Topic: Tennis League All Thread - page 273. (Read 203574 times)

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

that's exactly what I was going to say, and as far as I remember everyone I always heard them say that we should keep politics out of sports, but here we are banning individual tennis players because of their nationality, I am totally against the war but I'd love to see Medvedev and other players playing high level tennis, Rublev even wrote in a camera after he won a match "no war please" which shows that he's against it, but everything runs by their rules and we just have to obey them.

I agree with this one, at least the the tennis association has enough of Wimbledon because it's obvious that the ban of Wimbledon has nothing to do with the sports, it's simply geo-politics and the players are a unfair victim.

As for the games, it was still Casper Ruud in the Geneva Open.

Winning in 3 sets against Sousa, 6-7 , 6-4 , 6-7 and retains his Geneva Open title, while C. Norrie wins in Lyon vs Molcan.

Without competitive importance in terms of points, I am not sure whether Wimbledon in 2022 will be accepted as a regular GS, seems more like a revue tournament.
I don't see a reason why top players would bother about a tournament that has no weight, maybe it would really be best if all the players give up participating in it. In the end, politics and sport should never get mixed up together.

I believe that it is much more important for Djokovic to win Roland Garros and Wimbledon at this moment and thus surpass Nadal in the race for GOAT in tennis.
Unlike Australia, where Djokovic couldn't compete for well-known reasons, and his main rival Nadal used it well to win a record of 21 GS, this decision could now help Djokovic because one of his main Wimbledon rivals, Medvedev, will not be able to compete, and Nadal is also questionable due to the injury.
It is known that Djokovic loves records and wants everyone to agree that he is the best and that is why he wants to win as many GS as possible.

It's fairly straightforward. It can get a bit messy with minor tournaments for lesser players, because only your best x (I forget how many) tournaments count towards your ranking. But generally, ranking can be summed up as:
- The further you get in a tournament, the more points you get.
- You get more points for bigger tournaments.
- Ranking points total is based on a rolling 12 months. Your ranking points at the start of May are your total points from May 2021 - Apr 2022; your ranking points at start of June 2022 are your total from June 2021 - May 2022, etc.

Yes, I think they care because seeding is based on your ranking.


It does affect everyone equally - no-one gets any points this year. It's just those that did better at Wimbledon last year will lose more ranking points when 2021 is dropped, because they won't get any points from doing well at Wimbledon this year to replace them. Djoko isn't being targeted, no.


Yes, Wimbledon has always been a bit arrogant with stupid etiquette rules, and thinking they can do what they like, which is what they did with the ban on Russians. It's coming back to bite them a bit now though.

of course, points and ranking are important. it's not the same if you run into a tournament from the first or 10th place, in the first rounds you get a privileged draw and some "easier" opponents.
Djokovic is very close to breaking the all-time record on top place, (currently Stefi Graff- 377 Weeks) I guess it's important for him. therefore he will suffer the greatest damage from this new ATP decision.

Hands up here admitting I've got no idea how these points systems work, never have and now I'm trying to read it, doesn't seem very easy to understand. More important question for me is, do the players themselves really care though?

I thought titles are more important and sure, you lose points and rankings, but doesn't it affect everyone equally? Or is Djoko being targeted here?

P.S. The white was always silly to me.

Yes, that's it exactly. Rankings are based on results over the last 12 months. This is what is meant when a player is said to be "defending" points. This is the difference between ranking (points over last 12 months) and the 'race', which is who is leading on points gained this calendar year... the race gives you a clearer indication of who is likely to be ranked number one at the end of the year.

Rankings: https://www.atptour.com/en/rankings/singles
Race: https://www.atptour.com/en/rankings/singles-race-to-turin

Scenario: It's 27 June 2022, and time for Wimbledon to start. Djokovic has 10,000 ranking points accumulated over the last year, from Wimbledon 2021 right up until yesterday, 26 June 2022*. 2,000 of these 10,000 points came from winning Wimbledon 2021. This means that in order to retain his 10,000 ranking points, he needs to win Wimbledon again. If he's only runner-up, he gains 1,200 points but loses the 2,000 from last year, so drops to 8,800 in total.

So no points for Wimbledon this year means that at the end of Wimbledon 2022, Djokovic loses his 2,000 points from winning in 2021 with no chance of replacing them, and in the scenario above drops from 10,000 ranking points in total, to 8,000.





*I think (but someone please correct me if I'm wrong) a few days either way doesn't matter, you don't drop Wimbledon 2021 points until Wimbledon 2022 has ended, even if it's a few days past the 12 months threshold

It has nothing to do with the decision. Player's always loose points exactly 1 year after getting them. Proper way to say it is that players can't defend points from last year and Djoković won last year which is 2000 points less for him.

I have to admit of all the crazy stuff we seen in Tennis world this past two year’s this was something I wasn’t expecting, and I wonder will the athletes be motivated during this tournament, hence we should factor this while selecting them for our wagers. @Trofo I don’t think the current player’s will break the dress code, except Djokovic because he’s shown that he can challenge the authority and with nothing to lose maybe he can break the dress code.

Yes I agree with this move, the reasoning for doing this by the ATP and the statement by
the WTA aligns with my view


I'm not sure why if the ATP are taking this move this year players lose points from last year,
my brain doesnt compute that?

As Trofo points out, Wimbledon has this silly rule of players having to adhere to the White
dress code, top players play for points and accolades, it would be interesting if some of them
skip this event but I'm not sure Djokovic will, the race is still on to collect as many GS's

it was still Ruud over Opelka in just two sets. I thought that this will end up in three, but Ruud got the break in the second set and it didn't go in the tiebreak as compare to the the first set.


Yeah, but against Sousa, he play that bad, score 6-2,6-2. Sousa was playing high level tennis in tournament so I wouldn't be surprised if he pulled an upset.