Topic: Tennis League All Thread - page 269. (Read 202181 times)

Shapovalov is very good on grass, so he counted on that points in his season, I guess that creates extra pressure to perform better on other tournament then.

Tsitsipas managed to turn it around but Busta lost to Simon after looking well for comeback. This is maybe biggest surprise for me so far.

Two wrongs do not make a right.  No one should mix politics with sport.  I don't support Wimbledon's decision at all and ATP as well.  No one should ban anyone. This is just  ATP is trying to put its foot down but they are hurting players who worked so hard for their points. Wimbledon will be a joke this year, most players are very likely not to  turn-up as there is no incentive. Djokovic will now lose 2,000 points from last year. And it is not fair or democratic.

We almost got an upset when Tsitsipas went down 0-2 against Musetti.

So he has to climb back from that deficit and win the next three sets in fashion. And then again, Dennis Shapovalov (inconsistency), and after the game he said he felt some pressure because of the Wimbledon decision, not sure how true is that but a lost is a lost I guess.

Later it will be Nadal against Moutet in the second round. And fellow Spaniards Alcaraz vs Ramos Vinolas.

Four-time major winner Naomi Osaka is not sure she will play Wimbledon, saying that without ranking points it is "more like an exhibition".
"I feel like if I play Wimbledon without points, it's more like an exhibition. I know this isn't true, right? But my brain just like feels that way. Whenever I think like something is like an exhibition, I just can't go at it 100%.
I didn't even make my decision yet, but I'm leaning more towards not playing given the current circumstances."
Source: https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/61553327

How many tennis players think this way and who else could cancel their participation in Wimbledon?
It seems that in the end, Wimbledon GS will be severely weakened and will almost turn into an exhibition tournament due to the decision of the organizers to ban the performance of Russian and Belarusian tennis players.
If Djokovic takes this opportunity and wins his new GS tournament, it seems that this eventual triumph of Djokovic at Wimbledon will always be overshadowed by doubt and controversy.
This is really not good news for all sincere tennis fans.
Because of playing Wimbledon without points, Djokovic will actually suffer great damage because he will be the biggest loser in this story.

Yeah, but there are some games that are suspended, and most of them are my bets and with parlays, lol. So I guess I have to wait for them, don't know what time they're going to resumed, but I will not wait as it might be too late in my time when the game starts.

But there are games that's been playing right now, but not going to bet. Much better to wait for my previous parlays and see how it goes.

yes all won decisively, there is no getting away from it that its a three horse race so to speak.

On the womens side I was hoping to put an in-play bet on Swiatek but she demolished Tsurenko
6-2 and 6-0. She was in control from start to finish. There really isnt anyone who can trouble her
and few chances to make a bet on her other than going on a handicap.

Similar to the me s side for Djokovic, Nadal and Alcaraz early on in the rounds.

Don't underestimate Djokovic's chances in Roland Garros, he won it last year and he for sure don't want to lose more points, he's already going to lose 2000 points of Wimbledon because of all that crap, he has to give it all I Roland Garros to make up for that, he's the favorite to win it so it won't be a surprise if he does.

All favourites to win the title has won today, it was obvious that their opponents did not stand a chance i think this year roland carros competition will be more competitive than the recent ones we have another favourite one which is alcaraz, i think it will be a triple war between nadal, djokovic and alcaraz there are some others but it will be tough for them to get the win.

agree that Nadal will maybe skip Wimbledon, it is hard for his knees to adapt to grass surface, he talked a lot about that, and he is hardly a favorite there
only major reason to participate is to stop Djokovic from another grand slam probably, and chances for that are really slim for Nadal

if he is well, he could win over Djokovic on RG, but on Wimbledon, I do not think he has a chance, and he is probably aware of that as well

You have to also consider that Wimbeldon is a pinnacle of very short grass season. I am sure some of the top players that don't like grass surface will use that whole month to train and fill batteries to perform at their peak on hard turf.

There aren't points but there are still enormous cash rewards. Everybody will want to collect that with exception of some top 20 players like Nadal maybe. Norrie is from UK, I am sure he is playing even without points no matter what he talks.

Absolutely, a welcome break from a busy season and if those big names pull out lesser
"ranked" players will see it as a chance to boost their bank accounts as they have a chance
to go further in the tournament and be the unlikely winner of such a prestigious event!

Players are now talking about skipping Wimbledon, Norrie has said he thinks a lot of top names will skip it, Osaka has said she personally might skip it. Both mentioned that without ranking points, it's basically an exhibition tournament.

I have to say I'm a bit surprised at first, but thinking about it this does make perfect sense. Players have a long and tiring season, now they've been given the chance of a free mid-season break with no points to worry about... time to freshen up and get ready for the hard court season.

Yea the 5 set match is a big factor, most recent example is Felix AA's game with Varillas
yesterday, Varillas played Felix off the court in the first two games 2-6, 2-6 but after Felix
broke him early in the third set it was only going one way and it was time to get an in
play bet on!

Tennis is about Skill, Fitness, mental ability and experience and more so in the GS's

I think Alcaraz will do fine!

It's because he is the new face of tennis and even compare to Rafa when he was young. So obviously there will be a lot of media given to this kid in one of the biggest tournament early this year.

And I agree on @Rabi3, it will be a big test for Alcaraz, five setter is very different obviously. I know he is mentally tough, but at his age, he needs maturity and just can't slip even in just a set otherwise his opponent are going to take advantage of that. And you learn that experience as you go along.

I personally believe he won't win this one, he's still young and has a lot more to learn before winning a grandsalm, 3 sets in each match is not something he's used to, I know that he showed a lot of skill this year but the real test is going to be this, a grandslam, I am not sure yet on how he's going to handle that much attention from tennis fans and the media, and knowing how young and new he is to professional tennis, it might affect him negatively.

Seeing Alcaraz having an easy 3 set game winner against Londero.

And it's interesting that Djokovic, Nadal and Alcaraz are on the same bracket in this tournament. And another thing is that Alcaraz is getting more media exposure that Djokovic and Nadal combine. Hopefully though, Alcaraz will not succumb to this big pressure grand slams and hopefully he can win one.

Personally, I have a feeling that the Wimbledon organizers were under a lot of political pressure from the UK government and probably had no choice.
This is not the first such case. Didn't the Australian minister personally ban Djokovic from appearing at the GS in Australia for political reasons?
Like it or not, politics and sports have become firmly connected.
Meanwhile, Roland Garros has finally started.
We already have some unexpected results.
These are the defeats of Thiem and Jabeur and Muguruza is struggling a lot in her match.

True, but you don't want the big players to end up playing each other in the first round, you want to save it for the later stages of the tournament (especially if you're running the tournament). I'd also argue that tennis seedings are generally more accurate than football seedings, because their performances can more easily be compared, e.g. Djokovic and Nadal are playing the same set of opponents and same level of tournaments each year, in a way that say Poland and Colombia in football are not. Another point is that tennis matches come quickly after each other. Going back a few years, if you had Djokovic, Nadal, Federer and Murray all in the same half of the draw, then whoever got to the final would be exhausted and quite possibly lose to a lesser player who's had a much easier run-in.



ATP and WTA differ a bit, but ATP rankings are as below (from the Wikipedia page, easier to post as an image than text!). Getting through the qualification tournament will get you more points (e.g. 25 points for getting through the qualification tournament for a slam), but otherwise no, you don't get extra points. So for example a seeded player who loses in the first round of all four slams gets (4x10=) 40 points. If you're a lower ranked player, you'd have to get to R16 in two ATP250 tournaments to get  the same points haul. But I don't think this is unfair at all... the reason being that for top players, 10 or even 100 points here or there is largely irrelevant to their ranking, whereas if you're outside the top 100, even 10 points can be a big deal (e.g. compare Berrettini ranked 10 on 3,805 points, with Thiago Montiero ranked 100 on 651 points).


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATP_rankings#Ranking_method

Thanks for the rundown, Cnut, I definitely get that seeding matters in a way, but I know in football most teams don't really care since the performance of all teams tends to mean that supposed giants end up in a lower seed, and every season, unexpected underdogs who won recently end up in the highest seed pots.

I won't dare to say tennis would be the same but early exits for favourites probably puts them in lower rankings where they would easily progress anyway (might even then end up getting good form in latter stages).

One last question, seems it doesn't seem easily Google-able: if rankings are only from how far you get in a tourney, you don't get extra points for playing/winning more games to get to the same stage as a seeded opponent who doesn't need to play earlier stages?

And thanks for the info examples/Daniel but yeah, from the eyes of an outsider (me), it still doesn't feel as bad as it sounds (seeding), but I totally get why people would feel it's less privileged for those who did so well.

Face/Palm, of course, thanks Trofo.



Two good wins by Ruud and Norrie, they should go far at Roland Garros with the good
form they have shown.

There are a lot of matches in R1 today but all eyes will be on Alcaraz v Londero.

There are also some other potentially close matches on today which should make for
interesting betting.

Dimitrov v Giron
Fognini v Popyrin
Griekspoor v Davidovich Fokina
Ramos-Viñolas v Kokkinakis