Tennis writer exposes blatant favoritism and conflicts of interest in Australia Open
- Thread starter Elektra
- Start date
Mr Feeny
Hall of Fame
Not necessarily that. Pat Cash has always had something against Federer.
Nobody else has said anything untoward.
VB really clutching at straws. Too bad, their idol is 4 slams short of the old man. And they'e melting downnnnnnn.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
I was talking about fan wise. I don’t put to much stock in what any journalist writes because they will write whatever gets the most clicks.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Do you even have to ask?
Especially a certain brigade...
If you can’t join them, the next best thing......discredit them.
zalive
Hall of Fame
Temperature set at 23-24 degrees didn't favour Cilic. But he was doing well under conditions once he adjusted and court was still fast enough for him to make winners just like playing outdoors, so no complaint. It's adjusting to conditions which did look like a main reason for losing the first set that made the difference.
As for the wet bulb or whatever it is I'm not in the knowledge of this, but I'm interested in ruling. I didn't hear organizers told they made their decision under a strict ITF ruling as being obliged to. The explanation sounded to me that it was their decision rather than obligation - after all, they didn't do it prior to this in similar conditions. But you miss the other point. They certainly had the freedom to make this decision much earlier, without waiting for the humidity meter or whatever to confirm the absolute necessity (or obligation) to this decision at the last minute. In my view they should and must have made it earlier, for fairness reasons. As for majority, it wouldn't make much difference because what majority knows and understands is in the end that roof got closed. So if avoiding Halep incident scenario was the reason they had their justification to call the roof closing in advance.
I'm more amazed that something similar like with Halep didn't happen eariler, as I can't imagine that daytime schedule conditions were not worse than conditions during ladies finals match. Yet closing the roof was not done even during daytime matches throughout the tournament.
All being said, I still see no justification for the late decision. And I don't care for 'how spectators/fans would react' BS reasons. Players need to be protected if conditions are severe anyhow, but they need to be informed in advance, to provide them with needed peace and time to do proper preparations suited to the occasion. These are real priorities.
Last edited:
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
The article quoted by the other poster has the AO's statement that the tournament referee acted on the expert advice of the Meteorology service and the Chief Medical Officer. Who are all Federer fans with the expert knowledge to know that the conditions would favour Federer indoors even though people like Courier and Hewitt can't even agree on that.
Out on Twitter there are people still posting tweets that Cilic was not told about the decision even when it's pointed out to them that this is demonstrably not true. I know it's a trivial issue really but there used to be a time when people felt embarrassed at being caught out in an error, even in something of minor importance. Now they just seem unaware that facts have any importance. What has happened to us?
N
nikdom
Guest
Tweet from Priority1 - the company that customizes Roger's racquets and strings them -
https://twitter.com/priority1/status/958803401034424320
https://twitter.com/priority1/status/958803401034424320
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
Clearly Priority 1 are all part of the conspiracy...
So you mean you want people to believe Roger's stringers when they don't believe Cilic? Good luck with that.
LOL. You beat me to it.
N
nikdom
Guest
So you mean you want people to believe Roger's stringers when they don't believe Cilic? Good luck with that.
I don't want anything. I'm just posting something I thought relevant to the topic.
Everyone is free to believe what they want
I don't want anything. I'm just posting something I thought relevant to the topic.
Everyone is free to believe what they want
True dat!
augustobt
Legend
Priority1 is on Fedr payroll1!1!
tenisdecente
Hall of Fame
I dont know where to begin here, because honestly I dont see a single fair point and this just look for me as plain and simple butthurt. Sorry if this offend you but it is the way I see it
temperature favouring Cilic? I dont know, maybe being in a hot and humid temperature would favour him instead? Those are huge conjectures based in points of view more than real facts.
About ITF, I am not sure how they need to intervene here. AO is independent and the people at charge of the tournament have to take their own decisions based on his own rulings, being one of them the infamous wet bulb. ITF wont get the accusatory finger once something bad happens - the AO organizers will take all the fire for it.
About explanation about you feel something about decision more than obligation, you are free to feel whatever you want, facts here are that the wet bulb index was over the limit and therefore they took the decision based in that ruling. FYI the wet bulb limit index was fine all the rest of the tournament. If you argue that this ruling is not exactly good or the roof should be closed for Djokovic-Monfils match is completely a different issue and I may agree or not.
They did not take the decision earlier because I guess they still want to go with the tournament spirit, which is an outdoor tournament. But in the end maybe they went the safe way after what happened with Halep in a way less humid and hot day so you cant blame the organizers for that honestly. I dont see how this is unfair when both players, as stated in separate interviews/press conferences from both, were informed about the possibility to play indoors. In that aspect, I dont see how organizers can be blamed, all it was fair - both informed at the same time, both offered the chance to warm up /practice indoors. The rest are conjectures, points of view or feelings not based in FACTS
And about the Halep's match, you are wrong, and you can even read posts from people in Melbourne who said that the weather was a lot nicer in Saturday than Sunday. The humidity was OK on Saturday, and on Sunday was almost unbearable. As I said, if you feel that the roof should have been closed in some matches with a high temperature in the tournament, we can agree or not but based in AO standards to close the roof, the only day that really had a justified reason to be closed was on Sunday.
If you dont care about spectators or fans, who unlike you or me pay and fund the tournament, it is your issue. Tournament should take in mind heavily them, because they put the money so the AO can take place. And again players were informed in advance, Cilic did not arrive to RLA and caught by surprise with a roof closed. Heck, even the mixed the doubles finals were played under closed roof. Where is the surprise? And even if they were not informed with a lot of time to make preps, both were informed at the same time so I dont see the bias or advantage to anyone. Maybe the situation could be handled better? Maybe, yes, but after Halep's collapse and visit to the hospital, I guess they wanted to play safe and IMHO they made the correct decision
In the end the cold truth here is that Cilic had chances to win this match and he did not take him like in the US Open 2014. The rest are conjectures and talk
N
nikdom
Guest
tenisdecente
Hall of Fame
The bottom line here is this, IMO
No roof closed: AO idiots, weather can kill players, and CIlic is disadvantaged because in an indoor court, his game is better because he is a big server and a flat hitter
Roof closed: AO idiots, Fed is favoured because he likes indoor and Marin played all tournament outdoors, he is more accustomed to hot weather, he does not like indoors (even if he has half of his titles under a roof), etc etc etc
Stop the hate guys, and deal with it
No roof closed: AO idiots, weather can kill players, and CIlic is disadvantaged because in an indoor court, his game is better because he is a big server and a flat hitter
Roof closed: AO idiots, Fed is favoured because he likes indoor and Marin played all tournament outdoors, he is more accustomed to hot weather, he does not like indoors (even if he has half of his titles under a roof), etc etc etc
Stop the hate guys, and deal with it
N
nikdom
Guest
Once a match goes to the 5th set, there are no more excuses about surface, heat, noise... whathaveyou.
Both players by then have had enough time on court, in the exact same conditions and it's a fair game at that point.
Both have had ups and downs, both have 2 sets each.
Cilic even had the momentum going into the 5th and BPs in the very first game of the 5th!!!
So whoever is arguing unfairness to Cilic at this point needs to shut up and face the facts - Roger won it fair and square. Cilic couldn't step up. End of story.
Both players by then have had enough time on court, in the exact same conditions and it's a fair game at that point.
Both have had ups and downs, both have 2 sets each.
Cilic even had the momentum going into the 5th and BPs in the very first game of the 5th!!!
So whoever is arguing unfairness to Cilic at this point needs to shut up and face the facts - Roger won it fair and square. Cilic couldn't step up. End of story.
I Am Finnish
Bionic Poster
This was excellent free entertainment while I ate breakfast. Didn't even need salt for my hash browns, it was provided here in copious amounts
N
nikdom
Guest
Weiners are usually pretty salty in themselves
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Blatant Fraudualism and Conflict of Interest.
Yes, he was very beatable except for the slight little problem that nobody in the draw could do it!
Thiem, Zverev, Pouille and all those other incompetent youngsters you support certainly couldn't do it! They are having trouble beating players like Sandgren!
When I looked at Federer's part of the draw, the only players I thought may be able to beat him were Berdych(unlikely but possible), or Cilic if Cilic was zoning. Cilic did zone for the entire match but caved in the fifth. That's the story of his career vs Big Four players at slams. How many times has Cilic folded in the fifth vs Federer, Djokovic, etc? I think had Nadal not been injured, Cilic would have probably lost the fifth in their match. I'm also not confident that Nadal would have defeated Federer in the final on this surface.
Too bad for you buddy! Back to the Challengers to watch some of those youngsters you idolize.
zalive
Hall of Fame
Slowing down the court because of lower temperature doesn't help the flat hitter or a bomb server. Cilic's both serves and groundstroke flat attacks are faster than Fed's, faster court makes them less manageable. But it's also a question of a temperature difference between temperature in which he prepared for the match and in which he played. Bigger the difference, harder to adjust to it.
Does AO have a publically accessible written document concerning their extreme heat policy ruling, which can show facts about their current standards?
This quote is what I found, it's a quote from AO tweet:
“The referee will initiate the Extreme Heat Policy once the ambient temperature exceeds 40C & the Wet Bulb index (WBGT) exceeds 32.5C."
Notice the and sign. This means both criteria has to be met. However the temperature was not over 40C so criteria for closing the roof down was not met, according to quote.
You don't see? You don't want to see, perhaps. Players had to guess conditions to prepare for the match. One guesses/picks indoors, the other guesses/picks outdoors. What's tennis, a guessing game?
But in case AO organizers didn't follow the wording from their own tweet, that's manipulation.
tenisdecente
Hall of Fame
Again, these are conjectures. Federer also prepared for an outdoor match, or do you think he was a fortune teller? The other option is that you can think he was told beforehand and before Cilic that the match was going to be indoors definitely, and you would have to prove that.
Also, I dont understand how the lower temperature slowed down the court so much. In fact, the indoor conditions benefit big servers and flat hitters, that is why Nadal is not benefited indoor
You may have a point here since the maximum temperature that day was 38 celsius degrees and from the policy you can deduct both scenarios have to happen together. But maybe, and I just say maybe the people at charge of the AO wanted to avoid a situation like Halep's one, which occurred with a lot less temperature and humidity. There is only 2 celsius degrees shy from 40, so it was not a big gap, if we were talking of a day at 30 celsius degrees would be different
I found something interesting about AO Open in 2015:
Spectator lawsuit[edit]
On January 24, 2015, the Herald Sun reported that Susan Carman sued the Melbourne & Olympic Parks Trust for failing to close the roof at Hisense Arena during Andy Murray's second round match in the 2013 Australian Open. The temperature that day reached 40 °C (104 °F). Carman says she fell down the stairs while seeking shade.[20]
I dont know, but as an organizer of a big tournament I would prefer some people moaning and whining on Twitter instead a lawsuit, which may come even from one of the players. Better safe than sorry
You dont have any proof of that, it is just a conjecture based in zero evidence. What we have is what both players said, and from that, IMO it was fair play. I dont see either manipulation or a guessing game. Cilic could take different decisions but he decided to stick to his routines. Big mistake from him. But even a bigger mistake was to leave Federer got out from that big hole he was buried from the end of the 4th set to the start of the 5th set. That is the only real FACT we have to deal here. He had his chances and he blew them - he is the only one to blame, and in a lesser extent Federer. Have a good day
van_Loederen
Professional
wrong.
if both are met, the roof WILL be closed. if only one is met, decision is made like they explained.
that's common sense, as also one single parameter could be way too high after all.
N
nikdom
Guest
tenisdecente
Hall of Fame
If that account tried to be funny, failed miserably
zalive
Hall of Fame
Common sense is not the same as organizer's ruling about their policy, and your interpretation cannot be seen from the quote.
You need some fresh official statement from the AO organizers to back it up.
That's why rules are made official so they cannot be manipulated at will. Some half-defined policy leaves much room for manipulation and organizers have much room to justify different decisions. However strict ruling open to public leaves no such room for different interpretations. I've searched for documents but I saw no ruling document on their web pages.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
LOL
van_Loederen
Professional
no, your interpretation of that rule is what makes no sense.
and i even explained you why. it's in my post.
zalive
Hall of Fame
As much as your conclusions are conjectures.
Lower the temperature, slower the court, given the court is the same. Not much sense to compare different courts.
Besides you again disregard the fact that there was a huge difference between the outdoor and the indoor temeperature, which was so far from conditions in which Marin prepared. Marin stated he was not prepared for such low temperature conditions indoors. I guess the organizers failed to communicate to him they will drop it down severely if roof should be closed. And who decides the indoor temperature? The organizers, at their will.
I again see no reason for them to made the decision to close the roof down much earlier if it was allowed by their policy/ruling/documents.
For spectators, indoors environment was better, do you agree?
This is the official explanation according to foxsports web pages:
“During the afternoon the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) index reading was above the threshold of 32.5, and was closely monitored,’ it said in a statement.
“At 6.30pm it was 32.7.
‘With no dramatic reduction in the WBGT reading forecast (the 8.30pm forecast was 32.5) the referee exercised his discretion and called for the roof to be closed.
“At 7.29pm it was 32.5, and at 7.32pm, when the umpire called time to commence the match, it was 32.6.
“The tournament referee made this decision based on qualified and professional advice from the Bureau of Meteorology who are on site, and the tournament’s Chief Medical Officer.
“Based on their advice, and the fact that the WBGT reading had been above the 32.5 threshold for a considerable period of time, and was forecast to be at 32.5 at 8.30pm, the tournament referee used his discretion to invoke the extreme heat policy and close the roof prior to play.
“At no other time during the event this year has the WBGT reading reached the threshold.”
So, according to explanation, organizers find that leaving the decision open until the very last moment was obviously more important than to activate their policy earlier (when WBGT was approximately the same as in the evening) and ensure both players can have a quality preparation for playing conditions.
Can you prove I'm wrong?
If there's no official rules wording available, it's open to manipulation from the organizers. This is what rules serve for, to prevent this.
zalive
Hall of Fame
I or anyone else cannot interpret the word 'and' any different from what it means. If you want to denote that any criteria should be met, then you use the word 'or'.
Do you imply the organizers are illiterate in their public statements?
C
Chadillac
Guest
Do people really think cilic would of played better with the roof open? Fed would of broke him down in straight sets if it were hot.
zalive
Hall of Fame
No one can predict what would happen. IMO Marin would be calmer, as it was upsetting when ball started flying long on him in the first set. Still it doesn't mean he would win the first set, but pretty probable he'd had a much better chance. This way he had no other chance but to lose his first set, he needed to adjust, while Roger was playing too well not to take the opportunity.
I think he would have played better with the roof open, but I don't know if the outcome would be different or not. Playing better tennis doesn't mean it would be enough, you never know what is Roger capable of pulling out of himself when pressed, just as his game rose in the fifth set. This is why the man is the champion. But Marin had a chance nevertheless. His inside out attacks from both wings were crazy good, and he was doing this throughout the tournament.
IMO he outgunned Roger when it comes to baseline topspin game, but could not match Roger's serve and return quality, plus his tactical width which included slicing that did damage to Marin's serving games in the middle of the match. Marin said he was prepared for Roger's game, but he did't have a clear answer to Roger's slicing deep to his BH. Excellent tactics for Marin's serve games, Roger had nothing to lose, he was fishing some UEs from Marin who had the pressure to attack him because the initiative was crucial, and it was completely successful to Roger. But again, it's champ's quality, the variety he can pull out in need.
N
nikdom
Guest
van_Loederen
Professional
you are overinterpreting there.
if you want to rule out other criteria for the roof to be closed, you HAVE to be more clear. use words like "only".
the wording of the rule simply leaves it open.
but reading it like you do is just ridiculous. what if the temperature is 50°C ?
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Who wants to walk with Elias?
zalive
Hall of Fame
Well it's not AO official, but there's wikipedia article on this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Open_extreme_heat_policy
The Changes for 2015, the most recent part in the wiki article, matches the numbers which AO organizers used in their statemets: 40C temperature and 32.5 degrees WBGT. Here it is:
Changes for 2015
Following severe criticism of the handling of the 2014 Australian Open, organisers increased the temperature threshold from the 2003 level of 35 to 40 °C (95 to 104 °F) and increased the wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) threshold from the 2003 level of 28 to 32.5 °C (82 to 91 °F) to allow for more continuous play and fewer stoppages in the future.[1][2]
WBGT charts show that the new threshold may not be triggered even if the temperature reaches 50 °C (122 °F) when there is no humidity.[3]
When the policy is implemented, matches will now be halted after an even number of games in the set, rather than at the conclusion of the set.
There will also be a retractable roof available on Margaret Court Arena for the first time.
However, notice they use the word 'and' as well which implies both criteria should be met, and specifically describe the situaton of 50C and no humidity which should not trigger the criteria. Which also implies both criteria should be met.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
You seem to see what you want to see instead of the known facts of the situation(s).
From mid week on it was forecast that the week would get hotter and hotter towards the weekend.
By Saturday the temperature was ballpark 32 degrees, not quite as hot as predicted and it didn't continue to get as hot during the afternoon as expected. It was, for the time of the year, a pretty standard Melbourne summer day.
Sunday was much hotter, pushing 38 and much more humid by about 2pm. Again, given the breeze, it looked like it might cool in the evening. But by late avo (5pm ish) the temperature was still 38 and the wind had died down.
The decision to close the roof, considering also the punters' themselves - the highest rollers of high rollers who go to tennis - was made at around 5pm (or at least they have told us since). They have to make the call earlier because it takes a few hours for the stadium to be flushed so they don't get condensation on the roof as the air cools (yes, it drips everywhere in there).
Contrast this with Federer's semifinal where the roof was closed just before the matches because of incoming rain and you'll understand why he was saying to the umpire can they turn up the air-con. At that stage the stadium was still full of hot, humid air from the day. In you've ever been in Rod Laver (or many other stadiums) when they close the roof for rain it takes ages for drier air replace the air in there - regardless of the temperature.
In short, you can believe what version of this you like and see favoritism towards Federer but you actually have to ignore many basic facts for that story to hold up because it's basically rubbish when you consider those facts.
You see no justification for the late decision because you ignore the details. I see no justification for your view because I bothered to know the details - details which are easily found. I was actually in Melbourne for the last 4 days of the tournament.
zalive
Hall of Fame
Numbers fit, so I guess it's still the current policy, starting from AO 2015:
https://ausopen.com/essentials/match-info/extreme-heat-policyhttps://ausopen.com/essentials/match-info/extreme-heat-policy
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) -- Australian Open organizers have tweaked the extreme heat policy for 2015 in the wake of complaints from players about dangerous conditions during a heat wave in Melbourne during the last tournament.
Tournament director Craig Tiley said the decision on implementing the policy will take into account the weather forecast once the temperature exceeds 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) and the Wet Bulb Global Temperature -- a measurement that accounts for humidity, wind direction and the temperature -- exceeds a reading of 32.5.
''We believe this update will clarify and streamline the communications process for both players and support staff,'' Tiley said. ''We've consulted the playing group and this is seen as the fairest way to implement the policy by many of the top players.''
The tournament referee still has the absolute discretion on whether or not to apply the extreme heat policy, organizers said, although setting the parameters will help players and coaches preparing for matches.
This is what is written on AO official web page as well:
https://ausopen.com/essentials/match-info/extreme-heat-policy
The decision to suspend play for the Extreme Heat Policy is made at the referee’s discretion.
This is beautiful. Organizers have left to themselves a full freedom of discretionary choice with or without parameters set. But they cannot be held responsible for any actual decision, as officially they won't make the decision. The ref will. So, officially, it's ref's call, not the organizer's call.
https://ausopen.com/essentials/match-info/extreme-heat-policyhttps://ausopen.com/essentials/match-info/extreme-heat-policy
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) -- Australian Open organizers have tweaked the extreme heat policy for 2015 in the wake of complaints from players about dangerous conditions during a heat wave in Melbourne during the last tournament.
Tournament director Craig Tiley said the decision on implementing the policy will take into account the weather forecast once the temperature exceeds 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) and the Wet Bulb Global Temperature -- a measurement that accounts for humidity, wind direction and the temperature -- exceeds a reading of 32.5.
''We believe this update will clarify and streamline the communications process for both players and support staff,'' Tiley said. ''We've consulted the playing group and this is seen as the fairest way to implement the policy by many of the top players.''
The tournament referee still has the absolute discretion on whether or not to apply the extreme heat policy, organizers said, although setting the parameters will help players and coaches preparing for matches.
This is what is written on AO official web page as well:
https://ausopen.com/essentials/match-info/extreme-heat-policy
The decision to suspend play for the Extreme Heat Policy is made at the referee’s discretion.
This is beautiful. Organizers have left to themselves a full freedom of discretionary choice with or without parameters set. But they cannot be held responsible for any actual decision, as officially they won't make the decision. The ref will. So, officially, it's ref's call, not the organizer's call.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
You have misunderstood the Wet Bulb index and chosen a perhaps poorly-worded tweet to support your views, but they need a better explanation to not be misleading.
It can be a less than 40 degrees and the heat rule still triggered. The Wet Bulb is an apparent temperature measurement which shifts the number from the plain air temperature by including also humidity, wind speed (and even sunlight strength).
Sunday's index given it was 6-7 degrees hotter than Saturday and being much more humid, and having lower wind was over 10 degrees higher than Saturday. A huge delta.
The threshold for considering the index is when the air temperature alone is over 32.5 degrees - not 40 degrees. On Sunday it was 32.7 degrees an hour before the match was due to start and the decision made to close the roof was supported when at the time of the match beginning it was still 32.6 (due to lack of wind which contributed to the continued high humidity) - much higher than on Saturday.
Halep needed help post match because she had played a series of leg/lung busting matches, not because they didn't close the roof for her.
C
Chadillac
Guest
Ya, thats why she had to get IV's in the hospital...
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
According the one in command discretion is not an uncommon situation in organisational and political life.
Violation of the parameters would be an extraordinary move, however, so it is unlikely to happen.
They could have done it here by claiming that the onset of nightfall made the wet bulb measurement redundant.
They made the right decision to keep the roof closed, thankfully, and January turned out to be one of the hottest months on record.
Violation of the parameters would be an extraordinary move, however, so it is unlikely to happen.
They could have done it here by claiming that the onset of nightfall made the wet bulb measurement redundant.
They made the right decision to keep the roof closed, thankfully, and January turned out to be one of the hottest months on record.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
van_Loederen
Professional
and that's why they never even meant it that way. it's meteorological nonsense.
an extremely high WBGT even tends to rule out an extremely high temperature and vice versa.
the wikipedia editor did that, not the AO. as said, it's meteorological nonsense.
that only supports/explains the AO decision. they didn't want to interrupt dozens of matches. they were even criticised for it.
now they are criticised for the opposite. LOL
ensuring particularly cosy conditions for the big final is kinda different story. has not even to do with fairness or equality.
zalive
Hall of Fame
The decision to close down the roof could have been made in the afternoon, based on measurements plus weather forecast. As simple as that.
You can do the same if weather forecast showes it will likely rain during the match. Why wait, while you can close the roof down in advance, if you have solid measurement data and forecast arguments for that. And you had that famous wet bulb index. Even if criteria is not completely clear, but it's still a discretionary right to rule so, so...no problem.
Leaving the decision for the last moment, what good it brought? Only unnecessarly uncertainty to players. That's not respecting the players. That's not respecting the game.
You mention turning the air con. There's something called a thermostat. You can set the temperature you want, air con won't cool it down below the set value, within some normal margin.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
He's one of the few highlights at the minute. I do enjoy the gimmick.
Really blows my mind when I hear things like Miz is 8-time intercontinental champion.
Latetothegame
Semi-Pro
You have no sense of humour it was very tongue in cheek
