What if no one won??

heycal · 10-06-2008, 07:08 PM

Anyone see where my thread went about what happens if there is no winner in a Grand Slam event? We had a good discussion going about whether sooner or later, given how tough pro tennis is getting lately, we'd ever see a tournament where none of the 128 players entered could win 7 matches in a row to claim the title.

Steady Eddy · 10-06-2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heycal

Anyone see where my thread went about what happens if there is no winner in a Grand Slam event? We had a good discussion going about whether sooner or later, given how tough pro tennis is getting lately, we'd ever see a tournament where none of the 128 players entered could win 7 matches in a row to claim the title.

I used the search feature and couldn't find it. Was the thought just too upsetting for people to handle?

random guy · 10-06-2008, 08:34 PM

It disseapeared in a whirlwind of circular logic. Maybe it's went on to an alternate universe in where there could be no winner in a Slam

HyperHorse · 10-07-2008, 07:18 AM

Screw your head on.

heycal · 10-07-2008, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steady Eddy

I used the search feature and couldn't find it. Was the thought just too upsetting for people to handle?

Quite possibly. But if it does happen someday, or if more than one player manages to win 7 matches in a row due to improvements in conditioning and modern equipment, people are going to just have to accept it.

Change happens, folks. We need to embrace it rather than fear it.

10-07-2008, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heycal

Quite possibly. But if it does happen someday, or if more than one player manages to win 7 matches in a row due to improvements in conditioning and modern equipment, people are going to just have to accept it.

Change happens, folks. We need to embrace it rather than fear it.

I really hope you all are just kidding, but in the final, the 7th round at the US Open, is the 5th set tiebreak going to just keep going and going and going?

veritech · 10-07-2008, 09:00 AM

i'm not grasping the idea. how could there be no winner in a major final?

heycal · 10-07-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I really hope you all are just kidding, but in the final, the 7th round at the US Open, is the 5th set tiebreak going to just keep going and going and going?

Hard to say. It's also possible than there is not even a final, because no two players could even win 6 in a row to reach it, or there are multiple finals, because several players won 6 in a row.

Anything could happen, so it's useless to speculate.

certifiedjatt · 10-07-2008, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heycal

Hard to say. It's also possible than there is not even a final, because no two players could even win 6 in a row to reach it, or there are multiple finals, because several players won 6 in a row.

Anything could happen, so it's useless to speculate.

you should all know that heycal is just screwing with the minions.

coachrick · 10-07-2008, 01:45 PM

I'm pretty sure that if, say a half-dozen years ago or so, Kournikova and Dementieva had met in a final, the match would still be going and indeed, there would be no winner...and you know why.

10-07-2008, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coachrick

I'm pretty sure that if, say a half-dozen years ago or so, Kournikova and Dementieva had met in a final, the match would still be going and indeed, there would be no winner...and you know why.

I DON'T CARE WHO YOU ARE, THATS FUNNY RIGHT THERE!

william7gr · 10-07-2008, 02:50 PM

Any one who believes that there cant be a winner to a tournament is a Idiot. There has to be one winner and one loser for every match. Two people cant reach the finals and both lose. If federer and nadal both reach the finals and nadal plays like me and federer plays like my sister even though they are both playing awful one has to win.

Nadal would win because I could rock my sister anyday

coachrick · 10-08-2008, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I DON'T CARE WHO YOU ARE, THATS FUNNY RIGHT THERE!

woodrow knows whereof I speak!

Murray_Maniac · 10-08-2008, 01:55 PM

If ya think of it as some1 having to win 7 matches in a row, you might see it as possible for no one to win. But thats impossible. Just look at a draw. There is a winner & loser of every match which leads up til the final & some1 has to win the final.

10-08-2008, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coachrick

woodrow knows whereof I speak!

fault, fault, fault, fault, fault, fault, fault.. lol

coachrick · 10-08-2008, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murray_Maniac

Yea, this is the dumbest thread ever. Even if every1 tryed to lose, there'd still be a winner because for every match there is a winner and a loser.

You must think outside the service box, grasshopper.

heycal · 10-08-2008, 05:17 PM

You guys keep looking at past results to predict future results, and that's not always reliable. Unexpected things do happen in tennis.

I'm confident sooner or later there will be a GS where no one plays well enough to win 7 matches in a row.

coachrick · 10-08-2008, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heycal

.

I'm confident sooner or later there will be a GS where no one plays well enough to win 7 matches in a row.

You don't have to outrun the bear, you only have to outrun the other guy.

S H O W S T O P P E R ! · 10-08-2008, 06:24 PM

Once again, rule of competition: it is impossible for anyone to play forever in a match. Either the match will be called and whoever is ahead wins or someone eventually forfeits (or faints, or in a case we should never see, dying, of exhaustion.) Someone eventually has to win.

heycal · 10-21-2008, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murray_Maniac

. Just look at a draw. There is a winner & loser of every match which leads up til the final & some1 has to win the final.

But what if there was a really tough draw?

Quote:

Originally Posted by coachrick

You don't have to outrun the bear, you only have to outrun the other guy.

That's all well and good, except in tennis there are no bears -- or animals of any kind -- involved. Tennis is not horse racing or polo. Therefore it stands to reason that someday someone might not be able to win 7 matches in a row.

10-06-2008, 07:08 PM	#1
heycal Hall Of Fame Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,383	What if no one won?? Anyone see where my thread went about what happens if there is no winner in a Grand Slam event? We had a good discussion going about whether sooner or later, given how tough pro tennis is getting lately, we'd ever see a tournament where none of the 128 players entered could win 7 matches in a row to claim the title.

10-06-2008, 08:34 PM	#3
random guy Professional Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,461	It disseapeared in a whirlwind of circular logic. Maybe it's went on to an alternate universe in where there could be no winner in a Slam __________________ 'Lathe biosas'

10-08-2008, 01:55 PM	#14
Murray_Maniac Banned Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 899	If ya think of it as some1 having to win 7 matches in a row, you might see it as possible for no one to win. But thats impossible. Just look at a draw. There is a winner & loser of every match which leads up til the final & some1 has to win the final. Last edited by Murray_Maniac : 10-10-2008 at 12:11 PM.

10-08-2008, 06:24 PM	#19
S H O W S T O P P E R ! Hall Of Fame Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: In your thredz, stealin ur bukkits Posts: 1,939	Once again, rule of competition: it is impossible for anyone to play forever in a match. Either the match will be called and whoever is ahead wins or someone eventually forfeits (or faints, or in a case we should never see, dying, of exhaustion.) Someone eventually has to win. __________________ "At Eton, they teach us to wash our hands after using the bathroom." "At Harrow, they teach us not to **** on our hands." - Winston Churchill

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode