ITHF - such a fraud

S

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
i have problems with international tennis hall of fame........what is the purpose of its existence? is there a criterion as to who is inducted into the hall of fame?

i have issues with some nobody american player sitting beside sampras and laver in the same row in the tennis hall of frame........there were rumours about misuse of funds too.........i propose a permanent closure of this bogus tennis organisation, we do not require such an organisation to exist........
 
ForehandCross

ForehandCross

Legend
Start da Game said:
i have problems with international tennis hall of fame........what is the purpose of its existence? is there a criterion as to who is inducted into the hall of fame?

i have issues with some nobody american player sitting beside sampras and laver in the same row in the tennis hall of frame........there were rumours about misuse of funds too.........i propose a permanent closure of this bogus tennis organisation, we do not require such an organisation to exist........
Click to expand...
Roddick doesn't belong in an honest exclusive HF . There's way worse players in the corrupt pathetic HF however.

But your hatred is laughable. The guy retired 8 years ago. If his opinions hurt your feelings so much then stop listening to him, judging by the view counts on his Tennis Channel videos, nobody in the entire world except TTW is listening to him.


Try to get a thicker skin.
 
Last edited:
S

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
ForehandCross said:
Roddick doesn't belong in an honest exclusive HF . There's way worse players in the corrupt pathetic HF however.

But your hatred is laughable. The guy retired 8 years ago. If his opinions hurt your feelings so much than stop listening to him, judging by the view counts on his Tennis Channel videos, nobody in the world except TTW is listening.


Try to get a thicker skin.
Click to expand...
so that nobody was roddick? i wasn't talking about him but i can see your bias towards fed's pigeons........what's funny is not even their actual fans come to defend them but fraudtards do........
 
ForehandCross

ForehandCross

Legend
Start da Game said:
so that nobody was roddick? i wasn't talking about him but i can see your bias towards fed's pigeons........what's funny is not even their actual fans come to defend them but fraudtards do........
Click to expand...
The last thing I am is a Fed ****. I like 2000s tennis , not the man who destroyed careers half my favourites and repeatedly denies one of my current favourites. (Wawrinka)

Start da Game said:
nobody american player
Click to expand...
Who else gets dragged around like that? Roddick. No one else.
 
F

flutzingitaway

Semi-Pro
Calling Roddick a nobody is disrespectful and completely wrong. Whether he and many others should be in the Hall of Fame is debateable. Under their current standards he absolutely does, but whether their standards are high enough is another matter.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Start da Game said:
i have problems with international tennis hall of fame........what is the purpose of its existence? is there a criterion as to who is inducted into the hall of fame?
Click to expand...
Click on this link:


Start da Game said:
i have issues with some nobody american player sitting beside sampras and laver in the same row in the tennis hall of frame........there were rumours about misuse of funds too.........i propose a permanent closure of this bogus tennis organisation, we do not require such an organisation to exist........
Click to expand...
Who's the 'nobody American player' you are referring to?
 
S

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
i was just guessing it would be some nobody american player sitting beside pete, happens to be roddick again :laughing: not my fault........
 
F

flutzingitaway

Semi-Pro
Mainad said:
Interesting that it's always Roddick who gets it in the neck when this subject comes up but nobody mentions Chang (same no.of Slams but no #1 ranking). Not that I have a problem with either of course.
Click to expand...
Roddick serves the alterior agenda in Fedalovic fan wars. Federer fans inflate him to make Federer look better. Djokovic and Nadal fans dismiss him as a no talent nothing who won a fluke slam, which is quite ridiculous, to push the argument Federer had no competition in his dominance years. He is a pawn in the bigger game, which sadly all of Roddick, Hewitt, Wawrinka, and even Murray are to some degree around here.

Chang serves no such agenda.
 
Subway Tennis

Subway Tennis

Legend
Start da Game said:
i have problems with international tennis hall of fame........what is the purpose of its existence? is there a criterion as to who is inducted into the hall of fame?

i have issues with some nobody american player sitting beside sampras and laver in the same row in the tennis hall of frame........there were rumours about misuse of funds too.........i propose a permanent closure of this bogus tennis organisation, we do not require such an organisation to exist........
Click to expand...
The Tennis Hall of Fame is in a very difficult position now. The decision-makers have set the bar very low with some of the inductions, and that has created an expectation for many players upon retirement.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are players who should have been inducted but have missed out because there may be personality conflicts with the HOF selection committee or they have simply been overlooked.

The United States' historical significance as a tennis nation is unquestioned, but the US-Centric baseball styled "Tennis Hall of Fame" is struggling for relevance now that tennis is such a global sport with Europe as it's epicentre.

The impression I get is that The Tennis Hall of Fame is a bit stuffy and silly, and full of part-timers who can't really be trusted with the job of being custodians of the history of the game.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Subway Tennis said:
The Tennis Hall of Fame is in a very difficult position now. The decision-makers have set the bar very low with some of the inductions, and that has created an expectation for many players upon retirement.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are players who should have been inducted but have missed out because there may be personality conflicts with the HOF selection committee or they have simply been overlooked.

The United States' historical significance as a tennis nation is unquestioned, but the US-Centric baseball styled "Tennis Hall of Fame" is struggling for relevance now that tennis is such a global sport with Europe as it's epicentre.

The impression I get is that The Tennis Hall of Fame is a bit stuffy and silly, and full of part-timers who can't really be trusted with the job of being custodians of the history of the game.
Click to expand...
Would you be interested in revamping it if you were offered the job? If so, what changes would you make??
 
BeatlesFan

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
flutzingitaway said:
Federer fans inflate him to make Federer look better.
Click to expand...
When people here claim Roddick was a lousy player with no groundstrokes (and some even ludicrously claim his serve wasn't any good), I merely point out he was a #1 ranked player. That alone negates he was "weak era" competition. That's not inflating Roddick, it's merely stating the truth. Roddick is head and shoulders above any player under 30 currently in the game.
 
S

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
Subway Tennis said:
The Hall of Fame is in a very difficult position now. The decision-makers have set the bar very low with some of the inductions, and that has created an expectation for many players upon retirement.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are players who should have been inducted but have missed out because there may be personality conflicts with the HOF selection committee or they have simply been overlooked.

The United States' historical significance as a tennis nation is unquestioned, but the US-Centric baseball styled "Hall of Fame" is struggling for relevance now that tennis is such a global sport with Europe as it's epicentre.

The impression I get is that The Hall of Fame is a bit stuffy and silly, and full of part-timers who can't really be trusted with the job of being custodians of the history of the game.
Click to expand...
yep, i want to go a step further and declare it a bogus organisation.........it needs to be put under scrutiny, their cash flow statements should be revealed to authorities, there could be misuse of funds happening there.........we needn't even go to their criterion of induction, it's a big joke........time to terminate its license if there is one, seize all the funds and declare it defunct........the building should be used as a tennis museum.........
 
F

flutzingitaway

Semi-Pro
BeatlesFan said:
When people here claim Roddick was a lousy player with no groundstrokes (and some even ludicrously claim his serve wasn't any good), I merely point out he was a #1 ranked player. That alone negates he was "weak era" competition. That's not inflating Roddick, it's merely stating the truth. Roddick is head and shoulders above any player under 30 currently in the game.
Click to expand...
I was not referring to you specifically, but I have seen posts that say things like Roddick would win 6-8 slams in any other era, or that without Federer he would dominate, which is IMO inflating him. Notice I did say both sides are guilty in some cases and the deflating and thrashing of Roddick is much more than the inflating by some people which I made fairly clearly in my post, but there is some of both that happen.
 
Subway Tennis

Subway Tennis

Legend
Mainad said:
Would you be interested in revamping it if you were offered the job? If so, what changes would you make??
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be up to the job. But if I were to make a suggestion, it would be to make the barrier for entry much, much higher for player inductees.

I would also make a carefully defines contributor category, for people who were legends in growing the game in other ways (legendary coaches, promoters etc etc).

What changes would you make (if any)?
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Start da Game said:
yep, i want to go a step further and declare it a bogus organisation.........it needs to be put under scrutiny, their cash flow statements should be revealed to authorities, there could be misuse of funds happening there.........we needn't even go to their criterion of induction, it's a big joke........time to terminate its license if there is one, seize all the funds and declare it defunct........the building should be used as a tennis museum.........
Click to expand...
Lol....why do you care so much if you don't place any value in it? ;)
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Subway Tennis said:
I wouldn't be up to the job. But if I were to make a suggestion, it would be to make the barrier for entry much, much higher for player inductees.
Click to expand...
By 'much, much higher' are you subscribing to the 6 Slam cut-off argument or going for higher still? Of course if that rule were to be implemented there would almost certainly be no further inductions until after each of the Big 3 retired.

Subway Tennis said:
I would also make a specific contributor category, for people who were legends in growing the game in other ways (legendary coaches etc etc).
Click to expand...
If you click on the link I provided (post #9) you will find there is provision for guys like that.

Subway Tennis said:
What changes would you make (if any)?
Click to expand...
It may sound like a cop-out but I kind of think they've already got a reasonably fair balance. It's not perfect I agree but It's the least imperfect one that I have come across. At the end of the day, it's the Hall of FAME and not the Hall of Who's Won The Most Slams.
 
DSH

DSH

G.O.A.T.
There are several players (men and women) who do not belong to that select list.

Unfortunately, economic power, political decisions, lobbying and chauvinism often have more influence than sporting achievements.
:censored:
 
F

flutzingitaway

Semi-Pro
Sukova's induction made me laugh. Not a legend in doubles, and not a slam in singles. She in for what exactly?

Noah is also a super weird choice. Basically seen as a fluke very weak winner of a singles slam, and definitely not a major great in doubles.

Stich's induction was kind of strange as well, but not as bad as those other 2.

Roddick, Chang, Kafelnikov, Martinez, Sabatini, Novotna, Ivanisevic, Pierce, all made it in. Some of those atleast probably deserved it but it seems every borderline automatically gets in and some even beneath that.

Watch I predict Krajicek, Vitas, Muster, Bruguera, Stosur, Schiavone, Ivanovic, Haarhuis, Eltingh, to start getting in soon too.
 
Enceladus

Enceladus

Legend
Start da Game said:
i have problems with international tennis hall of fame........what is the purpose of its existence? is there a criterion as to who is inducted into the hall of fame?

i have issues with some nobody american player sitting beside sampras and laver in the same row in the tennis hall of frame........there were rumours about misuse of funds too.........i propose a permanent closure of this bogus tennis organisation, we do not require such an organisation to exist........
Click to expand...
The purpose of THOF is to celebrate personalities - especially tennis players due to their successful career, but also other personalities who have influenced tennis.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Enceladus said:
Sukova won 9 grandslams in the women's doubles, she managed to complete a career Grand Slam, so she is definitely a legend in doubles. Thanks to her doubles results, she deserves membership in THOF.
Click to expand...
if you include her 5 mixed doubles titles that makes 14 in total plus she was ranked #1 (not sure for how many weeks though) so I guess she does. The IHOF's current guidelines for automatic inclusion on the ballet for doubles players state:

Doubles Players

  • Won at least 12 major doubles titles and was World Number 1 for at least 52 total weeks; or
  • Won at least 15 major doubles titles
Not sure if she fully meets those requirements for automatic inclusion but is obviously a popular enough choice to be voted in by the fans.
 
Last edited:
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Subway Tennis said:
What changes would you make (if any)?
Click to expand...
Actually, I've just thought of one. I recall a live feed between Roddick and his good pal Mardy Fish that they did at a US Open final a couple of years ago. It was just after Roddick's induction had been announced and Fish asked: "How come Roger Federer isn't already in (obviously not knowing about the 5 year retirement rule)?"

It got me thinking. Should the retirement rule be waived for guys like Federer who are clearly and obviously going to be inducted at some point?

Thoughts?
 
Phoenix1983

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Mainad said:
Actually, I've just thought of one. I recall a live feed between Roddick and his good pal Mardy Fish that they did at a US Open final a couple of years ago. It was just after Roddick's induction had been announced and Fish asked: "How come Roger Federer isn't already in (obviously not knowing about the 5 year retirement rule)?"

It got me thinking. Should the retirement rule be waived for guys like Federer who are clearly and obviously going to be inducted at some point?

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I agree with this - maybe the ITHOF rules should specify a certain level of achievement at which you automatically get inducted the year after you retire (barring doping or similar controversies etc.)
 
D

Djokodalerer31

Hall of Fame
When and if they will include Mark freaking Edmondson into ITHOF - is when ITHOF will completely lose all of its credibility...LOL
Or maybe they even did already and that somehow gets slipped by me...LMAO (no wonder then...)
 
Beacon Hill

Beacon Hill

Hall of Fame
I agree. To get in the Hall of Fame you should have at least had to win a major or been No. 1. Roddick does not deserve to be there.
 
Subway Tennis

Subway Tennis

Legend
Mainad said:
By 'much, much higher' are you subscribing to the 6 Slam cut-off argument or going for higher still? Of course if that rule were to be implemented there would almost certainly be no further inductions until after each of the Big 3 retired.



If you click on the link I provided (post #9) you will find there is provision for guys like that.



It may sound like a cop-out but I kind of think they've already got a reasonably fair balance. It's not perfect I agree but It's the least imperfect one that I have come across. At the end of the day, it's the Hall of FAME and not the Hall of Who's Won The Most Slams.
Click to expand...
You're right, bad choice of words with my description. I know they have that current version of the non-playing category, but it should be handled better. Who they do and don't let in is quite unusual sometimes imo.

I totally agree that in terms of determining who should go in, making it major-centric and assigning a single number would be a big, big mistake. Much more thought needs to go into it than that.

Mainad said:
Be interesting to see what they will do about Sharapova.
Click to expand...
Sharapova should be an absolute lock for induction (in my opinion). For me, it's not just a matter of whether she gets in, but them doing it in a timely manner. I don't have high hopes there (hopefully I'm proven wrong).

I can see them doing her induction in a similar messy, protracted way to how Yevgeny Kafelnikov's was handled.

Mainad said:
Actually, I've just thought of one. I recall a live feed between Roddick and his good pal Mardy Fish that they did at a US Open final a couple of years ago. It was just after Roddick's induction had been announced and Fish asked: "How come Roger Federer isn't already in (obviously not knowing about the 5 year retirement rule)?"

It got me thinking. Should the retirement rule be waived for guys like Federer who are clearly and obviously going to be inducted at some point?

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
This is a great idea, and would be a good way of preventing the backlog that has happened when ATGs all retire at similar times. The only issue I have is how the player reacts to something like an induction ceremony when they are still active, and whether it gives them too outsized a role / aura while still an active player.
 
Last edited:
Azure

Azure

G.O.A.T.
Enceladus said:
The purpose of THOF is to celebrate personalities - especially tennis players due to their successful career, but also other personalities who have influenced tennis.
Click to expand...
If that were the case, Bolletieri should not have been snubbed multiple times until they finally decided to let him in. The man was not in the good books of the powers that be and it was long - long overdue before they brought him in. Unfortunately, politics and power seem to be playing a needlessly bigger role than relevant, at least in such cases.
 
AceSalvo

AceSalvo

Legend
I'd put Roddick in HOF just based on that 09' Wimb final. LOL

Not sure what the crying is all about.
 
Last edited:
Enceladus

Enceladus

Legend
Azure said:
If that were the case, Bolletieri should not have been snubbed multiple times until they finally decided to let him in. The man was not in the good books of the powers that be and it was long - long overdue before they brought him in. Unfortunately, politics and power seem to be playing a needlessly bigger role than relevant, at least in such cases.
Click to expand...
Philippe Chatrier (the President of the ITF, one of the fathers of the Open era, during his tenure at the head of the ITF, tennis returned between to Olympic sports) or King Gustav V of Sweden (contributed to the development of tennis in Sweden) were introduced into the ITHOF.
 
Subway Tennis

Subway Tennis

Legend
Azure said:
If that were the case, Bolletieri should not have been snubbed multiple times until they finally decided to let him in. The man was not in the good books of the powers that be and it was long - long overdue before they brought him in. Unfortunately, politics and power seem to be playing a needlessly bigger role than relevant, at least in such cases.
Click to expand...
For me, Nick Bollettieri not being in the Hall of Fame is probably the single best example of the politics and the poor decision-making at work in the ITHF. Hard to imagine a single person who has had a bigger influence in shaping the playing style and technique of the modern game.
 
F

flutzingitaway

Semi-Pro
Subway Tennis said:
For me, Nick Bollettieri not being in the Hall of Fame is probably the single best example of the politics and the poor decision-making at work in the ITHF. Hard to imagine a single person who has had a bigger influence in shaping the playing style and technique of the modern game.
Click to expand...
Many people on the inside of the sport don't like him and have grudges against him. That is probably why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top