So is Djokovic set to drop out of the top 10 during the North American swing and not qualify for the WTF?

[StrongRule]

Djokovic would be #4 in the race right now and a shoe in for the ATP Finals if they actually awarded him his 2000 points like they would have done in any other year. Politics is screwing with the sport. Now he's #10. What a joke, and it's a joke that the ATP voted for this.

Wimbledon as a tournament turned into a joke. This "slam" (which now more looks like a 250 tournament anyway) should be cancelled at this point.

Real slam count, without Wimbledons and Djokovic Opens:

Nadal - 18
Djokovic - 13
Federer - 12

 

[NoleFam]

No, the ATP acted to protect its players. Wimbledon chose to ban certain players based on nationality.

The ATP responded saying that if you are preventing certain players from accruing points, then no players can accrue points. They put all players on theoretically equal footing.

Their decision hurt the players, not protected them. Wimbledon doesn't give a damn about points. They care about money and they got what they wanted either way. The players were robbed including Van Rijthoven and Kyrgios, who both would have jumped far in the rankings.

 

[Ogi44]

Does Wimbledon count as a slam win this year for the WTF given all the bans and then stripping of points?

Yes

 

[jm1980]

all they said in daily express is - some more political support for Novak to enter US. Nothing else.

The "political support" Novak is getting is from the opposition party, which makes it even more unlikely that the current administration will change the rules

 

[FrontHeadlock]

Wimbledon as a tournament turned into a joke. This "slam" (which now more looks like a 250 tournament anyway) should be cancelled at this point.

Real slam count, without Wimbledons and Djokovic Opens:

Nadal - 18
Djokovic - 13
Federer - 12

We've also adjusted by excluding the AO for historical reasons. True Major count:

Nadal - 18
Federer -6
Djokovic - 5

 

[NoleFam]

Wimbledon as a tournament turned into a joke. This "slam" (which now more looks like a 250 tournament anyway) should be cancelled at this point.

Real slam count, without Wimbledons and Djokovic Opens:

Nadal - 18
Djokovic - 13
Federer - 12

 

[FrontHeadlock]

Their decision hurt the players, not protected them. Wimbledon doesn't give a damn about points. They care about money and they got what they wanted either way. The players were robbed including Van Rijthoven and Kyrgios, who both would have jumped far in the rankings.

Again, your beef should be with Wimbledon.

 

[TennisFan3]

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. We will eventually find out, but I am not taking some bs website called The Daily Express as anywhere near factual.

Not saying it's factual. But there is a "reasonable possibility" that Novak will be allowed to play in the UsOpen.
Those who claim that he certainly will NOT might be in for a rude shock.

 

[Rattie]

Not saying it's factual. But there is a "reasonable possibility" that Novak will be allowed to play in the UsOpen.
Those who claim that he certainly will NOT might be in for a rude shock.

Unless the US Government change their rules, there is no possibility.

 

[Ogi44]

Perhaps, but I'm not sure they want to take it that far. They'd have to declare it as not a "Grand Slam Tournament", otherwise players who qualify on the basis of winning (including for doubles) might sue. It would also alter the record books. Like what if Matthew Ebden goes on to win doubles titles at the other 3 Majors, but never again wins Wimbledon? Does he have the career Grand Slam?

Atp can decide not to award points in Atp rankings, but cant violate the existing contract with ITF guaranteeing slam winner the participation at ATP finals in case he is top 20. This agreement was established as compromise when ITF abolished grand slam cup in 1999. And of course, Atp dont have any control over 4 majors and David Cup. Is laughable to think that they can somehow strip the grand slam status to any of the majors.

 

[TennisFan3]

Unless the US Government change their rules, there is no possibility.

Again - not sure why this my way, or highway approach.
There are plenty of loopholes. This is not Australia, and no one cares about Tennis or Djokovic.
He just has to get the USTA and a few other top level folks to give him permission. Everything in the US works on appeal. It's a just society governed by law - unlike a lot of other countries.

 

[jm1980]

Again - not sure why this my way, or highway approach.
There are plenty of loopholes. This is not Australia, and no one cares about Tennis or Djokovic.
He just has to get the USTA and a few other top level folks to give him permission. Everything in the US works on appeal. It's a just society governed by law - unlike a lot of other countries.

You realize plenty of other unvaccinated athletes have tried and failed to enter the US, right?

As a Novak fan, I hope the rules change but that's unlikely, and him getting through on an exemption is even more unlikely

 

[intrepidish]

Again - not sure why this my way, or highway approach.
There are plenty of loopholes. This is not Australia, and no one cares about Tennis or Djokovic.
He just has to get the USTA and a few other top level folks to give him permission. Everything in the US works on appeal. It's a just society governed by law - unlike a lot of other countries.

That's not how it works at all. There are very clear guidelines and they are published. The USTA is next to irrelevant and that's if they actually wanted to try which they don't and with good reason. I don't know what you mean by 'appeal.' Here's the relevant info from the US CDC:


Categories of noncitizen nonimmigrants that meet the criteria for an exception under the Proclamation and CDC’s Amended Order include:

• Persons on diplomatic or official foreign government travel
• Children under 18 years of age
• Persons with documented medical contraindications to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine
• Participants in certain COVID-19 vaccine trials
• Persons issued a humanitarian or emergency exception
• Persons with valid visas [excluding B-1 (business) or B-2 (tourism) visas] who are citizens of a foreign country with limited COVID-19 vaccine availability (See list for updates effective June 28, 2022)
• Members of the U.S. Armed Forces or their spouses or children (under 18 years of age)
• Sea crew members traveling with to a C-1 and D nonimmigrant visa
• Persons whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, Secretary of Transportation, or Secretary of Homeland Security (or their designees)

As you can see, only the last provision offers any help even theoretically and it's unlikely in the extreme.

Unlike in most other comparable countries, there's not even a Minister of Sport in the US. You would need the Secretary of State, Transportation or Homeland Security to actually go to bat for a tennis player as somehow being vital to the national interest of the US. That's absurd on its face and of course there's not a single instance of them taking even a slight interest in more popular sports with people in similar situations.

 

[Rattie]

That's not how it works at all. There are very clear guidelines and they are published. It's not my specific field of law but I've read them and so have thousands of lawyers. The USTA is next to irrelevant and that's if they actually wanted to try which they don't and with good reason.

I don't know what you mean by 'appeal.' Here's the relevant info from the US CDC:


Categories of noncitizen nonimmigrants that meet the criteria for an exception under the Proclamation and CDC’s Amended Order include:

• Persons on diplomatic or official foreign government travel
• Children under 18 years of age
• Persons with documented medical contraindications to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine
• Participants in certain COVID-19 vaccine trials
• Persons issued a humanitarian or emergency exception
• Persons with valid visas [excluding B-1 (business) or B-2 (tourism) visas] who are citizens of a foreign country with limited COVID-19 vaccine availability (See list for updates effective June 28, 2022)
• Members of the U.S. Armed Forces or their spouses or children (under 18 years of age)
• Sea crew members traveling with to a C-1 and D nonimmigrant visa
• Persons whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, Secretary of Transportation, or Secretary of Homeland Security (or their designees)

As you can see, only the last provision offers any help even theoretically and it's unlikely in the extreme.

Unlike in most other comparable countries, there's not even a Minister of Sport in the US. You would need the Secretary of State, Transportation or Homeland Security to actually go to bat for a tennis player. That's absurd on its face and of course there's not a single instance of them even taking a slight interest in more popular sports with people in similar situations.

I wouldn’t bother. Some have their heads firmly stuck in the sand on this. Hope springs eternal I guess.

 

[jm1980]

That's not how it works at all. There are very clear guidelines and they are published. The USTA is next to irrelevant and that's if they actually wanted to try which they don't and with good reason. I don't know what you mean by 'appeal.' Here's the relevant info from the US CDC:


Categories of noncitizen nonimmigrants that meet the criteria for an exception under the Proclamation and CDC’s Amended Order include:

• Persons on diplomatic or official foreign government travel
• Children under 18 years of age
• Persons with documented medical contraindications to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine
• Participants in certain COVID-19 vaccine trials
• Persons issued a humanitarian or emergency exception
• Persons with valid visas [excluding B-1 (business) or B-2 (tourism) visas] who are citizens of a foreign country with limited COVID-19 vaccine availability (See list for updates effective June 28, 2022)
• Members of the U.S. Armed Forces or their spouses or children (under 18 years of age)
• Sea crew members traveling with to a C-1 and D nonimmigrant visa
• Persons whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, Secretary of Transportation, or Secretary of Homeland Security (or their designees)

As you can see, only the last provision offers any help even theoretically and it's unlikely in the extreme.

Unlike in most other comparable countries, there's not even a Minister of Sport in the US. You would need the Secretary of State, Transportation or Homeland Security to actually go to bat for a tennis player as somehow being vital to the national interest of the US. That's absurd on its face and of course there's not a single instance of them taking even a slight interest in more popular sports with people in similar situations.

IMO he should have gone for some sort of medical exemption, i.e.: contraindication to receiving a vaccine. That was a valid exemption in Australia as well

 

[intrepidish]

IMO he should have gone for some sort of medical exemption, i.e.: contraindication to receiving a vaccine. That was a valid exemption in Australia as well

It wasn't valid in Australia either in fact and there were 2 letters from the feds explaining that to Tennis Austalia and Djokovic. Contraindication to a receiving vaccine was never intended to be someone simply contracting covid right before he was set to fly out and several weeks into his visa process by that time no less.

In the US, it's even more clear:

• Medical contraindications to COVID-19 vaccination include immediate or severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) after a previous dose or known allergy to a component of a COVID-19 vaccine.
• Objections to vaccination based on religious or moral convictions do not qualify for an exception under the Presidential Proclamation and CDC’s Amended Order.

 

[jm1980]

It wasn't valid in Australia either in fact and there were 2 letters from the feds explaining that to Tennis Austalia and Djokovic. Contraindication to a receiving vaccine was never intended to be someone simply contracting covid right before he was set to fly out and several weeks into his visa process by that time no less.

In the US, it's even more clear:

• Medical contraindications to COVID-19 vaccination include immediate or severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) after a previous dose or known allergy to a component of a COVID-19 vaccine.
• Objections to vaccination based on religious or moral convictions do not qualify for an exception under the Presidential Proclamation and CDC’s Amended Order.

That's what I meant, he could have argued he was severely allergic to the vaccine, instead of the prior infection thing he went for

 

[intrepidish]

That's what I meant, he could have argued he was severely allergic to the vaccine, instead of the prior infection thing he went for

Well, it's preferable if you are actually severely allergic. However, if Djokovic isn't severely allergic, that would be a reckless move on his part and I'm sure his lawyers would have counseled against it.

Have a look at how it's described:


Airlines or airline operators must confirm that any Covered Individual claiming this exception has a signed letter from a licensed physician documenting a medical contraindication to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Airlines must review the letter (paper or digital copy) for the following essential elements:

• Must be signed and dated on official letterhead that contains the name, address, and phone number of the licensed physician who signed the letter.
• Must clearly state that the passenger has a contraindication to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. The name of the COVID-19 vaccine product and the medical condition must both be listed.
  • Medical contraindications to COVID-19 vaccination include immediate or severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) after a previous dose or known allergy to a component of a COVID-19 vaccine.
  • Objections to vaccination based on religious or moral convictions do not qualify for an exception under the Presidential Proclamation and CDC’s Amended Order.

Airlines and aircraft operators may, at their discretion, require medical consultation by a third party for persons requesting an exception based on a medical contraindication to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.




If there were even the slightest irregularity (and we are talking about a very prominent case here which would attract heightened scrutiny), Djokovic would have his reputation and credibility damaged and face legal consequences well beyond what occurred in Australia.

 

[BlueB]

No, the ATP acted to protect its players. Wimbledon chose to ban certain players based on nationality.

The ATP responded saying that if you are preventing certain players from accruing points, then no players can accrue points. They put all players on theoretically equal footing.

Wimbledon instigated. The ATP was forced to protect its players. If it doesn't, then it serves no purpose.

Wimbledon could have easily reversed its decision rather than double down.

Actually, proper response would have been to freeze the last year's W points for those who didn't play. Same like they did with Covid.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

To me the Vaccination rule is NOT unjust. Imagine if everyone thought like Novak Djokovic - there would have been an additional 20 Million plus Covid deaths with no one getting vaccine.

However, the top folks and the rich will obviously have a way out. They do have a privileged life and normal rules don't apply.

Its a false assumption that Covid vaccines stop deaths and severe symptoms etc. I've seen deaths of young people.
Covid vaccines are rushed and hence don't work. They don't even stop the spread or infection so mandates don't make sense.
Death ratio actually depends upon what kind of virus variant is in the play.