If this doesn't prove "scripted" exos...

[Kim]

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5g3rHOzi_DzgoNQgTagpod2y-qMCw

Some quotes:

"Sampras poked fun at his losses - 6-4, 6-3 in South Korea on Tuesday and 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5) in Malaysia on Thursday - and urged Federer to "throw me a bone" in Saturday's finale. He likened the possibility of just winning a set against Federer to an eighth Wimbledon title.

When Federer, fresh from winning the Masters Cup in Shanghai, China, last week, said Sampras has "a chance" on Saturday, the American sheepishly repeated, "just a chance."


See, Sampras suggests/urged Federer to throw him a bone, and in fact likens winning a set against Fed as winning another Wimby... And Fed says Sampras "has a chance"... AND GUESS WHAT, Sampras gets the First Set against Fed in their last match


Scripted. Period. Anyone else naive about this?

Enough said.

 

[jukka1970]

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5g3rHOzi_DzgoNQgTagpod2y-qMCw

Some quotes:

"Sampras poked fun at his losses - 6-4, 6-3 in South Korea on Tuesday and 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5) in Malaysia on Thursday - and urged Federer to "throw me a bone" in Saturday's finale. He likened the possibility of just winning a set against Federer to an eighth Wimbledon title.

When Federer, fresh from winning the Masters Cup in Shanghai, China, last week, said Sampras has "a chance" on Saturday, the American sheepishly repeated, "just a chance."


See, Sampras suggests/urged Federer to throw him a bone, and in fact likens winning a set against Fed as winning another Wimby... And Fed says Sampras "has a chance"... AND GUESS WHAT, Sampras gets the First Set against Fed in their last match


Scripted. Period. Anyone else naive about this?

Enough said.

Thanks for the post. Well said, and really does sum up the whole thing about these exo matches.

Jukka

 

[MasturB]

I personally felt it was scripted.

I thought in the first match Fed would win convincingly. Then in the 2nd match Sampras closes the gap, then in the third he actually wins (albeit I thought match, not just a set) setting up for an offseason full of "Will Pete make a comeback?"

Turns out I was right.

Fed actually won the first match, not by ease but not by much. THen in the 2nd match Pete closed the gap a bit more and made it tough. Then in the third he finally beats Roger.

Maybe when they play again in New York in December, Pete will come out and say he wants to play at WImbledon again.

 

[leonidas1982]

I personally felt it was scripted.

I thought in the first match Fed would win convincingly. Then in the 2nd match Sampras closes the gap, then in the third he actually wins (albeit I thought match, not just a set) setting up for an offseason full of "Will Pete make a comeback?"

Turns out I was right.

Fed actually won the first match, not by ease but not by much. THen in the 2nd match Pete closed the gap a bit more and made it tough. Then in the third he finally beats Roger.

Maybe when they play again in New York in December, Pete will come out and say he wants to play at WImbledon again.

Blah blah blah, your profile pictures says it all.

 

[MasturB]

Blah blah blah, your profile pictures says it all.

Fed is my favorite player, so what?

What does that have to do with me predicting the outcomes of these exos a week ago?

 

[Mike Bulgakov]

This was an exhibition in Macao, the Las Vegas of China, and was about entertainment. It was an exhibition and should not be taken too seriously

A lot of money was made and everyone had a good time, end of story. Neither man seemed to take the Macao result anymore seriously than Sampras use to regard practice sets, which he routinely lost to much lesser players.

 

[leonidas1982]

Fed is my favorite player, so what?

What does that have to do with me predicting the outcomes of these exos a week ago?

I don't have a problem with him being your favorite player; Pete is mine. I do find it a bit problematic and convenient for some people to premise the exhibition as scripted in case of the eventual occasion when Pete does beat Roger. Nobody knows that. And to declare so without any proof only sheds light on one's banality.

 

[barbadosan]

So funny. A guy over at MTF posted this right after the 2nd exho.

"Well acted, Roger.
Now make the next match even closer, heck might as well lose that match, so the hypemachine can work overtime to your final(?) match at Madison Square. It is going to be a sell-out."

Guess he was right on the money!

http://www.****************.com/showthread.php?p=6292628&highlight=Madison#post6292628

 

[JackSkellington]

I don't have a problem with him being your favorite player; Pete is mine. I do find it a bit problematic and convenient for some people to premise the exhibition as scripted in case of the eventual occasion when Pete does beat Roger. Nobody knows that. And to declare so without any proof only sheds light on one's banality.

Let me ask you one thing: did you even watch the match? Case closed.

 

[catspaw]

I don't have a problem with him being your favorite player; Pete is mine. I do find it a bit problematic and convenient for some people to premise the exhibition as scripted in case of the eventual occasion when Pete does beat Roger. Nobody knows that. And to declare so without any proof only sheds light on one's banality.

What strikes me as banal is that anybody takes these matches or their outcomes with anything more than a pinch of salt. Pete was/still is a great player; Roger is and will no doubt always be a great player. These matches were for entertainment, not for ATP points, not for any sort of one-upmanship, and certainly not for a definitive decision as to who is the greatest (if that had been the case, I doubt that either of them would have wanted to do it). They went out and played for the fun of it and to give the crowd a good time. But it wouldn't have been much fun if one player had completely routed the other (whichever way round) in any or all of the matches. It was meant to be entertaining, and that's exactly what it was - no more, no less, and anybody that reads more into it than that, frankly, needs their head examined.

 

[leonidas1982]

Let me ask you one thing: did you even watch the match? Case closed.

Yes, I watched this and the previous two.

 

[kimizz]

Ive only watched the 1set of the first match and 1 set of the second match. So I dont have a full picture of the exos. Im just wondering what you guys mean by scripted? Most of the points I saw Pete winning were because of huge serve where Federer had no chance. I actually replayed a lot of points and couldnt see it, the script I mean. Its not possible that Pete could return to tour since its different to play a complete season, but are you guys saying that with proper motivation Federer would have win those exos with ease?

 

[leonidas1982]

What strikes me as banal is that anybody takes these matches or their outcomes with anything more than a pinch of salt. Pete was/still is a great player; Roger is and will no doubt always be a great player. These matches were for entertainment, not for ATP points, not for any sort of one-upmanship, and certainly not for a definitive decision as to who is the greatest (if that had been the case, I doubt that either of them would have wanted to do it). They went out and played for the fun of it and to give the crowd a good time. But it wouldn't have been much fun if one player had completely routed the other (whichever way round) in any or all of the matches. It was meant to be entertaining, and that's exactly what it was - no more, no less, and anybody that reads more into it than that, frankly, needs their head examined.

The only one who reads into it are the ones who assume it is all staged. I take it for what it is, a match between two players. A match with one player trying to break a record and answer critics that his generation lack talent, and another player whose record might get broken wants to display that he may be better than the man who may eventually break his record.

A competition between these two will always be close. It was close (5 sets) when they played for "points". Now they play for pride, which is just as worth while as any other reward, at least from the school of thought I come from, not today's disconcerting standard.

 

[catspaw]

The only one who reads into it are the ones who assume it is all staged. I take it for what it is, a match between two players. A match with one player trying to break a record and answer critics that his generation lack talent, and another player whose record might get broken wants to display that he may be better than the man who may eventually break his record.

I'd seriously have thought that the opposite was true. If it's assumed to be staged, then there's nothing meaningful TO read into it - can't be done.

A competition between these two will always be close. It was close (5 sets) when they played for "points". Now they play for pride, which is just as worth while as any other reward, at least from the school of thought I come from, not today's disconcerting standard.

Well, if that's the case, then everybody's happy. Fed won the series 2-1, and Pete got one back. I really don't think either of them is going to lose any sleep over this, unlike some here who seem to think that something portentous has occurred.

 

[catspaw]

The only one who reads into it are the ones who assume it is all staged. I take it for what it is, a match between two players. A match with one player trying to break a record and answer critics that his generation lack talent, and another player whose record might get broken wants to display that he may be better than the man who may eventually break his record.

A competition between these two will always be close. It was close (5 sets) when they played for "points". Now they play for pride, which is just as worth while as any other reward, at least from the school of thought I come from, not today's disconcerting standard.

Whoops, got my quotes muddled up!

I'd seriously have thought that the opposite was true. If it's assumed to be staged, then there's nothing meaningful TO read into it - can't be done.

Well, if that's the case, then everybody's happy. Fed won the series 2-1, and Pete got one back. I really don't think either of them is going to lose any sleep over this, unlike some here who seem to think that something portentous has occurred.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Sampras has a good sense of humor...but what a player..Fed simply couldn't handle the big Sampras serve and silky net play and power forehand, but its no shame to lose to a legend.

 

[David L]

Ive only watched the 1set of the first match and 1 set of the second match. So I dont have a full picture of the exos. Im just wondering what you guys mean by scripted? Most of the points I saw Pete winning were because of huge serve where Federer had no chance. I actually replayed a lot of points and couldnt see it, the script I mean. Its not possible that Pete could return to tour since its different to play a complete season, but are you guys saying that with proper motivation Federer would have win those exos with ease?

Not necessarily with ease, but won them yes. It's hard to know the degree to which these matches were scripted or if they were scripted at all. What is clear, is Federer is not fully focused on the task of winning the match at all costs, as would occur in a Grandslam for example. These are exhibitions, which by their very nature, bring a more relaxed attitude to proceedings. This makes all the difference. Exhibitions can be arranged in many different ways, according to a loose or tight script. You can agree to play somewhat hard, take it easier, play to each others strengths, play you B games, prolong rallies, split sets. Sometimes you may even feel the direction of the match or a point on court and go with the flow. However it turns out, it's not going to be under the conditions of a proper match.

 

[barbadosan]

Sampras has a good sense of humor...but what a player..Fed simply couldn't handle the big Sampras serve and silky net play and power forehand, but its no shame to lose to a legend.

True, no shame at all. After all, he lost to Roddick in the Kooyong exhibition just before the AO (and we all know what happened when he met Roddick in the competition match

 

[theone]

Of course it's staged, only people who don't follow tennis would think overwise.

 

[A.Davidson]

Oh, geez, let it go.

Sampras has said that he doesn't want to make a comeback for no reason.

If he wants to, he will. If not, he won't. Leave it alone.

 

[Fedace]

Wasn't federer supposed to let Pete win one of the matches?

 

[Rhino]

I'll reserve judgement until I've watched the match but yeah, this sounds almost too predictable.

 

[Zaragoza]

We all know that these are exo matches to entertain people but I find it really funny that some people come now saying how fixed these matches are right after Sampras beat Federer, whereas they kept silent about that when it was Federer who beat Sampras.

 

[Rickson]

Pro wrestling in tennis.

 

[jackcrawford]

Pro wrestling in tennis.

Makes the WWE look like it has integrity compared to tennis

 

[barbadosan]

We all know that these are exo matches to entertain people but I find it really funny that some people come now saying how fixed these matches are right after Sampras beat Federer, whereas they kept silent about that when it was Federer who beat Sampras.

You must've missed a whole heap of posts which said the exho was scripted...

 

[Rhino]

We all know that these are exo matches to entertain people but I find it really funny that some people come now saying how fixed these matches are right after Sampras beat Federer, whereas they kept silent about that when it was Federer who beat Sampras.

Loads of people said it was scripted, dating way back to the day these exos were first announced.

You have to admit it's turning a bit 'fairy tale'. Madison Sq Garden would be empty if the matches were all 6-1, 6-1.

 

[PimpMyGame]

I really can't believe there are all these posts and several threads on this. An exhibition match does exactly what it says on the tin. The players make very good money and the public also pay lots of money. To let the fans down with Federer soundly whipping Sampras just defeats the object.

 

[babolat15]

ya, it was not real

 

[leonidas1982]

Pro wrestling in tennis.

Hahaha. What would be the moniker for the players. I suppose pete is Pistol Pete. What of federer, roddick, nadal, and the rest?

 

[martin]

If it is "scripted" then why ended every match after two sets.
Everyone said before these matches started it would go to three sets as that was "scripted"

 

[Khale]

Cognitive Dissonance guys....it's understandable. For 4 years everyone in the tennis world has extolled Federer as the greatest ever. In 2008 he will break Sampras's record and be the all-time record holder- the future is still very bright for him.

However, it should be seen now that Pete Sampras is almost unstoppable when his service game is on and his desire to win is evident. Very simple folks, hold your service games and you will win most of the time. In these 3 matches---Pete broke Roger's serve 3 (or 4 times?). Roger only broke Pete's serve in the first match and NONE in matches 2 and 3. Even though Pete played terribly in match # 1...if he held his serve it would have gone to tie-breaks as well.

The argument that Federer "wasn't trying" is the easy way out in explaining how easy it is for Pete to win. Watch how hard Federer tries to get to Pete's 1st serve and how he handles his 2nd serve....Roger is desperately trying.

Take it from Federer himself:

"It is a bit of a surprise. I knew in Kuala Lumpur how great Pete was still playing after he was much slower in Seoul. I came from Shanghai and I was confident and then all of a sudden the surface picked up in pace up here,' said Federer.

'His serve is still right up there. If you put him on the court with the top five in the world, not all the year round, but maybe just one match he could take them down, if he can take me down it shows where his level is.

'I am not embarrassed to lose against my hero. I played (Andre) Agassi when he was 35 in the US Open final. He doesn't need a stick to walk yet, he can still move. It has been a long season and I have to be careful with injury, but I pushed as hard as I could."

So, he pushed as hard as he could and also reasoned his loss to the quick surface in Macao! (He said it was quick in Kuala Lumpar as well...and would have said the same in Seoul if Pete held his service games).

Yes, I agree with Martin---if this was purely for the entertainment of the public and was 'scripted'- I think we would have seen at least ONE of the matches go to three-sets, and also some longer rallies as well...maybe some 30-40 shot rallies lol.

 

[David L]

If it is "scripted" then why ended every match after two sets.
Everyone said before these matches started it would go to three sets as that was "scripted"

Well, no one here knows what the script or guidelines of play were and many performances are improvised on the fly. In any case, the word "exhibition" explains itself. Showcasing or presenting for view.

 

[capriatifanatic]

It definitely was scripted to be a certain way for entertainment. Tennis needs a more interesting player like Jennifer Capriati so they have better ways to draw fans to the then scripted exos. Please Jennifer come back and save tennis.

 

[Rhino]

Take it from Federer himself:

so let me get this straight, if Federer was letting Pete win then you'd expect him to admit it in the post match interview.
I can just imagine:

Federer: "Yeah you know, we wanted to give people a show so I took my foot off the gas and gave Pete and the audience a nice present. We're in talks now about the Madison sq Garden result, we promise it'll be exciting so get your tickets while you can!"

 

[David L]

Cognitive Dissonance guys....it's understandable. For 4 years everyone in the tennis world has extolled Federer as the greatest ever. In 2008 he will break Sampras's record and be the all-time record holder- the future is still very bright for him.

However, it should be seen now that Pete Sampras is almost unstoppable when his service game is on and his desire to win is evident. Very simple folks, hold your service games and you will win most of the time. In these 3 matches---Pete broke Roger's serve 3 (or 4 times?). Roger only broke Pete's serve in the first match and NONE in matches 2 and 3. Even though Pete played terribly in match # 1...if he held his serve it would have gone to tie-breaks as well.

The argument that Federer "wasn't trying" is the easy way out in explaining how easy it is for Pete to win. Watch how hard Federer tries to get to Pete's 1st serve and how he handles his 2nd serve....Roger is desperately trying.

Take it from Federer himself:

"It is a bit of a surprise. I knew in Kuala Lumpur how great Pete was still playing after he was much slower in Seoul. I came from Shanghai and I was confident and then all of a sudden the surface picked up in pace up here,' said Federer.

'His serve is still right up there. If you put him on the court with the top five in the world, not all the year round, but maybe just one match he could take them down, if he can take me down it shows where his level is.

'I am not embarrassed to lose against my hero. I played (Andre) Agassi when he was 35 in the US Open final. He doesn't need a stick to walk yet, he can still move. It has been a long season and I have to be careful with injury, but I pushed as hard as I could."

So, he pushed as hard as he could and also reasoned his loss to the quick surface in Macao! (He said it was quick in Kuala Lumpar as well...and would have said the same in Seoul if Pete held his service games).

Yes, I agree with Martin---if this was purely for the entertainment of the public and was 'scripted'- I think we would have seen at least ONE of the matches go to three-sets, and also some longer rallies as well...maybe some 30-40 shot rallies lol.

Just a factual correction. I think they broke each other twice in total, that is assuming there were no breaks in the first set of the third match.

Exhibitions never bring out the best performance in players. Why would they? They're exhibitions. No need to overdo it. It's like friendlies in football, as opposed to the World Cup final. Which one do you think the players will try hardest in?

 

[capriatifanatic]

It is good the farcial fixed exhibition is over so people can start talking about serious tennis again. Things like Henin and Federer's quest for the calender slam, Capriati's possible comeback to tennis, the Williams sideshow, Sharapova's attempt at a comeback, Maursemo's attempt at a comeback, Nadal's attempt to keep dominance on clay, Djokovic to stay up there or go in a sophomore slump, whether Roddick is finished or not. The bogus exhibition tennis is done for the year, the real tennis is just around the corner.

 

[daddy.dirtsurfer]

Oh please. Get over it. It's just an exo.

 

[friedalo1]

I heard people was gambling on this match in Asia for Federer to win this final match in straight sets. Someone lose a lot of money on this match. Asia is the gambling continent of the world. They gamble on any sport like Vegas.

 

[David L]

Just a factual correction. I think they broke each other twice in total, that is assuming there were no breaks in the first set of the third match.

Exhibitions never bring out the best performance in players. Why would they? They're exhibitions. No need to overdo it. It's like friendlies in football, as opposed to the World Cup final. Which one do you think the players will try hardest in?

Factually correcting my factual correction. Federer broke Sampras 3 times. Sampras broke Federer twice. Continue...

 

[Tempest344]

I don't see the big deal of whether it was supposedly "scripted" or not
its a much more relaxed environment for Fed and so he's not going out there to blitz sampras he's playing for Enjoyment

so many Cynics on this topic

 

[alwaysatnet]

Yeah, all these know-it-all cynics sitting at home tapping away at their keyboards don't have any special insights. But they do have loads of cynicism.

It isn't surprising that Pete would shake some of his rust off and play better tennis as these exhibitons go on. I mean, he is an all time great, after all, and the once he gets warmed up the upside to his game is phenomonal. But I guess it's more fun to play the omnipotent commentor and treat this like it's WWF wrestling match.

If you think these exhibitions are rigged, that's your business. But don't pretend you know, because you don't.

 

[Federer's pet goat Leanne]

The matches were fixed. Federer tanked the last match. He should be fined $2000

 

[musicalmedic81]

Here's how it looked to me:

Fed's level of play was to be determined by Pete's level of play. Obviously in the first match, Roger was taking it easy to make it close, and it barely was cause Pete was making so many errors.

In the second match, Pete played much better, therefore Roger had to raise his level from how he played the first match. Roger was hitting serves at full power and hitting much harder from the baseline too.

In the third match, Pete played probably the best match he's capable of playing, and plain and simple, he was too good, if only for one day. Some of you act like Roger is not human and is incapable of losing on any given day. I watched the whole thing and trust me, Roger was not giving anything to Sampras. It was basically a serve fest, which if you saw how good pete was serve and volleying, and how fast that freaking surface was, you would have seen that he could have beaten anybody that day. Pete was very loose and playing out to the crowd until he took that first set. Then it became very business like. Roger looked very tense. The difference between the first 2 matches and the last one was Pete started playing like he really believed he could win. And he did. yeah, so it really means nothing in an exo, but to say that it was planned is rediculous. It wouldnt have been any less entertaining if Roger had won all 3 matches. This is Pete Sampras we're talking about here, he's still good enough to beat anybody on any given day.

 

[lambielspins]

The matches were fixed. Federer tanked the last match. He should be fined $2000

You dont get fined for effort level in exhibitions. Exhibitions are staged anyway. What the players did is what they were supposed to do. Koyoong is probably staged as well, remember Federer has lost to Roddick and Haas there the last two years there, even though those two are something like 0-23 against him on the official ATP tour in the last 3 years. Nobody said he should be fined for those matches though, it is an exhibition event just like this is.

Personally I think there are too many exhibitions these days anyway, and the ones they have are not as entertaining as the old ones. Tennis is struggling to put together a package that entertains fans and they are now grasping at straws.

 

[David L]

Okay, I've seen all 3 matches now. The first was a relaxed knock about, with the occasional hit shot. The second was more intense and involved more real playing. The third was another relaxed knock about with the occasional hit shot. The outcome of all matches were in Federer's control, whether to win all the sets, giving his best effort or ease up and give Sampras a chance to respond. Anyone who saw the matches, knows a little about tennis and is not trying to wind people up, should be able to tell these matches were not for real. Only the second match involved more real playing and intensity.

The last match had none of the fire of the second. It looked like Federer gave Sampras the opportunity to take the first set, rather than throwing it completely. Sampras didn't blow it. In the second set, Federer played, but in a relaxed manner, making some unforced errors before losing his serve. Probably not intentional, but that's what happens when you're not focused on winning. Probably would have liked to clinch it in the third set, even playing in second gear, but couldn't seem bothered to put forth the effort once he lost the first. So in the end, the matches were played like exhibitions, with a little more fire in the second encounter. Maybe they'll bring the heat again at The Garden next year, but probably not.

 

[wangs78]

As much as I enjoy watching Pete and Rog play, I really don't think Rog should waste is time next year playing an exhibition at MSG. And I live in NY and plan to go if it IS played too.

Rog should focus on the Golden Slam and that's it. History is waiting to be made and he is going to waste his energy on an exhibition??!!

 

[BreakPoint]

Of course it's staged, only people who don't follow tennis would think overwise.

Yes, the matches were played on the world stage. I assume that's what you mean by "staged".

 

[hopeless]

Yes, the matches were played on the world stage. I assume that's what you mean by "staged".

that assumption is almost certainly incorrect.. you do know that right?

 

[Clay lover]

Yeah, all these know-it-all cynics sitting at home tapping away at their keyboards don't have any special insights. But they do have loads of cynicism.

It isn't surprising that Pete would shake some of his rust off and play better tennis as these exhibitons go on. I mean, he is an all time great, after all, and the once he gets warmed up the upside to his game is phenomonal. But I guess it's more fun to play the omnipotent commentor and treat this like it's WWF wrestling match.

If you think these exhibitions are rigged, that's your business. But don't pretend you know, because you don't.

So true...so true