2012 ATP World Tour Finals: Roger FEDERER vs. Juan Martin DEL POTRO

Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by Ico, Nov 8, 2012.

?

And the winner is...

Poll closed Nov 10, 2012.
  1. Federer in 2

    34.5%
  2. Federer in 3

    36.4%
  3. Del Potro in 2

    12.7%
  4. Del Potro in 3

    16.4%
  1. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    As I said it was written by a ******* but the incident itself is legit. And if Fed tanked before, he will do it again. Delpo played well below his USO level at the end of 2009 and there is absolutely NO way Fed would have lost that match if he had decided not to.
     
    #51
  2. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    Yeah, he really tanked to come within a point or two of going out in straights. Plus, he lost to DAVYDENKO next. That Delpo loss was totally valid.
     
    #52
  3. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    Davy was on fire that year end. No one could beat him. Delpo was not. Kind of cool that Fed's strategy backfired anyway. (And let me remind you that Fed would have won USO 2009 if the match had been a best of 3 sets. Fed had NEVER struggled vs Delpo on hard at that point, what happened at USO is that he ran out of gas in the last set)
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #53
  4. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    don't be ridiculous, no one is going to calculate the exact amount if games you need to win over 3 sets to make the semi and knock someone out as well. This wasn't a simple case of needing a certain amount if sets, literally one game less or more and it wouldn't have happened. to do that Delpo would have had to be in on it as well.

    Seriously, sense never gets in the way of your anti federer agenda.
     
    #54
  5. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    If WE can calculate it, don't you think they do? You bet they do. Players tank or are you denying that they do? because players have admitted to it you know. It is not that hard to miss a couple points at the end of a match and lose it.
     
    #55
  6. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    Yeah and he was on a huge roll vs Delpo just recently and then basel. so according to you if someone never struggles vs a guy then that will continue and never turn out differently? Brilliant reasoning again. also there is a chance that federer knew he was through after winning a set and wasn't giving it 100%. But he didn't plot to knock Murray out, he didn't care who came through as long as he did and he had no idea who had qualified along with him. even after the match the officials took ages to work it out.
     
    #56
  7. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    The tournament officials took ages to work out who had qualified and most of the people on this board get pretty confused as to the qualification rules so i don't think a player is going to give themselves a headache working it out just to knock someone out. also it cane down to the game score. you really think someone could manufacture the exact amount of games needed over 3 sets? Seriously next you will be claiming federer is an alien from a planet that breed tennis players and thus has an unfair advantage.
     
    #57
  8. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York


    If he dropped his level because he knew he had qualified, that IS strategic tanking. What else? It really doesn't matter whether he was aware of Murray going out as an additional benefit or not, it would still be strategic tanking and it would still be damaging the credibility of the event imo. BUT no way on earth that Fed was not aware of the qualification game. As I said, we are, how can you believe for a second that they're not? They have 10 million times more motivation to calculate it than us. And given Fed's record vs Murray in best of 3 and the way he'd been talking about him in interviews... well... draw your own conclusions.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #58
  9. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,130
    You can have as little doubt as you want, but until you have evidence of the actual tank job i.e. footage of rallies where Federer is clearly not trying you're just throwing out random obscure possibilities.
     
    #59
  10. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    Agree, can't prove it but am really curious about what will happen tomorrow. Sure hope Fed will keep it honest this time.

    ETA: most players know how to tank without it being visible. Read Agassi's book for more insight. It is not that hard really. WINNING with a specific # of games would be highly risky and complicated but losing after winning a certain # of games, I can't see why not.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #60
  11. AnotherTennisProdigy

    AnotherTennisProdigy Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    Messages:
    892
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    That has to be the worst tennis article I've ever read. Read the following for lols

    "had Federer won a third game in his brilliantly executed 2-6 tanking, Murray might still be alive in the tournament"
    "Had Federer lost just a few more games, he himself would have been eliminated, but he was more than willing to take that risk for the chance of knocking out his dark nemises."
    "It's all part of an intricate strategy brilliantly orchestrated by Nadal, Mirka, and Gavin Rossdale"

    This is obviously a joke, I don't even know why you brought this up. I especially love the orchestrated by Nadal part.
     
    #61
  12. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    Well of course everything damages the credibility of an event Nadal has never won, but sorry, a man who needs to win a match can sometimes give it more than when they don't and that isn't always a conscious decision, look at the effects on djokovic when he is match point down. you think he was just fooling around before that? The survival instinct in sport is a big factor.

    And sorry, the calculations for Murray or Delpo qualifying were way too in depth for a single player to fix. Delpo gained the most but you never accuse him. i wonder why? Plus didst federer almost lose the Delpo match? he lost the fist set 6-2 and only won the 2nd on a tiebreak. as he needed at least one set to qualify there's no way he would lose the first if he was tanking. and no way he would let the second get to a tiebreak.

    That idea is one of the stupidest I've heard. as is the idea that fed wants to play djokovic who is clearly the best player here at the moment.
     
    #62
  13. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    The article itself was a joke but the occurence was real. If the article even needed to be written, it's because Fed was suspected of tanking by a lot of people. To me, the suspicions were legit. Contrary to what the article states, he didn't have to calculate every point, he just needed to win 1 set and lose at the end. The biggest argument against it would be: not wanting to deliberately give up ranking points but after all in 2009, neither Djoko nor Murray (nor Delpo) were threatening Fed in the rankings (only Nadal was).

    ETA: Djoko may be the best player in the tournament but he's still a better matchup for Fed than Murray. Murray is the only top player who has a winning head to head vs Fed on hard court.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #63
  14. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    I am not accusing Fed of fixing the first and second set's score. I'm accusing him of deliberately tanking the 3rd once he got the set he needed. As I remember, a lot of people were under this impression while watching the match live.
     
    #64
  15. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    You accused him of tanking so Murray couldn't qualify. If he didn't fix the first 2 sets because he planned this all along what you're saying is this.

    Federer after winning the 2nd set, uses his photographic memory to remember not only his own match scores but the scores of all the other matches in his group. Using his maths skills, he works out in his head the total sets for and against of all the players, and the games for and against for all the players, then works out how many games Del Potro needs to get through instead of Murray. He then goes out and makes this happen.

    VERY realistic.

    Also you say Fed wouldn't have lost to Del potro. Well if he genuinely lost a set 6-2 and could only save the 2nd set on a tiebreak, why couldn't he have lost the 3rd set 6-3?

    Basically everything you say is a bit lacking in logic.
     
    #65
  16. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    Sure he could have lost the match and then everything would have been over for him. Once again, the only thing I'm accusing Fed of doing is let go of the third set once he got the opportunity to do so. It's unprovable naturally but not totally unrealistic. (It was not hard to do)
     
    #66
  17. Ico

    Ico Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Messages:
    4,235
    Let's forget this tanking thing. Who would Roger rather face in the semi? Djokovic or Murray? Tsonga doesn't look like he has a chance out there.
     
    #67
  18. AnotherTennisProdigy

    AnotherTennisProdigy Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    Messages:
    892
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    Wrong, people joke about it because the idea of Federer tanking the third set against delpo is absurd. If it was a real suspicion then it wouldn't be joked about like this. There is a reason for the sarcastic tone in the article.
     
    #68
  19. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    Both Djoko and Murray will be tough but I'm sure he'd rather Djoko for matchup reasons.
     
    #69
  20. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York


    Exactly the opposite, the author needed sarcasm to defuse the intensity of the accusations. Otherwise, he wouldn't have bothered. Once again, watch the 3rd set and make your own opinion.
     
    #70
  21. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    No that's not the ONLY thing, you're accusing him of tanking in order to knock out Murray.

    And assuming tanking wasn't his plan all along, the idea that he worked out all the possible results which rely on knowing every match result and adding up all the sets and games, is bloody hilarious bordering on stupid. You're making Federer sound like some sort of genious with a photographic memory who can crunch numbers in the middle of a tennis match :lol:

    And again, if he genuinely lost the first set 6-2 and almost lost the second too, it just proves Del Potro was dominating the match and a 6-3 3rd set is not suspicious at all. At what point was Federer ever in contro of the match to tank it? I reckon he obviously tanked RG 2008 too.

    There have been plenty of matches more suspicious, Fed losing vs Tsonga Canada 2009 from 5-1 up in the final set. Djokovic vs Querry Paris 2012, nadal vs Davydenko Doha 2010
     
    #71
  22. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    He's 7-9 to Murray on HC and 12-9 to Djokovic, but Murray has mostly masters wins. He's 1-2 in WTF, but Djokovic has 4 wins over Fed in hardcourt slams. Though this is not a slam, for Federer it's only second to a slam and Djokovic has been way better than Murray at beating him in the big events.

    I don't think Fed would really prefer Djokovic. He might have no preference but if he did I still doubt he's go for Novak the way he's been playing.
     
    #72
  23. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    WTF is a best of 3 format and much closer to a master than a slam. Given Fed's track record at WTF, he would probably be a favorite against both but Murray is the one with the best chance for an upset.
     
    #73
  24. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    Forget about the knocking out Murray part. That is not the most interesting point in this. The main point is:

    a- The RR system encourages players to cheat, which is not a good thing for tennis in general
    b- If Fed tanked in 2009 (whether it was against Murray or just because he was aware of having qualified), he can do it again.

    And trust me, this is not something I'm hoping for since I want him to play Murray in the semi.
     
    #74
  25. Sartorius

    Sartorius Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,471
    So you can't prove anything and you also say players know how to tank without it being visible (which is probably very true).

    Then, for Fed to "keep it honest" (for you), he must win, or he must lose with a scoreline that keeps Murray in the tournament. If he goes down with a scoreline that knocks Murray out of the tournament, then there is "absolutely no doubt" (for you) that he tanked.

    Well... I can't really prove it, but I think you hate Federer's guts and you want to believe he tanked, hence you actually believe he tanked. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind.
     
    #75
  26. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    I like the way you bring something up and then say forget about it when your original point starts to looks ridiculous.

    Again, Del Potro was the better player in that match and there was nothing suspicious about Fed losing the 3rd set.

    Technically players can tank matches yes, but I still like the format. You have to come through 4-5 top 8 players to win. In 2010 Federer as number 2 seed beat Nadal [1] Djokovic [3] Soderling [4] Murray [5] Ferrer [7] with the loss of one set. At no other event would you have to beat that many top players.

    Also Federer has won 5 of of 6 WTF titles undefeated, so he doesn't cheat his way to the title and doesn't tank matches. You saying this for a player who has won 5 out of 6 UNDEFEATED when other players don't come close to this is the ramblings of an obsessed fed hater. All because of one match where he might have tanked but there's no evidence any more than any other match in history :lol: Lets talk about how many times other players have "retired" shall we?
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #76
  27. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,945
    Who cares! Just worry about Nadal and whether he is going to be able to come back and win more slams and not worry so much about Fed. Fed has nothing to prove any longer and it is unlikely that Nadal will catch him in the slam race so all of your Fed hatred looks especially foolish. It just makes you look like a sore loser. Fed is just a tennis player, he shouldn't cause you to be filled with so much hatred. He is not capable of starting world wars. Why do you hate him so much, seriously?
     
    #77
  28. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    Can't prove it but the way the 3rd set went, it sure looked that way. This is not a personal vendetta against Fed, it's just a comment that a- I don't think Fed is incapable of tanking for a purpose, b- RR is ill-suited to tennis and makes it tempting to manipulate outcome if one can. Once again, Fed knows both semi-finalists now and he shouldn't be in a position to choose who he'd rather play and yet because of the awkwardness of the RR system, he is in that position. He has already qualified and the only thing he'd have to do to choose his opponent is not play too well. I don't like RR. Obviously other players than Fed could take advantage of it. I just think it's not a good system.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #78
  29. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686


    He won't be back,and even if he is he won't win anymore slams. Vero probably knows that so she has amped up her Fed hate to pass the time. Lol.
     
    #79
  30. underground

    underground Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2012
    Messages:
    6,977
    Quoted for truth.
     
    #80
  31. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    Really? I guess clarky doesn't have to worry about stuff like that given that its hatred of Djokovic is so hysterical there is nothing left to be amped up. :oops:
     
    #81
  32. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686


    Pot meet kettle,Vero.
     
    #82
  33. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    Am I the pot or the kettle? :)
    One thing though is that I'm fair when evaluating achievements and I would never wish injury to any player. So I have some ethics (and not everyone in the world of sport fanhood does).
     
    #83
  34. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,945
    :lol: ;) :oops:
     
    #84
  35. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,945
    Clarky definitely hates Djokovic, but I think your Fed hate is even more diabolical if that is possible. :lol:
     
    #85
  36. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    There's no way Federer tanks the third set against the guy who took him out at the U.S. Open final that year. Why on Earth would he do that?
     
    #86
  37. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York


    I'm sorry you think that but I don't "hate" him. I just don't support him, that's all. So I won't defend him at all costs if I think he does something reprehensible or suspicious. Fair enough I think. And very mild compared to the standards applied by Nadal detractors here.
     
    #87
  38. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    really funny that Vero is going after Federer for "tanking" matches at the WTF when the guy has lost 4 RR matches in his last 10 appearences.

    Currently 29-4 starting the year he won in 2003, looking to make it 30-4 tomorrow. I mean how many years could he have tanked after winning his first 2 matches? Yeah all of them, yet only 3 years since 2003 has he ever lost a RR match. Not only that but 2009 is the ONLY year he's lost his final group match having already qualified. He lost his first in 2007 (so not a tank) and his first and last therefore putting him out in 2008. So time in 10 years is the only time it's even possible he did it.

    Most ridiculous player to accuse? Yes. :lol:

    ps what about Nadal tanking at Queens to Tsonga, perhaps lopez too, you know once he had enough practice.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #88
  39. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    I don't want him to tank tomorrow so I hope you're right but I'm entitled to my doubts.
     
    #89
  40. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    you're entitled, but i don't think there's any resonable evidence for it at all.

    I mean the delpo match is the only time in 10 years he lost the final match when he was already qualified. There are 6 years he didn't need to win the final match and he did anyway. 6-1 is not good evidence
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #90
  41. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,945
    That is what I think. It is one thing to lose to Nadal or even Murray or Djokovic, but Del Potro? Fed has his standards, lol. If he loses again to Del Potro I think it means he is really just playing very badly.
     
    #91
  42. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York
    (to Towser) That's your prerogative of course.

    To cc0509: and if he beats Djoko in straights afterwards, will that mean he's playing brilliant again? Obviously you'll think whatever you want to think but don't blame other people for being skeptical.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #92
  43. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,945
    I think Fed is going to come out firing and win in straights.
     
    #93
  44. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York


    Great, I'm looking forward to that! Come on Roger, don't disappoint your fans please. Do as they say. Thanks.
     
    #94
  45. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,571
    It is, but if you were unbiased you'd admit Federer has a history of going 3-0 in the RR even though he could tank his final match. Like i said, after winning his first 2 matches he's won the 3rd 6 times and lost just once.

    But if you want to believe he tanks that's your choice, just a biased one that's all.

    Funny enough, I want Del Potro to win so there's still a small chance of him getting to the semis.

    I would laugh though if Fed wins like you want and then he beats Murray and ruins your dream final :lol: If it's a Djokovic vs Fed final I'm good either way, but knowing how much you'll hate a Fed victory probably sways me a bit towards him ;) :lol:
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    #95
  46. kaku

    kaku Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,137
    If Fed's not careful, Delpo could win this in 3
     
    #96
  47. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York


    Even more suspicious if he never tanked the 3rd match but did it the one time he could get something out of it, hum (just kidding, I get your point alright).
     
    #97
  48. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    I wouldn't mind a Fed/Djoko final but I'd prefer a Murray/Djoko. Don't worry, I'm well aware that Fed is perfectly capable of beating Murray, especially indoor but I'm taking my chances. Murray could at least make him tired for the final (in case you hadn't noticed, I like Djoko, so I wouldn't mind him getting a bit of a help vs Fed from Murray :) )
     
    #98
  49. TheF1Bob

    TheF1Bob Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,473
    Location:
    NON-Pigeon City
    Fed to tank so he can play against his lapdog again.

    Disgusting.
     
    #99
  50. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,088
    Location:
    New York

    Djoko is Fed's lapdog? :shock: Let's not exaggerate now. Djoko beat Fed twice at USO and twice at AO. (If Fed tanks, he will play Djoko in the semi, if he wins he will play Murray)


    ETA: this is my prediction: if Fed beats Djoko in semi, Murray is likely to win the whole thing (tough ask for current Fed to beat in form Djoko and Murray back to back even indoor)
    If Fed beats Murray in semi, Djoko is likely to win the whole thing (same reason)
    If either Murray or Djoko beat Fed, then anything can happen in the final. (a Djoko/Murray match is always unpredictable). For the sake of a suspenseful final, go Djoko/Murray.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012

Share This Page