Players tanking matches!!

Buckethead

Buckethead

Banned
What do you guys think about this subject?Does it happen or not?
IMHO ,i think it does happen ,and a lot.
Some people have to fly next day,or even the same day,they don't want to miss the fly,then,what happens,they don't even compete.(You all know about this example,right?)
Sometimes,they just defend the amount of points they needed,then they just look at the next tournament and think"I just better put all my efforts at next tournament where i can score more points,and make more money",i am sure many lower ranked players think like that.
Now ,to give examples of tanking matches and just trying to do better at more well known tournaments or resting for the better ones i'll put a few examples such;

Soderling VS Llodra??? Soderling Davis Cup and rest because of TE
Roddick VS Querrey?? AR has to go to Dubai
Federer VS Herbaty?Cincy year....Fed had just won Canada,Cincy too hot,US Open coming.
Feel free to give your examples.
 
SLD76 said:
fed tanked in Montreal agaisnt Tsonga.

tanking happens.
Click to expand...

No ,against Tsonga was just carelessness,and again his thought of winning before it happened,and we all know you are up 5x1 it's pretty much done,but he didn't care,and took a turn around by Tsonga.
 
The last tournament before a Slam maybe, but I don't think most guys tank one week's tournament for the next week's. It wouldn't make any sense. They can gain points in the tournament they're in...
 
What do you mean "does it happen or not"? Uhhh, of course it happens, players have admitted it happening, this is sport. These things happen.
 
undcl.jpg

2ekiuk0.jpg

u54it.jpg
 
Roddick isn't going to Dubai. He doesn't tank; he'd rather scrap and relishes a battle.

Federer tanked in Cincy against Murray in 2006.
 
Clydey2times said:
Of course he did. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
Click to expand...

I don't believe tanking happens. I just believe that someone can decide, today's not my day, I've played a ton of matches, and if it doesn't come easy, I'll try, but if it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.. Like a bit indifferent to a match.

That's what also happened at Cincy, and therefore I don't value that victory much, but Murray has 5 more victories to show for the fact that he's a tough one for Roger.

Anyway, on the subject of tanking: I don't think it happens, not regularly at least. It's their job. I don't 'tank' at my job either.
 
Fed would never tank a non slam event. It just would never ever in a million years happen. right? right?!! :confused:
 
I don't think arod tanks matches. I think he needs to keep his ranking in the top 8 so as to get decent draws. his grand slam draws became very bad when he fell out of the top 4. He also gets confident, and he is a confidence player, when he wins titles. I think he wanted Memphis because he didn't get San Jose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They can't afford tanking. Especially the lower ranked guys, who never really have any kind of guarantee of gaining any points in the next tournament.

And if you're a good player, a tanked match could create problems with your H2H against someone. This would destroy your reputation of being a decent player, at least on any tennis forum. Besides, top players are usually pretty serious with their job, and they probably don't think stuff like, "I'm gonna miss my flight if I don't donate this match to my opponent right now. I think I'll do that, even though I could easily win this match" :)
 
joeri888 said:
I don't believe tanking happens. I just believe that someone can decide, today's not my day, I've played a ton of matches, and if it doesn't come easy, I'll try, but if it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.. Like a bit indifferent to a match.

That's what also happened at Cincy, and therefore I don't value that victory much, but Murray has 5 more victories to show for the fact that he's a tough one for Roger.

Anyway, on the subject of tanking: I don't think it happens, not regularly at least. It's their job. I don't 'tank' at my job either.
Click to expand...

Murray had played more matches than Federer in the lead up to that match, so that excuse really doesn't add up. Murray was more fatigued and was, at that time, nowhere near as fit as Federer.
 
I don't know how anyone can see Fed's Montreal loss as a tank. It's more wasteful to just throw a match away after leading 5-1 than to win the match and then just withdraw from the tournament.

It was an abysmal, mind-boggling loss - but not a tank.
 
Buckethead said:
Sometimes,they just defend the amount of points they needed,then they just look at the next tournament and think"I just better put all my efforts at next tournament where i can score more points,and make more money",i am sure many lower ranked players think like that.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. For many lower ranked players, the story is earning respect and recognition, and intentionally losing a match may cause other, higher-ranked players to think badly about them. Also, it may be detrimental mentally if they lose early in the tournament they tanked to get to, if they know they might have had a shot at the player they tanked against.
 
Hey Clydey, do *you* know what tanking is?


Its not about going out and being served a double or triple bagel. Its about your effort level on the court.

I saw that Montreal match. Fed was playing D level tennis. As was Tsonga. Then all of sudden Tsonga decided he wanted to win.

Fed continued to sleepwalk.

After the match Fed said something to the effect of "well, its not like I came to Montreal just to get some matchplay or practice, I came here to try to win the tournament"

translation? "this match didnt mean a whole hell of a lot to me"


Tank, pure and simple.

At this stage of Fed's career, not that many tourney's outside of majors really matter. I'm not saying his effort is Serena-esque outside of a major, but really, you have to suspect alot of top 10 players effort level outside of a major. Except maybe Nadal.


........... I just believe that someone can decide, today's not my day, I've played a ton of matches, and if it doesn't come easy, I'll try, but if it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.. Like a bit indifferent to a match.
Click to expand...

I agree completely and thats what Im trying to convey to Clydey who doesnt understand what tanking on the pro level means.

However, I do not believe Murray tanked that Cincy match. That match was too important. 1) its a HC tourney going into the biggest HC slam of the year 2) Its agaisnt the 5 time defending champ of that HC slam. 3) A murray win (perhaps?) sends a message to Fed going into the HC slam

Murray got moked in Cincy, plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
I'll always believe something was fishy with Fed in the 09 USO.

Wasn't necesarily a tank, but something was up.
 
SLD76 said:
Hey Clydey, do *you* know what tanking is?


Its not about going out and being served a double or triple bagel. Its about your effort level on the court.

I saw that Montreal match. Fed was playing D level tennis. As was Tsonga. Then all of sudden Tsonga decided he wanted to win.

Fed continued to sleepwalk.

After the match Fed said something to the effect of "well, its not like I came to Montreal just to get some matchplay or practice, I came here to try to win the tournament"

translation? "this match didnt mean a whole hell of a lot to me"


Tank, pure and simple.

At this stage of Fed's career, not that many tourney's outside of majors really matter. I'm not saying his effort is Serena-esque outside of a major, but really, you have to suspect alot of top 10 players effort level outside of a major. Except maybe Nadal.
Click to expand...

What a load of rubbish. Tanking is not playing to win. You do not go 5-1 up in the final set and then decide not to try anymore. Then, when 6-5 and three match points down, you do not go all out to save those matchpoints and then randomly decide to tank the tiebreak.

You really do spout some utter nonsense. I have absolutely no patience for ignorant tools like you, who seemingly have nothing but disdain for common sense. Tanking from 5-1 up in the final set? Go away and get a clue.
 
Last edited:
FEd served like crap, and played some very poor shots on big points. And Delpo blasted him off the court.


Thats what happened in USO 09
 
decades said:
So I guess if it was a GS final up 5-1 he could lose right?
Click to expand...

Of course he could lose. Would he lose? Probably not. That has nothing to do with tanking, though. If he was tanking, he would never be up 5-1 in the final set in the first place. It simply wouldn't happen. Use some common sense.
 
Tanking is not playing to win. You do not go 5-1 up in the final set and then decide not to try anymore.
Click to expand...


Did you read what I wrote? I said Fed played like crap that match, Tsonga played better, Fed continued to sleepwalk. Ive watched alot of Fed matches. I know the levels of play he is capable of. Believe me when I tell you, that effort level wasnt there from the word go.

You have this idea that tanking means a player will go out and get bagelled and breadsticked. Sometimes players use a match to work on something on their game, not even caring about the end result of the match. Thats a tank to, but a tank with a purpose.

Hell, when all these commentators were making such a big deal out of the Montreal match for the Fed semi with Tsonga I already knew that match would be completely irrelevant given the way Fed played that Montreal tourney vs the way he played the AO.

Fed didnt "decide" to lose, but he sure as hell really didnt care about the win, judging by the way he played.

ETA: You think Fed got it through his thick skull that he can't out hit Del Pot?
Click to expand...

We shall see I suppose.
 
SLD76 said:
Did you read what I wrote? I said Fed played like crap that match, Tsonga played better, Fed continued to sleepwalk. Ive watched alot of Fed matches. I know the levels of play he is capable of. Believe me when I tell you, that effort level wasnt there from the word go.

You have this idea that tanking means a player will go out and get bagelled and breadsticked. Sometimes players use a match to work on something on their game, not even caring about the end result of the match. Thats a tank to, but a tank with a purpose.

Hell, when all these commentators were making such a big deal out of the Montreal match for the Fed semi with Tsonga I already knew that match would be completely irrelevant given the way Fed played that Montreal tourney vs the way he played the AO.

Fed didnt "decide" not to lose, but he sure as hell really didnt care about the win, judging by the way he played.
Click to expand...

That is not tanking. It's not tanking just because a player doesn't play their best. By that logic, Federer tanked most of the 08 season.

I'll say it again, playing poorly is not tanking. That has to be the most idiotic definition of the term I've ever seen. You have randomly decided that the effort wasn't there simply because he didn't play well.

If he wasn't trying for the whole match, why did he go all out to save 3 match points at 6-5 down? What you are saying makes no sense. Federer's own actions completely contradict you.
 
Again read what I said. Its not just about level of play, its about effort. Like, you cant put your finger on it but you know when a player isnt playing full out to try and win a match.

And watching that match in Montreal, thats what happened.

Ive seen Fed win, Ive seen Fed lose. Ive seen him play his heart out and lose.

Montreal was not one of those matches.

Again, read what someone eloquently stated on the matter:

uote:
........... I just believe that someone can decide, today's not my day, I've played a ton of matches, and if it doesn't come easy, I'll try, but if it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.. Like a bit indifferent to a match.
Click to expand...

As I've said before, outside of some extremely money motivated cynical players, I would doubt the sincerity of effort of everyone on tour outside of a major. And at this stage of Fed's career, some of these tourneys will be nothing but paid practice.
 
Last edited:
SLD76 said:
Again read what I said. Its not just about level of play, its about effort. Like, you cant put your finger on it but you know when a player isnt playing full out to try and win a match.

And watching that match in Montreal, thats what happened.

Ive seen Fed win, Ive seen Fed lose. Ive seen him play his heart out and lose.

Montreal was not one of those matches.
Click to expand...

You're talking as though you're the only one who saw the match. And you ignored my question.

If he wasn't putting in any effort, why did he save 3 match points?
 
If he wasn't putting in any effort, why did he save 3 match points?
Click to expand...


Again, "tanking" isnt about just not trying at all.

But it is about not trying your absolute best.

By your definition, if a player decides to tank they may as well not even pick up the racket.
 
Last edited:
SLD76 said:
Again, "tanking" isnt about just not trying at all.

But it is about not trying your absolute best.

By your definition, if a player decides to tank they may as well not even pick up the racket.
Click to expand...

No, that is the definition of tanking. It means not trying to win. You're talking rubbish and your argument is becoming more and more ridiculous.

You just said that tanking is not trying your absolute best. By that definition, Federer tanks every tournament except the majors. Right or wrong? Most people agree that Federer only goes all out at the majors.
 
You just said that tanking is not trying your absolute best. By that definition, Federer tanks every tournament except the majors. Right or wrong? Most people agree that Federer only goes all out at the majors.
Click to expand...


Isnt that what I said 4 posts ago? Didnt I say that at this stage of his career aside from Majors and a few tourneys outside of the majors, some matches will be little more than paid practice for Federer?

So now you understand?
 
SLD76 said:
Isnt that what I said 4 posts ago? Didnt I say that at this stage of his career aside from Majors and a few tourneys outside of the majors, some matches will be little more than paid practice for Federer?

So now you understand?
Click to expand...

Now I understand? Yes, I understand that you're as bright as a dark room. You don't know the definition of tanking. Only an utter moron would say that Federer tanks all the tournaments outside of the majors, yet he still wins many of them. It makes no sense.

Me: "Federer just won Cinci."

You: "Yeah, but he was tanking."

Me: "What?"

You: "He tanked Cinci."

Me: "But he won the whole tournament..."

You: "Still tanked."

Me: "Are you mental?"
Click to expand...

I have never, ever heard a player be accused of tanking a tournament that he's just won. For all intents and purposes, that is what you are suggesting.
 
Now I understand? Yes, I understand that you're as bright as a dark room. You don't know the definition of tanking. Only an utter moron would say that Federer tanks all the tournaments outside of the majors, yet he still wins many of them. It makes no sense.
Click to expand...



First of all. We disagree on a definition of "tank". I dont mean Fed has absolutely no intention of winning. What I am saying is that outside of a major and a few tourneys, 'Im saying his effort level isn't the same.

Point blank, I dont think he *cares* about winning some tourneys as much as others at this point in his career. He doesn't completely phone it in like Serena outside of a major, but again, I think he cares more about some tourneys, like say a Masters tourney one week before a major.

Does that mean he intends to lose the match before it is played? No

What it means is that beating Fed at say Basel , you are probably not getting the 'best' of his play like you would at say Wimbledon, at this stage in his career.

Do you understand that???

And yeah, Fed even without 100% max effort will still win some of those matches, because he is good enough to.

Again, your definition of 'tanking' or rather your context is different than mine.

Thats why I say he 'tanked' Montreal . That was not the 'best' of him, either by effort or level.
 
SLD76 said:
First of all. We disagree on a definition of "tank". I dont mean Fed has absolutely no intention of winning. What I am saying is that outside of a major and a few tourneys, 'Im saying his effort level isn't the same.

Point blank, I dont think he *cares* about winning some tourneys as much as others at this point in his career. He doesn't completely phone it in like Serena outside of a major, but again, I don't think he cares more about some tourneys, like say a Masters tourney one week before a major.

Does that mean he intends to lose the match before it is played? No

What it means is that beating Fed at say Basel , you are probably not getting the 'best' of his play like you would at say Wimbledon, at this stage in his career.

Do you understand that???

And yeah, Fed even without 100% max effort will still win some of those matches, because he is good enough to.

Again, your definition of 'tanking' or rather your context is different than mine.

Thats why I say he 'tanked' Montreal . That was not the 'best' of him, either by effort or level.
Click to expand...

That is not tanking. No one defines tanking that way, other than you. It's a ridiculous. You cannot tank a match or a tournament and still win it. By definition, it is impossible.

If Federer beats, say, Djokovic in the sem-finals of a 250 tournament, no one in their right mind would say that he tanked the match. It makes no sense. You cannot win a match and then be accused of tanking the match. How can you fail to see how stupid that sounds?
 
You know what.

let me put it this way since its the actual word 'tank' that you seem to have a problem with,


Do you concede that there are times when maybe, just maybe, a player is not playing up to their level best, and that it has nothing to do with an opponent?

In effect, do you ever believe any tennis player "phones it in" during a match?

Do you believe every player is playing 100% balls out to win every match?

If you believe that about tennis, thats your right.

I disagree.
 
SLD76 said:
You know what.

let me put it this way..


Do you concede that there are times when maybe, just maybe, a player is not playing up to their level best, and that it has nothing to do with an opponent.

In effect, do you ever believe any tennis player "phones it in" during a match?

Do you believe every player is playing 100% balls out to win every match?

If you believe that about tennis, thats your right.
Click to expand...

No, I don't believe that. That isn't the issue, though. What you are describing is not tanking. You have the definition all wrong. You cannot, by definition, tank a match and still win.
 
Clydey2times said:
Of course he could lose. Would he lose? Probably not. That has nothing to do with tanking, though. If he was tanking, he would never be up 5-1 in the final set in the first place. It simply wouldn't happen. Use some common sense.
Click to expand...

thank you. there is no way he would lose up 5-1 in gs close out set. fed tanks by not taking tournaments or certain matches seriously. He either wants rest or he doesn't want to face certain players unless a big cup is on the line.
 
No, I don't believe that


Well, since you dont, I agree with you on that.

And its my opinion thats what happened in Montreal.


Again, as someone else said , not every effort level is the same for every match.

fed tanks by not taking tournaments or certain matches seriously.
Click to expand...


ive been trying to explain that. thank you. Thats what I meant by my context of the word "tank"
 
Last edited:
decades said:
thank you. there is no way he would lose up 5-1 in gs close out set. fed tanks by not taking tournaments or certain matches seriously. He either wants rest or he doesn't want to face certain players unless a big cup is on the line.
Click to expand...

That isn't tanking. You cannot win a match and still tank it. By definition, that is impossible. When have you ever seen a player be accused of tanking a match that he has won?
 
Clydey..ok, we will change the word/phrase from "tank" to "phone it in" since you have a problem with context.

So, Federer "phoned it in" agaisnt Tsonga in Montreal.

Now the question is, do you agree or disagree?

I agree.
 
SLD76 said:
Clydey..ok, we will change the word/phrase from "tank" to "phone it in" since you have a problem with context.

So, Federer "phoned it in" agaisnt Tsonga in Montreal.

Now the question is, do you agree or disagree?

I agree.
Click to expand...

I'd say he wasn't as motivated as he could have been. He didn't just decide at 5-1 up that he didn't want to win the match, though. You don't get to that stage and not want to close it out.
 
Clydey2times said:
Murray had played more matches than Federer in the lead up to that match, so that excuse really doesn't add up. Murray was more fatigued and was, at that time, nowhere near as fit as Federer.
Click to expand...
That match was a dismal performance from Federer who had played 4 consecutive 3 set matches in toronto the week before. I remember after the match, no one was taking the result seriously and everyone expected Federer to be the favorite for the US Open and that definitely turned out to be a safe bet.

btw you are wrong but Murray having played more matches. Federer was playing his 8th match in 9 days.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say he wasn't as motivated as he could have been.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Thank you. Thats all I was trying to say from the start.

And I will put it even stronger.

He phoned that match in.

Yes, I already conceded to you the word 'tank' since you have a problem with the context in which I used it.
 
I think people are using the word 'tanking' too casually. Tanking by definition means to make NO effort ( or little effort) to win a game and even intentionally lose. It DOES NOT MEAN not trying your hardest. Otherwise every player would be a tanker. There is no player who has always given 100%.

As an example, Fed did not tank the final set of AO 2009 . He didn't given it 100% for sure, but it wouldn't be called a tank. In fact I doubt that players with the mental calibre of Nadal or Federer would every really 'tank' because no matter how inconsequential the match, the drive to win is always there. As Joeri put it, they might decide to not try as hard as they would normally. On the other hand, I would think that someone like Safin has most certainly tanked at some point.
 
Justdoit10 said:
That match was a dismal performance from Federer who had played 4 consecutive 3 set matches in toronto the week before. I remember after the match, no one was taking the result seriously and everyone expected Federer to be the favorite for the US Open.
Click to expand...

It was a dismal performance from both players. I don't care how seriously people took the match. There wasn't an excuse for the loss. There's a reason Murray was only 1 of 2 people to beat Federer that year.

As I said, Murray had played more tennis than Federer in the lead up to that math. If anyone was going to have fatigue as an excuse, it was Murray.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kraggy
Can tanking points/games be a good strategy?
Replies
6
Views
852
jigar
jigar
Third Serve
  • Poll Poll
Do players actually tank matches to duck opponents?
2
Replies
80
Views
3K
Gt86
G
J
Tanking theory vs reality and 3 setters vs 5 setters
Replies
6
Views
1K
Rhino
Rhino
kishnabe
Tomic and his tanking strategy
Replies
15
Views
1K
The_Order
The_Order
S
Federer's matches against other top 3 players outside the slams
Replies
3
Views
1K
tudwell
T
Back
Top