2020 ATP Sudden Death League: ROME
- Thread starter Boozyuzi
- Start date
Boozyuzi
Legend
@TripleATeam time for a simple written rule for what happens if a LL replaces a picks opponent?
It's either pick stands of use back up..
It's either pick stands of use back up..
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
I'd say the backup is used, but my vote is just one among many. I'd appreciate other people chiming in.
My argument:
We pick our picks mostly based off of the opponent. It's almost always (at least in the early rounds where LLs can appear) about finding the lowest ranked/most injured/least experienced player you can find and the most consistent player to match up against them.
There have been very dangerous LL in tournaments before, and I'd always choose a strong backup over an unknown. In this case, I don't lose by an unlucky withdrawal, I lose because I picked a bad pick. What does everyone else say?
milk of amnesia
Legend
R1: de Minaur
BU: Struff
BU: Struff
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
So I totally missed all of this but I agree things should be clarified so we all enforce things the same way. At the US Open I explained the BU rule, I thought, to a new player and now reading this this whole situation I don't even know if I did it correctly and I'm a helper for this game when I can. We should definitely hammer out the wording so it makes sense. Ive been involved in a few weird rulings about the BU involving rain delays and OOPS in the past to get the confusion. I think we all want the game to be fair and enjoyable to everyone.
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
I'd agree with this. That's definitely my thinking. I had the luckiest of possible escapes in Cincy this year because I missed the whole 1st round except 1 match and got insanely lucky I picked the right low ranked next to nobody to win. It's why some people tending to strategically stick to seeded players a lot, less likely early on they get bagged out in a LL situation
milk of amnesia
Legend
This has never been an issue for me, but I always assumed that it was the responsibility of the SDL player to pay attention to what is going on and make whatever pick changes they want prior to the match. It's fine with me if you want to change it to automatically go to back-up pick in the scenario you describe, however you really need to advertise that change. People are going to be upset if their original pick wins but you changed to a back-up who loses.
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Of course, I'm assuming we'd be very clear on the change. I'm just wondering how many people feel a change would be the right move to make - many probably like the rules as they are and many probably would like to see the rule changed. Just trying to get a sense of what everyone is thinking.
Edhead-Fedhead
Hall of Fame
R1: de Minaur
BU: Millman
BU: Millman
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
Agreed. I'm picking a player to win the round, and I wouldn't like it if someone changed my pick. It's up to me to determine who my pick is playing against.
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
1: Rublev
BU: Raonic
BU: Raonic
milk of amnesia
Legend
Yeah, I don't like the idea of someone changing my pick for me either. But it wouldn't bother me if other people wanted to add @TripleATeam 's caveat:
"SDL: If my pick ends up having a cancelled match (does not play original opponent) move on to my BU."
to their pick either. I might actually want to use that myself under certain circumstances.
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
Yep, that seems like the best of both worlds.
Big_Dangerous
Talk Tennis Guru
I thought in my scenario that both my main pick and my back up had already started their matches by the time my pick came in. I think that's why I was allowed to switch both since they were both deemed invalid.
Boozyuzi
Legend
I vote pick stands if a LL come in. I agree that I'm picking a player to win the round. Happy with that.
From an admin point of view - I mostly just check to see who won and check the time not who was on the losing side. It's too time consuming to go back and check the draw constantly. Mistakes would likely be made especially in the Slams and arguments would happen.
But how best to write a rule if some players prefer the BU....
From an admin point of view - I mostly just check to see who won and check the time not who was on the losing side. It's too time consuming to go back and check the draw constantly. Mistakes would likely be made especially in the Slams and arguments would happen.
But how best to write a rule if some players prefer the BU....
luiz_gustavo
Hall of Fame
R1: de Minaur
BU: Wawrinka
BU: Wawrinka
PDJ
G.O.A.T.
For my penny's worth. I suggested the Back Up way back when because of withdrawals in different posters time zones and not being aware of the need to change the original pick.
Obviously, given previous posts, there has been inconsistencies in how the rule has been perceived and metered out.
For clarity, l would suggest the back up stands unless the poster posts otherwise - much the same as when we change a pick.
My own understanding was this was how the back up works.
I also agree that, given inconsistencies as to previous rulings, that posters shouldn't be penalised until there is a clear, absolute rule.
I hope that makes sense?
Boozyuzi
Legend
Problem is that mistakes will be made when looking at results.
In the middle of a 1st round at a Slam I doubt that any admin would have time to go back and check that ie TripleATeams win was against a LL. I would just credit him with a win if his player won on time.
With his rule he may not be due the win as he would prefer his back up who perhaps lost. So he keeps quiet/is busy/doesn't notice and advances to next round. (Sorry triple team
)
It then comes down to the player to point out his preference and thats when mistakes and issues happen.
In the middle of a 1st round at a Slam I doubt that any admin would have time to go back and check that ie TripleATeams win was against a LL. I would just credit him with a win if his player won on time.
With his rule he may not be due the win as he would prefer his back up who perhaps lost. So he keeps quiet/is busy/doesn't notice and advances to next round. (Sorry triple team
)It then comes down to the player to point out his preference and thats when mistakes and issues happen.
Last edited:
TheTennisReporter
Semi-Pro
R1: Raonic
bu: ruud
bu: ruud
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
Problem is that mistakes will be made when looking at results.
In the middle of a 1st round at a Slam I doubt that any admin would have time to go back and check that ie TripleATeams win was against a LL. I would just credit him with a win if his player won on time.
With his rule he may not be due the win as he would prefer his back up who perhaps lost. So he keeps quiet/is busy/doesn't notice and advances to next round. (Sorry triple team
It then comes down to the player to point out his preference and thats when mistakes and issues happen.
I think it that instance it would need to be clearly stated when making the pick.
like for this round of this tournament I picked
R1 Dimitrov
BU Raonic
If Dimitrov's opponent withdraws I want my backup used
If I included that than I'm locked, and if Dimitrov still wins but Raonic loses I am out. If I choose not include that statement than I advance no matter whom Dimitrov plays. It would take an extra 10 seconds or so to type that statement in and solve that issue.
We had a very similar discussion back when we first came up with this and how unfair some felt it was to still count the main pick if the opponent changed at the last minute. As this happens fairly often we put in the BU rule for this reason. If we need to clearly word it, or add in a statement clause like I put as an example here, than we do. Either we do that or we simply state one of the following, your pick is your pick and if their opponent withdraws and is replaced you take the risk, or your backup is used period.
TheMuzziah
Hall of Fame
R1: Wawrinka
BU: Raonic
BU: Raonic
Yugram
Legend
Saved, lol
tennisbuck
Hall of Fame
R1: Raonic
BU: Wawrinka
BU: Wawrinka
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
I appreciate the logic in what you're saying
When I was overseeing the SDL my understanding was that the backup would only be used in case my original pick retired / withdrew just before the match started and we didn't log in or have time to make another main pick beforehand. The purpose of this was to avoid handing out walkovers in early rounds - which is why the rule doesn't apply once you reach the SF. This was how the rule was applied before 2016 if I remember correctly - though no doubt there may have been some dubious decision-making here and there.
The complication with missing the pick and forcing someone to take their backup is that there is an obvious alternative: don't choose a backup
Case in point right here actually - no backup, and then you're effectively free to choose someone else. It's not an easy one to enforce in practice and will likely require subjective judgement on the day
We can, in theory, "force" everyone to choose a backup - and provide an incentive to choose a "strong" backup who would be likely to win their match.
Boozyuzi
Legend
The back up rule was initially introduced as a reserve pick for withdrawals only - probably about 2012/13. It was unfair that some people were able to change their pick last minute but some were not due to timezones. Also, we had no way of knowing what time it became public (or insider) knowledge that a player was pulling out.
The back up has evolved into what it is now by various admins and over time and in the interest of fairness. PPL work.
Yugram is free to pick another player but what if he only looks in occasionally - then he's out with no back up.
The back up has evolved into what it is now by various admins and over time and in the interest of fairness. PPL work.
Yugram is free to pick another player but what if he only looks in occasionally - then he's out with no back up.
Boozyuzi
Legend
That's quite a good solution - add a * to Dimtrov's name when your picking - that would work and let the admin know that you want your back up used if a LL is an opponent.
No * then just use main pick.
ie -
R1 Dimitrov*
BU Raonic
Last edited:
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
Understood
In that case I'm fine with what @boredone3456 suggests
In that case I'm fine with what @boredone3456 suggests
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't know why some picked Kecmanović to beat Nishioka. This guy is very good from the back of the court. Only weakness is the serve.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
I forgot when I last played a SDL. I'm probably not even ranked now.
Boozyuzi
Legend
Doha 2019
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
Works for me. I guess we come to a consensus and if we want to do this, we need to come up with a set symbol/statement everyone understands will be used in this instance. A symbol will probably be easier as it saves a little more time.
stringertom
Bionic Poster
Maybe because he had a losing record on clay and Kec just won a title on clay, winning as many matches in one week on clay as Nishioka had since April 2018.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
I hadn't looked at his clay record but this guy can hang with the best players from the back of the court. Just based on that, I thought it wouldn't be wise to pick Kec against him. I haven't seen Kec play before though.
TheTennisReporter
Semi-Pro
R2: Krajinovic
bu: monfils
bu: monfils
Boozyuzi
Legend
@TripleATeam whats your thoughts on the possible new rule?
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
I've played SDL for over 3 years with the old rule. A small change like that, which makes it easy to signify that you do want a BU in case of a LL is perfect (as long as the signature still works). Sounds good to me!
The other rule (BU will be used whenever main pick is invalid) will also be going into effect, correct?
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
I'll try to do it with the asterisk, but it is something to remember every single tournament.
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
R2 Bottom Coric
BU Berrettini
BU Berrettini
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
Or R2...or whatever...LOL
Similar threads
