What would you do???

Here is the scene.

You are down 2-4 in the first set of a final of a big tournament. Your opponent is feeling sick and begins to throw up, after taking his timeouts he is about to concede the match. What would you do?

A) Offer to finish the match at a later time giving your opponent a chance to recover? (if allowed by the tournament director)

B) Take the default and the win?

As much as it pains me to say it, I'd take the default, but I guess it would depend on the size of the tournament to some degree.

take the default

As has been said, it'd probably depend on the circumstances--how big is the tournament, how important is it to you to win this particular tournament, what's on the line, etc. If it's a very minor tournament (we have some very, very small and informal "unofficial" tournaments in my area), and your conscience would feel better rescheduling it, then certainly make the offer. Good sportsmanship is always a good thing.

That being said, no one should expect you in that situation to make the offer to reschedule the match. In any decent tournament, participants go into the matches knowing the rules, and agree to be bound by them. Getting sick and being too ill to continue is part of the risk that players assume when they enter tournaments--it's "part of the game" in a sense. If I was in a tournament and got sick in a final and couldn't continue, I'd never, ever expect my opponent to offer to postpone the match; I certainly would never think any less of my opponent for accepting my default.

take the default to win.

This thread does raise an interesting scenario though. Can you imagine, for instance, a US Open or Wimbledon final between, say, Federer and Nadal....and on the second point played in the match, one of the players twists or breaks an ankle and can't continue? I mean, obviously the winner takes the default all the way to the bank, but wow...that'd be a pretty surreal thing. Two minutes after starting, the winner is standing there at net with the tournament officials hoisting the trophy and making a victory speech to the fans. Gosh...what could a guy possibly say at that point? lol "Well, glad I won, but very sorry I had to win this way...thanks for coming out, folks! Have a safe trip home!"

I wonder...in that type of situation would the tournament organizers offer ticket refunds? Can you imagine spending hundreds (thousands?) of dollars on tickets to the final, and the match lasts all of two minutes? Yikes...

canadave said:

That being said, no one should expect you in that situation to make the offer to reschedule the match. In any decent tournament, participants go into the matches knowing the rules, and agree to be bound by them. Getting sick and being too ill to continue is part of the risk that players assume when they enter tournaments--it's "part of the game" in a sense. If I was in a tournament and got sick in a final and couldn't continue, I'd never, ever expect my opponent to offer to postpone the match; I certainly would never think any less of my opponent for accepting my default.

Click to expand...

Just to clarify, no "expectations" just would you do it. Not even out of sportsmanship (personally I don't think it applies under sportsmanship) moreso the desire to complete the tournament and determine the "true" tournament champion.

What I find interesting in this thread is that over 80 views but only 5 respondents. I am particularly intrigued by the first poster who said "it pains him to admit it", very honest.

So, the questions is still posed would you "take the def" or "offer to reschedule" knowing that your offer maybe rejected or accepted. Either way. what would you do???

Just for the record, personally if it was a final I would want to know the "true champion in a head to head" so I would offer, if allowed to finish the match at a later time.

Voltron said:

As much as it pains me to say it, I'd take the default, but I guess it would depend on the size of the tournament to some degree.

Click to expand...

Me too. I'd feel like a jerk, but if it was a big tourny like you stated, I'de kinda want to win...

it would be a hard decision and would depend on how well i know the kid/ his personality. But i would probably play another day because then if you win you feel prouder than winning from a default..

I'd see how it unfolds. See whether he forfeits or not.

Don't try and impose and be like "SOOO, do I get the win?". Plus it's probably up to the people running the tournament.

small tourney take default big tourny wait for the guy to get better if local!!

Win by default. It like getting cramps in a match, you play so long and the person who is less fit cramps up, simple as that. Would you offer to reschedule the match then? Of course not, it is part of the game.

Another way to think of it, you played so well that he got sick of playing you =)

Yeah. Take the default. You made him get sick. Being down 2-4 isn't that much of a down either also. Take the default. Doesn't matter the size. He could just be faking.

scraps234 said:

take the default to win.

Click to expand...

dude all your posts are like(do it.) why dont you ever give any info? but to answer the question.i would proble offer to play again if its scraps to own his but hehe.but nah i would take the defualt i think unless you wanna play him again.

^^^im just trying to make my posts short,easy to read,and answer the question asked.

scraps234 said:

^^^im just trying to make my posts short,easy to read,and answer the question asked.

Click to expand...

but why not give a suggestion like well i found gamma strings to be soft in the bed and hard for vollys or somthing like that.like one thread called somthing like what strings do you like and you said lux thats all just lux... and 10 chars but i mean say somthing why to help us out please i would rather read and get better then just learn nothing...

Take the default. Points are too important. Plus, I've played against people who got sick because of the night before, so it's a question of it being legit or not. I know for the final, I'm always well-rested and ready to go. Some are not, though.

Default every time. Being able to complete the match is all part of the challenge.

Take The Default!

Completely up to you. But I'd urge you to consider delaying the match if it's reasonably convenient for you.

First, this can benefit you. Playing a final is good experience, win or lose. In addition, if you're at all spiritual, you'll get good karma/blessing from God or whatever you choose to call it. On top of all that, people who are around the tournament will respect you for it(not all of them, some will never respect anybody) but you'll earn some respect from the ones who's opinions are worth anything. This might include your opponent, any coaches, officials, spectators, parents etc. Some day they may do you a favour!

Second, you're not playing the USO. Are you going to lose $100,000 by getting the runner-up prize money? A ton of ATP points? Are you a struggling journeyman who needs to feed his family? Will the world end? Nah. In fact, if I were an unrelated spectator, in 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, I won't remember you for your big default win. I JUST MIGHT remember the guy who made such a gentlemanly and good sporting gesture.

Finally, remember, there has been more than one case of a PRO tennis player doing this. For example, Andre Agassi once voluntarily delayed a final to let Sampras recover from food poisoning and then promptly got his ass kicked. Agassi was on a role and had beaten good players to get to the final on a comeback from injury, I"m sure he would have loved the points and the title. Now, I think he actually had a tiny bit of a selfish reason in that he really wanted to test his newfound game, fitness and dedication against Sampras BUT, he could have taken the money and title and done that another time. Even if you ended up losing, remember that it was good enough for Agassi in the finals of an ATP tourney.

Now, if it's not convenient for you or you simply don't want to, I don't think it's "bad" to just take the default! Your opponent has an obligation to play at the appointed time. But sincerely cutting him a break. That IS GOOD.

If you're playing for pride and the challenge and he is actually the better player, was it really a "win" anyways?

Take the default, if you are playing tournaments to win, then you will win. Its you opponents fault for trying to play when he/she probably felt ill to start with.

tenniscrazed said:

Just to clarify, no "expectations" just would you do it. Not even out of sportsmanship (personally I don't think it applies under sportsmanship) moreso the desire to complete the tournament and determine the "true" tournament champion.

[snip]

So, the questions is still posed would you "take the def" or "offer to reschedule" knowing that your offer maybe rejected or accepted. Either way. what would you do???
.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought my response made my position clear. The answer "would I do it" depends on the circumstances (the nature of the tournament, how high a level it's at, how much is on the line). If it was an "official" sanctioned serious tournament governed by rules, yes, I would do it. If not, if it was some sort of semi-serious loosely-governed tournament, I'd probably want to win "fairly" in the manner you describe.

And yes, it has *everything* to do with sportsmanship, which includes as a subset the "desire to complete the tournament and determine the true tournament champion" as you aptly put it. Good sportsmanship includes not only playing fairly, being a gracious winner/loser, and so on, but also includes a respect for the integrity of the sport and winning and losing "fairly." And all things being equal, obviously as you say it'd be better to win in competition than to win by illness default.

I have to say though (as someone who's practiced better sportsmanship than most people I've played against, and as someone who believes in good sportsmanship and "giving all possible benefit to the opponent") that at a certain point, a match is a match and rules are rules. Once we start picking and choosing rules to selectively ignore or follow based on a subjective code of ethics, then things can become tricky.

Here's some examples off the top of my head of what I'm talking about. What if you know your opponent, going into the final, is playing at only 40% capacity because of a serious ankle injury he suffered late in the previous round's match? Do you offer to reschedule your final until he's fully healed so you can hopefully win "fairly"? What if his mother died the day before, and he's decided to finish the tournament anyway, but you can see from the first point played that he's in no emotional shape to play a tennis match and has no chance of winning? Do you offer to reschedule?

Again, when a player enters a tournament, he/she tacitly accepts that things like illness or injury or emotional trauma may occur, and that's part of the risk of choosing to play sports.

I could also add that hopefully that will not be your opponent's last tournament, and if he's that good, he'll have ample opportunity to enter many more tournaments in the future....and who knows, maybe you'll have the opportunity to meet again and have a competitive final.

Of course, as I also said, if the "tournament" is 8 people playing for no prize money as part of a local club gathering, an offer to reschedule in the case you described is probably fair enough. Anything more than that is "part of the game" and you should without question take the default.

In an official tournament with anything on the line, I would take the default. I know there are cases where professionals like Agassi did not, but they did have something else on the line. Fan support. You'll get a lot of it for doing something like that. Your opponent just was unlucky that day, it is too bad. On another day, it will be you that may have to default.

On the other hand, if this is a local unofficial tournament at the club you play at, I would offer to play the final at another time. In return for your sportsmanship, maybe your opponent will offer to start the match fresh, not at the losing score you indicated.

It depends on the opponent. If he seems like the type of person that would take the default and win if you got sick then yeah. If its a good friend or somebody who seems very kind then I might reconsider.

But in the end a W is a W

TAKE THE DEFAULT.

didnt something like this happen to mcenroe, except his opponent wasnt sick, but something else...someone chime us in on that por favor.

miniRafa386 said:

TAKE THE DEFAULT.

didnt something like this happen to mcenroe, except his opponent wasnt sick, but something else...someone chime us in on that por favor.

Click to expand...

no por defecto, porque, en el gran mundo, ganar con orgullo que es más importante.

take the default. what if that person comes back to win it? i think you'd regret that loss.

[K]aotic;2777557 said:

default.

Click to expand...

In the "scenario" you were down when the choices and decisions had to be made, so the default would hardly be considered a win.

I don't care the size or location of the tournament, you take the default.

Bundey said:

I don't care the size or location of the tournament, you take the default.

Click to expand...

Based on a quick review of the answers the def to play ratio is about 4-1 or worse. In all fairness that maybe the problem with tennis in the United States we seem to lean toward an easy win mentality.

I would be interested to read answers from those across the Atlantic.

tenniscrazed said:

I would be interested to read answers from those across the Atlantic.

Click to expand...

If you look up to my previous post you can see that i would take the default .... plus i'm from the UK and most of my friends who play competitive tennis will most likely also do the same.

^^^ I guess even our compadres from the other side of the Atlantic aren't exempt from taking the easy way out. I pose this question then. What if there is nothing on the line, no points, no wild card, no money just pride? I suspect yours and the rest of the answers would be different.

Or this scenario since you were down in the score count at the time of the illness the choice is play in 2 hours, or lose? My guess is now playing becomes a lot more appealing. That is called hypocracy.

Given that spend your money on education, the prize is easier to get which should appeal to most that have answered this.