Why do people think draws are rigged?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by RCizzle65, Jun 17, 2011.

  1. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    It makes me sick reading it, especially when they draw the names in front of plenty of other people not taking part of the tournament. No one has any proof that ANY draws are rigged, so please, shut up
     
    #1
  2. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,564
    No concept of chance, to put it simply.
     
    #2
  3. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,709
    Location:
    England
    Well said.
     
    #3
  4. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Because they don't have a basic grasp of probability theory.
     
    #4
  5. Tammo

    Tammo Banned

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    3,875
    it's just a theory I guess.
     
    #5
  6. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    I was reading the Isner/Mahut thread to hopefully see other people get excited about the match, even though it most likely won't be as good as last year. Instead, I see a whole page of 'rigged draw'. You would think if the draws are rigged, that there would have been a scandal by now, or hell, at least Murray put on Djokovic's side of the draw. These guys have no logical argument
     
    #6
  7. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,756
    Or, on the other hand, many people do not have a grasp of the businesses are in it to make money theory. Depends on how you look at it.
     
    #7
  8. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I think it's to do with the fact that Nadal/Murray always seem to be in one half with Federer/Djokovic in the other half. And what were the odds of Isner vs. Mahut being drawn together again?
     
    #8
  9. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Then tell me why no player or commentator or well known journalist has made a big fuss about draws being rigged? That's a pretty bold claim to have, and you have no proof or worthy suspicion
     
    #9
  10. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    It's all chance, a couple of years ago, people were complaining that Djokovic was always on Nadal's side of the draw. And yeah, Isner/Mahut is what caused me to make the topic. But until someone has some hard evidence of fixing draws, it is all just bs
     
    #10
  11. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,756
    Who needs proof to have a valid discussion on something? Why would a player or commentator come out and say something even if they knew? They are all on the same side aren't they--i.e.the business of tennis.

    You don't have any proof that rigging does not occur do you?

    Let people form their own opinions. You don't have to agree with it.
     
    #11
  12. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    That which is asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. ;)
     
    #12
  13. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,756
    Maybe in a court of law but not necessarily outside of it.
     
    #13
  14. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    I need evidence to prove something is happening without anyone meddling with the draws, as it should be? So do you want me to post every single draw ever?
     
    #14
  15. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    No, outside out it too mate. Otherwise I have no way of refuting the contention that an invisible flying spaghetti monster orbits our planet.
     
    #15
  16. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Exactly, it's like if I said magic was real. I would look quite dumb of you said "prove it is real" and I said "prove it isn't", because mine is a wild claim that needs proof behind it. I'm sure it's a fallacy of some sort
     
    #16
  17. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,756
    Sometimes instead of evidence one has to look at the power of greed. The power of greed is often stronger than any empirical evidence.
     
    #17
  18. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Yup, he can't prove it, move along folks...
     
    #18
  19. rovex

    rovex Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,231
    Nadal and murray have been in the same half of the draw not once, twice or thrice, up in the double digits.
     
    #19
  20. mellowyellow

    mellowyellow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,553
    I think its funny to think players like Davvy and Fed who stood to make nothing are guilty when tourneys and betting who stand to make hundreds of millions are not guilty. Their is a reason certain players are always on TV, ie He who is faithful in little is faithful in much.
     
    #20
  21. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Again, all chance, and it's not a given either men will make a semi
     
    #21
  22. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Can you explain to me why you think the AELTC would frig the draw for money whilst refusing to sell advertising at The Championships? The value of the TV/internet rights would rise considerably if ads were allowed - not to mention the value of the ad revenue itself. I'm not a kid mate - I've started a couple of successful businesses that provide consulting services to FTSE 100 financial services companies - I understand the profit motive quite well - which is why I don't get what additional value the AELTC get by frigging the draw or why they would do that rather than open the tournament up to advertising.
     
    #22
  23. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,709
    Location:
    England
    The same odds as Isner drawing another specific player.
     
    #23
  24. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    The probability of Isner meeting Mahut again in the first round is 1 in 16129. Certainly improbable, but definitely not impossible. That being said, are those claiming to understand probability theory so well, so confident that the probability of the draw being rigged is zero? Who cares if the draw was in public? Wouldn't be any different that any inexplicable illusion by a magician. How hard could it be to rig a draw after all? I'm not one for conspiracy theories and I doubt the draw is rigged, but one would have to completely naive to say that without a doubt, the draw is not fixed. Human greed knows no bounds.
     
    #24
  25. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,709
    Location:
    England
    The probability of Isner getting Mahut is 1 in 127 (or however many players there are).
     
    #25
  26. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Yes, but the probability of getting him twice in a row is 1 in 16129 (127 * 127)
     
    #26
  27. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,018
    Location:
    Weak era
    True I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the draw is rigged but that said the majority of people do have trouble understanding how probability theory works.I mean one could as well take a dice or a coin and roll/flip it about say 50 times for a test,they might be surprised with the result,any subsequent roll/flip doesn't take into consideration the result of the previous one,it's new game every time.
     
    #27
  28. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    I don't think probability theory has anything to say about the likelyhood a draw being rigged as it wouldn't be a random event.
     
    #28
  29. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,709
    Location:
    England
    Sure, but say Isner drew Nadal. The probability of the Mahut 2010, Nadal 2011 combination is also 1 in 16129. Naming any 2 specific players will result in the same probability.
     
    #29
  30. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    But last year Isner was a seed, so you have to knock out 31 from the first number.
    Roddick got Gimelstob twice in a row in slams, Wimbledon then the US Open, certainly improbable, but not impossible
     
    #30
  31. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Agreed - I don't think I said otherwise.
     
    #31
  32. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    A good point, well made - which makes the probability higher. Two guys drawing each other twice in a row is not a hugely improbable event - far less likely events happen every week when people win the lottery.
     
    #32
  33. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    He can't even put together an argument :p and congrats on those businesses, I aim to somehow start one myself, my parents just started one themselves
     
    #33
  34. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,226
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    and all of the sudden i remembered Maximo... not sure why!!!
     
    #34
  35. icazares

    icazares Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    305
    Wrong, check your math. Tip: read about conditional probability. Probability of both Isner and Mahut of not being picked up to play against a seed is 44.2%. Once all the seeds are drawn, probability of Isner given Mahut= Probability of Isner AND Mahut divided by probability of Isner. It's actually 1 in 144.8.
     
    #35
  36. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    They are rigged, no doubt here. There aren´t so many weird hazards.

    - Verdasco-Raonic: Nando complains about Raonic, wanna show him some real tennis on clay.
    Guess what?? - Rome Round1 = Raonic- Verdasco :lol:

    - Mahut - Isner: Epic, most boring match ever SW19 2010.. guess what?? Isner, one year later out of 127 players in the field he draws Mahut. :lol:

    - Federer-Djokovic: As always a SF between them, people can say it IS possible it´s like flipping a coin..
    But here´s why - It´s ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.
    A possible Federer- Ralpf final is better and easier to merchendise.

    It´s all about the money, this is never going to change, so there´s no reason to complaing about that crap.
    No need to be mad at Ralph or Fed or whoever for those draws. It´s all about the organizers making as much cash as possible.
     
    #36
  37. BrooklynNY

    BrooklynNY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,627
    Pete Holtermann
    Wimby draw procedure enabled Isner-Mahut rematch. Here, unseeded players are alphabetical on chip list. Normal ATP events it's by ranking.
     
    #37
  38. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    If it's all about money, then please respond to batz's post about why Wimbledon doesn't accept any advertisements. Until then, all you have are coincidences
     
    #38
  39. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Thanks mate - best of luck to you and your family on your business exploits - I wish you every success.
     
    #39
  40. lendledbergfan

    lendledbergfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    India
    Doh. Now I have to explain probability to people! Isner/Mahut already happened last year. And last year, it was NOT projected that it would go 70-68 in the fifth. So, probably of Isner/Mahut being clubbed together "intentionally" is zero (well, lets say 0.0000001).

    So, the probability of Isner/Mahut happening this year was just 1/127.
     
    #40
  41. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    I'm always happy to be educated but isn't the probability of them meeting twice 1 in 96 * 1 in 127? Isner was a seed last year, therefore there were 96 possible opponents for him in R1. Isner was not seeded this year, so there were 127 possible opponents for him to face in R1 - multiply the 2 together and you get the probability of them meeting 2 years in a row- have I got that wrong?
     
    #41
  42. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Valid point, no one would have known they would have played such a long match, so last year should be thrown from the perspective of 'profit motive' as these guys are claiming. So only this year should be taken into account
     
    #42
  43. Manus Domini

    Manus Domini Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,854
    Location:
    Jersey
    because of their seedings. 1 and 4, and 2 and 3 will always be on the same side of the draw.
     
    #43
  44. Rippy

    Rippy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,709
    Location:
    England
    Lol, no they won't.

    1 and 2 go in opposite halves, then 3 goes randomly into one half and 4 into the half without 3.
     
    #44
  45. Oceansize

    Oceansize Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    350
    I just wish we'd get some different match ups in the Slams occasionally. Since 2008 the current top 4 have been drawn Murray/Nadal and Fed/Djokovic 12 out of 14 times. It's getting a bit boring now.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2011
    #45
  46. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,655
    Location:
    Dundee
    And that spaghetti monster is very greedy.
     
    #46
  47. Manus Domini

    Manus Domini Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,854
    Location:
    Jersey
    I said 1 and 2 go on opposite halves

    Why do you think the Murray'Nadal, and Djokovic'Fed are so often in the SF?

    because of 1/4 2/3 seeding
     
    #47
  48. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Nope - 3 and 4 are drawn -they can be in either half. 1 can meet 3 and 2 can meet 4 (and vice versa)
     
    #48
  49. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,655
    Location:
    Dundee
    Is it as simple as multiplying 127 x 127 = 16129?
    Doesn't the seeding process reduce the odds?

    Edit: sorry didn't notice this being discussed before.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2011
    #49
  50. RCizzle65

    RCizzle65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Yeah only 1 and 2 are set in stone to be on opposite sides of the draw, 3 and 4 can be placed in either side, all luck of the draw
     
    #50

Share This Page