US. When you look at it over say the last 15 years, you realize that your students are part of a very small group of people(i.e. people who want to play tennis) compared to 10, 15 years ago.

The USTA & various other organizations publish data yearly about participation, racquet sales, etc. Coincidently, Agassi's success (& ratings) provided a huge spike in them as well. Obviously he's one player that is very important, business wise.

Since you are involved in the game & presumably follow it closely on tv as well, I'm not sure you can distance yourself enough from the sport to see how insignificant (in the US) tennis & Roddick are. Tennis fans/players are a select minority who view Roddick as much of a bigger deal than he is.

As far as espn choosing to show Roddick incessantly, its due to several reasons:

1)Roddick gets better ratings(though pretty minor as I noted) So these producers can show their bosses, "see, ratings improve 3%, can I keep my job or get promoted to working on a real sport?"

2) Desperation because of low ratings. Tennis didn't get good ratings in the 90s, but espn rarely showed tape delayed coverage of Sampras or Agassi when there was live tennis going on involving a variety of foreign players.
These are a new group of execs/producers at Espn. They are trying new things(i.e. tape delays) in the hopes that something might change.

3)Roddick seems to always be on show courts/night matches(not just in the US) Espn doesn't have cameras to show you Haas/Mirnyi on court 10, but even if they did wouldn't you have trouble telling your producer that we shouldn't show a match on center court with a packed audience instead click over to court 10 with 10 fans watching? That would look good on TV:players playing in front of no one. That would be like TNT choosing to show the Hornets-Hawks game instead of the Lakers.

4)Since Roddick is always on show courts(not just in US) & scheduled at primetime, jeez maybe the guy has some sort of following among tennis fans. Let's face it, casual fans aren't forking over $ to attend a tournament hardcore fans are. So if the stands are full, hardcore fans seem to care about this guy.

5) I've been playing the game for 20 years in many different cities. From my observation, most avid players don't really care to watch tennis. The few that do, seemed to care about the stars, McEnroe, Agassi, the Wiliams sisters, heck, even a non-Ameican like Boris Becker. Roddick's not in any of those players' league in terms of appealing to casual fans, but among the minority of hardcore US tennis fans, he is popular. Sad, but true.

StupidCupid
02-25-2005, 10:17 AM
Whoever that is creating the special treatments, Roddick is getting way to many / much. So, if he wins anything, do you think many people would feel he deserved them. But, if this is what the USTA / ESPN is capable of in order to whatever ...... then let them continue their idiXtiK ways. But, one thing is for sure, I have no respect for a winner of this arrangement.

andfor
02-25-2005, 11:43 AM
Whoever that is creating the special treatments, Roddick is getting way to many / much. So, if he wins anything, do you think many people would feel he deserved them. But, if this is what the USTA / ESPN is capable of in order to whatever ...... then let them continue their idiXtiK ways. But, one thing is for sure, I have no respect for a winner of this arrangement.

With all due respect have you read anything other than the last few post on this thread. For heavens sake, all the top players get special treatment depending on where they are playing. How much more clear does it have to be?

Roddick playing in the US = Special Treatment
Henman playing in England = Special Treatment
Federer playing in Switzerland = Special Treatment
Schrichipan playing in Thailand = Special Treatment
Spanish players playing in Spain = Special Treatment
Russian players playing in Russia = Special Treatment
Japanese players playing in Japan = Special Treatment

Def. Special Treatment, When a marquee tennis player(s) who has a large following of ticket paying fans or who may positively impact television ratings is scheduled to play at primetime.

Stop the hate.

Chadwixx
02-25-2005, 11:52 AM
what u are missing though andfor is the pts availible. the tournaments on us soil are worth much more in the pts standings

so u maybe correct federer gets special treatment in the swiss open, but can u really compare that to a masters series, us open, or the 5th grand slam (lipton)?

andfor
02-25-2005, 12:09 PM
Again, you're blowing the whole thing out of proportion. He plays at night, big deal. Have we narrowed it down to the fact that night matches/playing during prime-time are now unfair?

Didn't Rabbit, I and a number of others make it clear we are talking about professional tennis? It's never going to be even across the board at every tournament, for every player world-wide. The best players and the largest drawing card whoever they, where ever they are going to get special treatment.

Not just Roddick.

Maybe you could call the ATP and ask them to move all US tournaments abroad. The game without the support of the US, the US tennis playing community and ESPN would be better for it. Right?