Tennis writer exposes blatant favoritism and conflicts of interest in Australia Open

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
Funny how this forum doesnt mirror whats happening. Here one gets accused wearing tin foiled hats when questioning these obvious questions.

I had an unexpectedly civilized conversation on Twitter with someone promoting the conspiracy theory. In the end, you can't ever prove that a conspiracy didn't happen. But everything posited as evidence had an equally or much more likely innocent explanation. And we all know that if Cilic had chosen to practice indoors and Federer outdoors no one would have suggested that Cilic was privy to secret information that Federer wasn't. The organisers were in a no-win situation - have the roof open and a player collapses and they're accused of endangering the players health. Close the roof and they're favouring Federer. What if it had been a Nadal/Cilic final and the roof was closed when it's well known that Nadal prefers outdoor conditions? Would everyone then have said it was a conspiracy to favour Cilic?
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
I had an unexpectedly civilized conversation on Twitter with someone promoting the conspiracy theory. In the end, you can't ever prove that a conspiracy didn't happen. But everything posited as evidence had an equally or much more likely innocent explanation. And we all know that if Cilic had chosen to practice indoors and Federer outdoors no one would have suggested that Cilic was privy to secret information that Federer wasn't. The organisers were in a no-win situation - have the roof open and a player collapses and they're accused of endangering the players health. Close the roof and they're favouring Federer. What if it had been a Nadal/Cilic final and the roof was closed when it's well known that Nadal prefers outdoor conditions? Would everyone then have said it was a conspiracy to favour Cilic?
It makes no sense why they applied the heat rule suddenly, it was not in use in the tournament. It was even less humid and hot than other days.
They make the decision very late, after practice.
If you dont find this odd, well then I dont know what to say to you.
 
Look.
All I was saying whole of the time is that by no means it should have happened that one player prepares for right playing condition, while the other player prepares for wrong playing condition.
Now why this has happened? It's because the organizer doesn't care about this. If they cared, if they were aware of the importance that this decision should have been made early enough if anyhow possible -and it was indeed both possible and justified to call the decision to close the roof down- then they should have made it as well.
Looking into facts just proved that they could have done it.
One player's chances in finals match were compromised because of AO organizers failing to do so. It's because he picked preparing for the outdoors event, in the lack of the knowledge of what decision what it will be, while his opponent picked to prepare indoors. Compromising chances doesn't have anything to do with indoors or outdoors conditions players preferrence.
Whether this has or hasn't do with preferrential treatment is after all completely irrelevant in this scenari. Because this simply shouldn't have happened that players will have to guess the decision, if this could have been avoided. And it could have been avoided. Instead, what happened is disgrace.
But still vast majority has no problem with the scenario, it seems. Why? Because they root for Federer and wanted him to clinch that title no matter, so they intimately don't care much if his opponent's chances got thinner.

I can only wish for similar circumstances to compromise Roger's big title the next time in similar circumstances, only this time working against him, so Federer fans can see the situation from another angle, with less personal bias. I cheer to that and wish it sincerely. Not because of Federer, I like the guy. But because of his fans, because the amount of bias present is just ridiculous.

Federer said that he practiced indoors and was ready for any scenario.

If Cilic choose to practice outdoors out of habit/superstition/whatever then it means that he didn't fully understood the impact (if there was such impact as some claim) of his actions i. e. was unprofessional in this particular situation.

Neither the AO organisers, nor Federer can be hold responsible for someone else's lack of professionalism.

:cool:
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
Another favorite narrative is AO organizers helped Federer win the last two years because Tennis Australia and Team8 have a partnership for the Laver Cup. DUH! They have the same partnership with the USTA but does Federer win the USOpen. NOPE! If that’s all it took, Federer and agent Tony Godsick wouldn’t have waited 5 yrs. Besides Federer has always been well liked in Australia, so AO would not waited for 5yrs. to help Federer win another GS title anyway.
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Funny how this forum doesnt mirror whats happening. Here one gets accused wearing tin foiled hats when questioning these obvious questions.

That's because we have almost an entire fanbase made of conspiracy theorists, here. When things don't go your way, you start sifting the net to find other conspiracy theorists who "validate" your claims by posting their BS on their blogs (which suddenly makes them "tennis writers and experts"). The real reason, though, is that you can't deal with the truth, and when results don't conform to your view of the world, you have to change the narrative by looking for "cheating", "favoritism", "weak era", "extra day of rest", etc.

On the other hand, do you see people here creating a dozen threads on Nadal's controversial retirement at AO? Because you know, we could. And look, we could also find "tennis writers" who validate this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/allens...-tenniss-ongoing-injury-problem/#3f6d3fe3a988

So, let's burn him at the stake, too? Is this what you're suggesting?
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
That's because we have almost an entire fanbase made of conspiracy theorists, here. When things don't go your way, you start sifting the net to find other conspiracy theorists who "validate" your claims by posting their BS on their blogs (which suddenly makes them "tennis writers and experts"). The real reason, though, is that you can't deal with the truth, and when results don't conform to your view of the world, you have to change the narrative by looking for "cheating", "favoritism", "weak era", "extra day of rest", etc.

On the other hand, do you see people here creating ten threads on Nadal's controversial retirement at AO? Because you know, we could. And look, we could also find "tennis writers" who validate this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/allens...-tenniss-ongoing-injury-problem/#3f6d3fe3a988

So, let's burn him at the stake, too? Is this what you're suggesting?
Man, you have some wild fantasy.
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
It makes no sense why they applied the heat rule suddenly, it was not in use in the tournament. It was even less humid and hot than other days.
They make the decision very late, after practice.
If you dont find this odd, well then I dont know what to say to you.

Ha! Ha! You feel helpless because you didn’t want Federer to win. Roger Federer 20x GS champion. You see how right it sounds?
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
There is a point being lost here,
Let's assume for example it was Nadal in the final facing Fed, this situation with the roof and practice and conditions would not have been the same, Nadal would have demanded more from the organisers, and would have got it.

Let’s assume Nadal wasn’t even in the final and that’s why his fans are mad and his fans thought Nadal has sway with the organizers and doesn’t.
 
Because all logic would be they played outdoors because thats what had been done in the tournament when it was hotter and more humid than it was that day.

They were warned that they are considering the application of the extreme heat policy, so, you are wrong about whatever you think that that "logic" dictates (or rather you are not using logic that is a result of the facts that were at hand).

:cool:
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Man, you have some wild fantasy.

I don't. It says "Nadal's controversial retirement" in the title, so it must be true. And it comes from Forbes, too, which is infinitely more reliable that the Express that VB loves to quote. So it's obviously legit, no? And the quote McEnroe, too--both McEnroe's, actually. There's you expert opinion. Now, lets make a thread and repeat this endlessly every three or four messages, the way some of you have been harping here while blissfully ignoring what really happened (not that agenda-driven people are interested in the truth anyway).

See how easy this is? I didn't even have to look for controversial stuff on the net, I just typed "Nadal news" and this is what I got at the very top of the page. I don't even even want to know what I could have dug out with stuff like "Nadal cheating", "Nadal controversy", "Nadal MTO", etc. My guess is we'd have enough material for dozens of threads, though.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't. It says "Nadal's controversial retirement" in the title, so it must be true. And it comes from Forbes, too, which is infinitely more reliable that the Express that VB loves to quote. So it's obviously legit, no? And the quote McEnroe, too--both, actually. There's you expert opinion. Now, lets make a thread and repeat this endlessly every three or four messages, the way some of you have been harping here while blissfully ignoring what really happened (not that you're interested in the truth anyway).

See how easy this is? I didn't even have to look for controversial stuff on the net, I just typed "Nadal news" and this is what I got at the very top of the page. I don't even even want to know what I could have dug out with stuff like "Nadal cheating", "Nadal controversy", "Nadal MTO", etc. My guess is we'd have enough material for dozens of threads, though.
You are bringing up another topic Im not keen on digging into right now.
And yes, there has been numerous threads about Nadals injuries and such from the conspiracy fanbase numero one in here, the Fed fans.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
That's because we have almost an entire fanbase made of conspiracy theorists, here. When things don't go your way, you start sifting the net to find other conspiracy theorists who "validate" your claims by posting their BS on their blogs (which suddenly makes them "tennis writers and experts"). The real reason, though, is that you can't deal with the truth, and when results don't conform to your view of the world, you have to change the narrative by looking for "cheating", "favoritism", "weak era", "extra day of rest", etc.

On the other hand, do you see people here creating a dozen threads on Nadal's controversial retirement at AO? Because you know, we could. And look, we could also find "tennis writers" who validate this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/allens...-tenniss-ongoing-injury-problem/#3f6d3fe3a988

So, let's burn him at the stake, too? Is this what you're suggesting?

Not just that, you can also find articles and statements from people with tennis authority such as Nikki/Nikola Pilic (who's a far bigger authority on all things concerning tennis than a talking head like Rusedski or Cash) accusing Nadal of doping which his fans vehemently deny.

There's never a shortage of articles on the internet about conspiracies of all kinds concering all spheres of life. They still don't really prove any of them. They don't represent the whole word any more than this forum does.
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
Look.
All I was saying whole of the time is that by no means it should have happened that one player prepares for right playing condition, while the other player prepares for wrong playing condition.
Now why this has happened? It's because the organizer doesn't care about this. If they cared, if they were aware of the importance that this decision should have been made early enough if anyhow possible -and it was indeed both possible and justified to call the earlier decision to close the roof down- then they should have made it early as well.
Looking into facts just proved that they could have done it.
One player's chances in finals match were compromised because of AO organizers failing to do so. It's because he picked preparing for the outdoors event, in the lack of the knowledge of what decision what it will be, while his opponent picked to prepare indoors. Compromising chances doesn't have anything to do with indoors or outdoors conditions players preferrence.
Whether this has or hasn't do with preferrential treatment is after all completely irrelevant in this scenario. Because this simply shouldn't have happened that players will have to guess the decision, if this could have been avoided. And it could have been avoided. Instead, what happened is disgrace.
But still vast majority has no problem with the scenario, it seems. Why? Because they root for Federer and wanted him to clinch that title no matter, so they intimately don't care much if his opponent's chances got thinner.

I can only wish for similar circumstances to compromise Roger's big title the next time in similar circumstances, only this time working against him, so Federer fans can see the situation from another angle, with less personal bias. I cheer to that and wish it sincerely. Not because of Federer, I like the guy. But because of his fans, because the amount of bias present is just ridiculous.

Nah. Because you don’t care about other players until one is playing Federer. We all know which two players stood to lose if Federer won the title. It works out better this way because these two players have to work hard and with Federer around these two players along with their fans won’t have the dream of a weak field so they can go unchallenged where they enjoy favoritism and endless fawning from the press.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
They were warned that they are considering the application of the extreme heat policy, so, you are wrong about whatever you think that that "logic" dictates (or rather you are not using logic that is a result of the facts that were at hand).

:cool:
Never closed the roof before even much worse conditions, saying will maybe put the roof on. What would you have done?
Its pretty logic to think the roof would not be on as temperatures were going down, and wasnt really high in the first place.
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
It makes no sense why they applied the heat rule suddenly, it was not in use in the tournament. It was even less humid and hot than other days.
They make the decision very late, after practice.
If you dont find this odd, well then I dont know what to say to you.

I don't find it odd because after the previous final a player had to be treated in hospital. I think that after this the officials were worried about the bad publicity of it happening again. This seems a far more likely explanation than any conspiracy. It would have been better if they had decided earlier and said it was a precautionary measure but perhaps thought that looked like an admission of liability. And of course they would still have been accused of favouring Federer. I see no scenario under which the officials would not have been accused of favouring Federer - if the roof had been left open and Cilic had collapsed it would have been said that as the bigger guy and having played longer matches he was the player more likely to suffer and therefore the roof should have been closed. If people have a prior belief that all the officials' actions are designed to benefit Fed then EVERY action taken by them will be viewed in that light.
 
Never closed the roof before even much worse conditions, saying will maybe put the roof on. What would you have done?
Its pretty logic to think the roof would not be on as temperatures were going down, and wasnt really high in the first place.

The organisers of a Major are coming to you just before the final and are informing you of a pending decision of which you will be notified (as Federer said "keep us posted"), and you go, "fvck it, obviously they have nothing better to do and decided to play some games with us just before the big final"?

I hope that you don't listen to your bosses/business partners like that.

That is not your leisure time, when you can decide to go unshaven and with wrinkled shirt in your flip flops and nothing will happen.

:cool:
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Nah. Because you don’t care about other players until one is playing Federer. We all know which two players stood to lose if Federer won the title. It works out better this way because these two players have to work hard and with Federer around these two players along with their fans won’t have the dream of a weak field so they can go unchallenged where they enjoy favoritism and endless fawning from the press.

Nah, he's genuine Cilic fan (and I'm guessing his compatriot), you can tell from his posts. Probably (well almost certainly) the only one in this thread.
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
Neither the AO organisers, nor Federer can be hold responsible for someone else's lack of professionalism.

Yes. Cilic said he was surprised that the roof being closed made such a difference to conditions yet the roof was closed for the Mixed Doubles Final. Couldn't one of Cilic's team have gone into the stadium to check out the conditions? I understand he himself had a lot on his mind but surely someone on his team should have been on the ball?
 
Yes. Cilic said he was surprised that the roof being closed made such a difference to conditions yet the roof was closed for the Mixed Doubles Final. Couldn't one of Cilic's team have gone into the stadium to check out the conditions? I understand he himself had a lot on his mind but surely someone on his team should have been on the ball?

Also , it is not like he hasn't been to big or indoor finals before.

Really, there is no excuse for that sort of "explanations".

:cool:
 
Last edited:

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
Because all logic would be they played outdoors because thats what had been done in the tournament when it was hotter and more humid than it was that day.

I imagine that Federer is a much more worldly wise person than Cilic. When told of the possibility of indoors I bet he thought "the roof will almost certainly be closed because the organisers won't want to take the flak from another Halep collapse." Cilic seems to have buried his head in the sand.

This whole conspiracy now seems to rest on Federer making a better decision than Cilic. Is that really surprising?
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Federer said that he practiced indoors and was ready for any scenario.

Mentally ready for outdoors perhaps, but he had the practice session prior to match in indoors conditions. If decision was to play outdoors he would likely not be equally well prepared for conditions. Because this final practice session prior to match makes a difference.

And even in case if Federer adjusts at express speed to different conditions (IDK if he does, his words don't make it so just because he said this), it has nothing to do with Marin.
This would mean that leaving the decision open for the last minute would favour Roger, and we know well which decision it was to make a last minute decision.

If Cilic choose to practice outdoors out of habit/superstition/whatever then it means that he didn't fully understood the impact (if there was such impact as some claim) of his actions i. e. was unprofessional in this particular situation.

Neither the AO organisers, nor Federer can be hold responsible for someone else's lack of professionalism.

:cool:

It's not lack of professionalism.
Cilic's routine is to string according to conditions. There are reasons for this which are related to game he plays. His margin of error is tighter. Besides even if it wasn't for this, it's the way he's used to play.
This disabled him to prepare well for both scenarios, he had to take a pick.

Organizers can be, and are held responsible for all their decisions. But obviously too much for Federer fans to acknowledge this.
I think AO organizers made a damage to their reputation. This is clearly shown by many articles which question their decisions.
 
Last edited:

zalive

Hall of Fame
Yes. Cilic said he was surprised that the roof being closed made such a difference to conditions yet the roof was closed for the Mixed Doubles Final. Couldn't one of Cilic's team have gone into the stadium to check out the conditions? I understand he himself had a lot on his mind but surely someone on his team should have been on the ball?

Tennis is not a sport in which this is usual to make the difference. This is a situation that doesn't quite happen. It's not skiing. Proffessional teams of tennis players are not necessarily prepared to handle well such situations.
This is why I said tennis is not a guessing sport, and should't be made such. There are sports in which forecasting conditions and scenarios it the essential part of the game. But even in such the organizer's decision are not the usual part of the conditions forecast.
Besides I'm not sure about the timeline allowing anything done differently once the decision was made. Roof closing happened literally the last minute for the event to commence. And indoor temperature set was organizer's discretion.
 
Last edited:

zalive

Hall of Fame
Nah, he's genuine Cilic fan (and I'm guessing his compatriot), you can tell from his posts. Probably (well almost certainly) the only one in this thread.

You guess it right, I'm Cilic's compatriot. But no surprise because in your posts you show you have an excellent understanding of tennis. Or at least, when I read your views, like 95% of it is if I was looking through my own eyes. From my point of view at least it's unbiased, realistic, knowledgeable and insightful views of a person who understands tennis and is a very good observer of what happens in the court. My compliments.
 
Mentally ready for outdoors perhaps, but he had the practice session prior to match in indoors conditions. If decision was to play outdoors he would likely not be equally well prepared for conditions. Because this final practice session prior to match makes a difference.

And even in case if Federer adjusts at express speed to different conditions (IDK if he does, his words don't make it so just because he said this), it has nothing to do with Marin.
This would mean that leaving the decision open for the last minute would favour Roger, and we know well which decision it was to make a last minute decision.



It's not lack of professionalism.
Cilic's routine is to string according to conditions. There are reasons for this which are related to game he plays. His margin of error is tighter. Besides even if it wasn't for this, it's the way he's used to play.
This disables him to prepare well for both scenarios, he has to take a pick.

Organizers can be, and are held responsible for all their decisions. But obviously too much for Federer fans to acknowledge this.
I think AO organizers made a damage to their reputation. This is clearly shown by many articles which question their decisions.

Federer said that he was prepared to play in any of those consitions as it would not have made a difference.

They are professional players, not weekend hacks. They played in outdoor conditions the whole tournament, so they wouldn't have needed to adjust to anything they haven't adjusted already.

The only thing they needed to consider were the potential consequences from the closing of the roof.

RE: stringing: did Cilic receive fresh batch of racquets after the first set?

I must have missed that ( but I insist on becoming an answer from you here).

I said that the AO organisers cannot be held responsible for someone else's lack of professionalism, so you must be mixing up their responsibilities with Cilic's.

They were responsible for notifying the players for a possible closing of the roof, which they did, and took the decision to close it due to reasons that you either didn't make an effort to familiarise yourself with (as they are posted in this thread as well), or you just choose to ignore, which is your problem.

Whether they took a hit to their reputation is something that needs to be further researched, but I would imagine that the "story" about Halep ending up in a hospital (whether it was their fault is also a separate matter) would be the reason for such development.

In any event I haven’t seen a single reputable source blasting the AO organisers for closing the roof.

:cool:
 

Pagoo

G.O.A.T.
Man, VB members are getting quite desperate and unhinged. I took a look at the article, and you can see that not everyone is in agreement. The same clowns who were angry at Cilic have become his greatest defenders because he couldn't stop #RF20.

Stay pressed and stay salty.:cool:
 

George Turner

Hall of Fame
kermit-typing-gif.gif
5wFUthd.gif

FR3YpWw.gif
1*T8rlsnjFfiArXBaah6Ioew.gif

This internet battle is still ongoing.

tenor.gif
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Federer said that he was prepared to play in any of those consitions as it would not have made a difference.

Sorry if I don't take his words for granted, doesn't mean he'd enter equally well into the match if it was decided for outdoors. But no matter, it has little to do with Marin.

RE: stringing: did Cilic receive fresh batch of racquets after the first set?

Yes, I saw a pic from the match:
AO-reket-Cilicev-boks-Mark-KolbeGetty-Images.jpg


I guess he had some racquets strung for indoor conditions, but not for the actual temperature. he and his team obviously expected a higher indoor temperature.

The only thing they needed to consider were the potential consequences from the closing of the roof.

Nothing implies they were worried about this. And this 'only' thing is really an important one.
But it's not just finals match. The current extreme heat policy seems to be too permitive and it doesn't spare players much. Potentially puts them to serious health risk.
Like I've read somewhere, like it's needed for something really serious to happen, for the organizer to change their policy to protect players more.
I get the notion that accomodating players is not the top priority for the organizer. But quite the opposite, it looks like being quite low on their priority list.
I understand organizers have their schedule as one of primary concerns, but it cannot jeopardize players health, by insist on playing in conditions under which part of players' organisms cannot function well.
But nothing unusual for modern times, it's happening in various sports, when organizers moslty care about making most money, and sportsmen are considered as an instrument to have this goal accomplished, rather than a primary reason for having such events.
Sign of the times. But don't expect of someone like me to approve such policy. I don't think there's a moral right to use sports just as business and players just as instruments for making money. And this happens to be so in many aspects of pro tennis, on various tournaments.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
More saliva or zalive? You've already told us you don't care about the issue, so who are you trying to kid with talk of morality?

I don't think there's a moral right to use sports just as business and players just as instruments for making money. And this happens to be so in many aspects of pro tennis, on various tournaments.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
More saliva or zalive? You've already told us you don't care about the issue, so who are you trying to kid with talk of morality?

What is this I don't care about, be specific?
Zalive came from zed alive...legacy internet forum username from a deep history...my first forum username ever used on internet was zedizded
 
Sorry if I don't take his words for granted, doesn't mean he'd enter equally well into the match if it was decided for outdoors. But no matter, it has little to do with Marin.



Yes, I saw a pic from the match:
AO-reket-Cilicev-boks-Mark-KolbeGetty-Images.jpg


I guess he had some racquets strung for indoor conditions, but not for the actual temperature. he and his team obviously expected a higher indoor temperature.



Nothing implies they were worried about this. And this 'only' thing is really an important one.
But it's not just finals match. The current extreme heat policy seems to be too permitive and it doesn't spare players much. Potentially puts them to serious health risk.
Like I've read somewhere, like it's needed for something really serious to happen, for the organizer to change their policy to protect players more.
I get the notion that accomodating players is not the top priority for the organizer. But quite the opposite, it looks like being quite low on their priority list.
I understand organizers have their schedule as one of primary concerns, but it cannot jeopardize players health, by insist on playing in conditions under which part of players' organisms cannot function well.
But nothing unusual for modern times, it's happening in various sports, when organizers moslty care about making most money, and sportsmen are considered as an instrument to have this goal accomplished, rather than a primary reason for having such events.
Sign of the times. But don't expect of someone like me to approve such policy. I don't think there's a moral right to use sports just as business and players just as instruments for making money. And this happens to be so in many aspects of pro tennis, on various tournaments.

What incentive would Federer have to lie about his preparedness?

So, Cilic strings according to the temperature with a difference of several degrees?

This is hard to believe and absolutely ridiculous if true (at which point during the match was this picture taken, BTW?).

I don’t understand the sentence "Nothing implies they were worried about this" comment.

What is that supposed to mean?

Lastly, you seem to be very dismissive about the efforts the organisers are making to accommodate the players and give them good conditions to compete.

Well, guess what: AO is an outdoor tournament , so the players will have to bite the bullet and do their best.

Oh, and, BTW, the conditions nowadays are vastly superior to anything that was available to the players even thirty years ago, so, if you want to create some sort of compassion for their hardships you should start talking to millenials about tennis. You might just trick them into believing that before was better.

Also, is it me or your ramblings about the organisers not caring about the players' health and the closing of the roof seem to be at odds?

:cool:
 
Last edited:

zalive

Hall of Fame
What incentive would Federer have to lie about his preparedness?

It's not factual so it cannot be a lie; it's his judgement.
Besides, perhaps he felt the need to point this out, umbarassed by possibility that someone might get the impression he was told by the organizer about which decision it will be and prepared exclusively for indoors.

So, Cilic strings according to the temperature with a difference of several degrees?

I don't know really.
IDK which indoor temperature was expected by Marin and his team. I can understand though why they didn't quite expect a spring season temperature.

This is hard to believe and absolutely ridiculous if true (at which point during the match was this picture taken, BTW?).

Part of info came from the local tennis specialized newsman/blogger who's closely connected with Marin and other local players, another part came from the local pro stringer with RG experience who has some knowledge on what Marin uses otherwise. I know the stringer personally but he was asked for clarifications by this newsman. But they didn't get into too many details like actual tensions difference. They just explained what has happened.

I don’t understand Nothing implies they were worried about this" comment.

What is that supposed to mean?

it means that nothing shows they understand or acknowledge that players should preferrably have the decision earlier than 'last minute', to be able to play their best tennis, by being able to prepare with their full focus on actual playing conditions.

Evening conditions weren't a surprise, they followed perfectly the daytime conditions.

Lastly, you seem to be very dismissive about the efforts the organisers are making to accommodate the players and give them good conditions to compete.

Well this is their business, what's there to praise? Doing what they should be doing?
i know it's not nice just to criticise things which weren't good without prasing the other thigs which were good, but this is a GS tournament, not some village tournament. Highs standards are expected at every aspect.

Also, is it me or your ramblings about the organisers not caring about the players' health and the closing of the roof seem to be at odds?

And I don't talk they should have made an early decision to close down the roof, for the whole discussion?
It's the most fair thing they could have done. Protecting the players from humidity plus temperature, but allowing them time and full focus to prepare for match conditions.
Plus if organizer was to set the indoor temperature, some information to both players about this would be fair, as it does influence stringing - at least for some players it does.
Wasn't this the most fair thing to do?
Indoors vs outdoors by iself doesn't matter much. Both players can play well in both conditions. Besides, even if it wasn't so, closing the roof down was justified by conditions, it was not decided out of nothing, so no arguing about having it indoors.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Look.
All I was saying whole of the time is that by no means it should have happened that one player prepares for right playing condition, while the other player prepares for wrong playing condition.
Why didn't you just say that then instead of disguising it among a pile of codswallop and moronic claims/ideas which aren't supported by the known facts?

Cilic had a whole extra day to recover from his semifinal match. If the organisers really cared about equality they would run the men's tournament on days 1, 3, 5, 7 etc and the women's on days 2, 4, 6, 8... That way no-one would be able to claim they'd had less rest/recovery than the other side of the draw.

You should write a letter...

Looking into facts just proved that they could have done it.
Apparently "facts" doesn't mean the same thing to you as it does for other people.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
He has no sincerity. He admitted he is just wasting everyone's time and that he is frustrated that the world is organised for Federer's pleasure ... in his humble opinion, of course.

Wow this thread still going strong

@zalive let it go man. Right or wrong, you made your point. Nothing in the real world is changing because of your sincerest arguments here....

Go out. Do something nice today. (Telling myself this too, so don't take it as condescension)
 
Last edited:

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
QUOTE]
Wow this thread still going strong

@zalive let it go man. Right or wrong, you made your point. Nothing in the real world is changing because of your sincerest arguments here....

Go out. Do something nice today. (Telling myself this too, so don't take it as condescension)

It is tempting to move away but it's nice to stand up for rationality.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
QUOTE]


It is tempting to move away but it's nice to stand up for rationality.

Be careful though. Rational arguments once stated don't have to be pile-driven to be justified. We humans tend to go into emotional over-investment territory even when making the most rational arguments because of a Choice-Supportive bias.

I often wonder when I go from standing up for what I believe is right to wanting to be right. There is a difference.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
@nikdom sound advice indeed! :) yeah I was thinking about the same...

He has no sincerity. He admitted he is just wasting everyone's time and that he is frustrated that the world is organised for Federer's pleasure ... in his humble opinion, of course.

Seriously, you got me wrong on something, and I'm having a hard time to understand what and where. But to dig this out, it's just too demanding and it's by far easier to let it go.
Peace. Wish you all the best.
Was that sincere? Decide for yourself.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
I often wonder when I go from standing up for what I believe is right to wanting to be right. There is a difference.

"There's a difference between a wish to have the truth on your side, and a sincere wish to be on the side of the truth".
:)
 

kevaninho

Hall of Fame
This is an ridiculous logic. If we follow it, we'd never be able to compare anything. Come on, this is plain stupid.

No its really not. So its the same thing to compare Federers career to Chungs then? Doesn't matter that they've played completely different amounts of matches, by your logic.
 

augustobt

Legend
No its really not. So its the same thing to compare Federers career to Chungs then? Doesn't matter that they've played completely different amounts of matches, by your logic.
This logic is ridiculous and absurd. You, sir, has 0,0% abilities in making comparisons. You can't compare Federer's career to Chung's because one is professional for more time than another one is alive, so the margin of comparison is really discrepant. While in Cilic vs Federer, there's a much more reasonable timeframe, still a large one, but also still comparable. Not to mention we're looking at one specific match condition that is limited to a limited short-timespan of the Tour calendar.
 

Tornes

Semi-Pro
No its really not. So its the same thing to compare Federers career to Chungs then? Doesn't matter that they've played completely different amounts of matches, by your logic.

By your logic Federer cannot be better grass player then hard player (or even clay player) because he played much less matches on grass... Do I need to say anything else about your "logic"?
 

NaBUru38

Rookie
If you want Roger Federer to win a match, your safest bet is to have him play it indoors.

Just look at the Wimbledon 2012 final for example, against Andy Murray. Once the rain came it was an insanely different match from the two previous sets.

Why is this the case? 1987 Wimbledon champion Pat Cash said, “The way Roger plays and takes the ball so early means any wind making the ball move is detrimental to him”

http://lastwordontennis.com/2018/01...open-final-indoors-roof-closed-roger-federer/

So how is he so successful at Wimbledon and US Open?
 
Top