Tennis

[thirteen]

an article that actually talks about it, including bringing up LA and OP: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/08/tennis-has-a-doping-problem.html?

 

[faraday]

I didn't watch the 3rd set...after seeing Djokovic missing the tramlines by half a metre, unforced errors that I would have got in play...I watched the recording of the day's Tour.....at least that was funnier than Wimbledon....watching Sky act out their pre-planned pop

But you've still not actually said why Djokovic might have decided to 'throw' the third set. It seems to be a conspiracy based on nothing but your eagerness to be outraged at (or read into) everything you see.

 

[Cycle Chic]

But you've still not actually said why Djokovic might have decided to 'throw' the third set. It seems to be a conspiracy based on nothing but your eagerness to be outraged at (or read into) everything you see.

Says Mr Junior poster who has 8 posts....go read some threads me laddie and wisen up before you join in the discussions.

 

[adamski101]

Says Mr Junior poster who has 8 posts....go read some threads me laddie and wisen up before you join in the discussions.

could you be anymore patronising? since when has the number of posts a member has made be a contributing factor towards whether someone is eligble to join the discussion.

 

[buckle]

Scary

What we Brits have to fear is that the government will sink the pound on the back of all this as happened in 1966. Heck if Rose wins the Open our summer holidays will be really expensive.

 

[Cycle Chic]

could you be anymore patronising? since when has the number of posts a member has made be a contributing factor towards whether someone is eligble to join the discussion.

because they usually enter discussions without even reading the previous page of the thread.

 

[ebandit]

'doh

Says Mr Junior poster who has 8 posts....go read some threads me laddie and wisen up before you join in the discussions.

if you insist on being patronising at least post in a logical manner on subject you know what you are talking about

you make a decision admitting you only saw part of the match?

i know little about tennis but at the match end murray's opponent was fighting hard not to lose

welcome new members they can offer much to discussion

Mark L

 

[Cycle Chic]

if you insist on being patronising at least post in a logical manner on subject you know what you are talking about

you make a decision admitting you only saw part of the match?

i know little about tennis but at the match end murray's opponent was fighting hard not to lose

welcome new members they can offer much to discussion

Mark L

I know A LOT ABOUT TENNIS !

 

[ebandit]

I know A LOT ABOUT TENNIS !

wow! i bow to your superior knowledge

also i am always amazed by your ability to dream up crackpot conspiracy theories................chapeau!

Mark L

 

[blackcat]

What we Brits have to fear is that the government will sink the pound on the back of all this as happened in 1966. Heck if Rose wins the Open our summer holidays will be really expensive.

george shortos

 

[faraday]

Says Mr Junior poster who has 8 posts....go read some threads me laddie and wisen up before you join in the discussions.

Funny thing is I used to have 1,000+ posts, but they all got removed.

Probably an Anglo-Saxon conspiracy.

 

[sugarman]

Seriously?

Novak played an incredibly tough 5 set match in the semi. For once, it just looked like he wasn't able to recover in time.

This. To me he just looked slightly slower than normal, it can make you miss by a lot if your slightly out of position.

Haven't seen Djoko like this since he went 'gluten free' but seriously what incentive would he have to throw the match?? Match fixing is usually betting related, no one stands to win that much money when its #1 v #2, maybe if he lost in the first round... In any case, I think it would be pretty hard to 'convince' a top 10 player to throw a match, they certainly dont need the money.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

I know A LOT ABOUT TENNIS !

Do you know much about match-fixing though?

What would be Djokovic's motivation for losing? He's obviously been highly motivated to win over the years, leaving home at 12 to train in an academy (much as Murray and Nadal did) and even goes as far as doping to win (according to some; yourself included, if memory serves).

His career prize money earnings are $51m, and for top tennis players, prize money is usually loose change vs that earned from endorsements. (Federer earnt $65m for endorsements in 2012 for example.)

So, it seems reasonable to conclude that he wouldn't lose a match for money, which is the usual reason.

So why would he do it?

 

[Cycle Chic]

This. To me he just looked slightly slower than normal, it can make you miss by a lot if your slightly out of position.

Haven't seen Djoko like this since he went 'gluten free' but seriously what incentive would he have to throw the match?? Match fixing is usually betting related, no one stands to win that much money when its #1 v #2, maybe if he lost in the first round... In any case, I think it would be pretty hard to 'convince' a top 10 player to throw a match, they certainly dont need the money.

It wouldn't be a match fix aka cricket. The first 2 sets were a true competition and the rallies reflected that, Djokovic having an argument with the umpire proved how intent he was to win. The 3rd set was laughable....a friend also commented 'when have you ever seen Djokovic make SO MANY UNFORCED ERRORS'.

When have you ever seen a top 5 player have a 'tired match' - doesn't happen these days and we know why. So for Djoko to 'spray balls' around like he did was a red flag to anyone. Beginning of that 3rd set he couldn't hit a ball in court - I recall a passing shot from Murray when Djoko was at the net and Djoko was so close to the ball he could have caught it in his hand.

No idea why Djoko didn't comeback from 2 sets down...but he threw that 3rd set.

And the argument as to why wouldn't Murray have been gifted the Wimbledon title in last years final against Federer....well Federer's career is on the way down and he hadn't had a win never mind a Grand Slam title for some time.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

And the argument as to why wouldn't Murray have been gifted the Wimbledon title in last years final against Federer....

The argument is actually why would Murray be gifted the Wimbledon title in any year?

Your post implies that gifting the home player the title is the normal course of events!

 

[sniper]

I didn't see Djokovic throw the match either.
Djokovic had a couple of unlucky points. Some breakpoints where he came very close, only for Murray to come up with some magic shot or magic piece of athletic ability.
Also, Djokovic was genuinely angered by a couple of the linesmen's calls, which doesn't exactly fit the matchfixing scenario.
Well, if there was any match-fixing, perhaps it was the linesmen, or Hawkeye software reprogrammed to favor Murray.

Anyway, Murray was ridiculously strong and fit once more.
While Djokovic at least showed some signs of exhaustion, Murray didn't, even though he played later on Friday.
Good thing Walsh 'believes' in Murray. That's settled then.
Ow, and can anybody tell Murray that having his mom shouting and fist-raising in the crowd at every match is really uncool?

 

[Cycle Chic]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/te...-players-playing-Wimbledon-Championships.html

With the world’s most prestigious tennis tournament due to start at Wimbledon a fortnight tomorrow, match-fixing experts have voiced fears that up to a dozen top-50 players who have been involved in ‘suspicious’ matches could be in action at the All England Club.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/te...ng-Wimbledon-Championships.html#ixzz2YXMYvhge
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

AGAIN.. I don't think money was Djoko's reason for throwing the match...most likely 'a give' to Murray. Good for the game, good PR.

 

[faraday]

...beginning of that 3rd set he couldn't hit a ball in court - I recall a passing shot from Murray when Djoko was at the net and Djoko was so close to the ball he could have caught it in his hand.

Certainly the match stats for Djokovic would completely disagree (Source = http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/stats/day21/1701ms.html):
Set 1 - winners = 6, unforced errors = 17
Set 2 - winners = 11, unforced errors = 12
Set 3 - winners = 14, unforced errors = 11

Having watched the third set, you may have seen he was going for more winners on his forehand in the 3rd set - presumably because he was two sets down and forced to be more attacking and less passive. This seems to be backed up by the stats.

Yet he actually decreased his unforced error count, which is the opposite of what usually happens when you become more attacking. And definitely the opposite of what you'd expect if he was throwing the match.

I know A LOT ABOUT TENNIS.

I would seriously query that.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

AGAIN.. I don't think money was Djoko's reason for throwing the match...most likely 'a give' to Murray. Good for the game, good PR.

So how does Djokovic benefit from letting Murray win? You sensibly agree that money wouldn't be a possible motivation, so how do the very imprecise terms "good for the game" and "good PR" motivate Djokovic to deliberately lose the Wimbledon final? Djokovic has to be a willing participant in any match-fixing and for your theory to be plausible, you have to establish a motive for Djokovic. We've ruled out money, so was his girlfriend being held hostage by the Russian mafia or has the Sun got negatives of him in a threesome with Navratilova and Mauresmo? Or something else?

The most plausible explanation for Murray winning is that he's actually the best grass-court tennis player at the moment. He only conceded superiority to Federer in last year's final when the roof shut (making it a defacto indoor court, which favours Federer) since when he's won 8 sets in row on grass against Federer and Djokovic who were both ranked #1 at the time.

Djokovic's error rate was a combination of being more fatigued than Murray (his semi was a lot harder) and having to go for higher risk shots due to the sheer number of balls Murray was getting back and the speed, depth and angle of these returns. Murray was "in the zone" on Sunday, playing with a constant level of aggression, rather than rolling over and dying as he'd done in his first few Grand Slam finals. (Lendl should get an honourary knighthood if Muzza gets the real thing.)

 

[lemoogle]

The argument is actually why would Murray be gifted the Wimbledon title in any year?

Your post implies that gifting the home player the title is the normal course of events!

Because Murray may not be British anymore next year Scotland is having a referendum. ( I could almost believe this to be honest )

Or maybe they really like the number 7 and it's been 77 years since the last british men's champion, the last british woman to win wimbledon was in 77 and the Murray Djokovic game was on the 7th of July ( 7/7 ) . Say whaaaaaaaaat?

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

I would seriously query that.

Dont forget that in the Chic's world, your low post count means you know nothing. So run along now, son!

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Because Murray may not be British anymore next year Scotland is having a referendum

I'm sure such geopolitical considerations were uppermost in Djokovic's mind on Sunday!

 

[sniper]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/te...-players-playing-Wimbledon-Championships.html



AGAIN.. I don't think money was Djoko's reason for throwing the match...most likely 'a give' to Murray. Good for the game, good PR.

that final wasn't fixed, cycling chic.
Or if it was, both players deserve an Oscar, cuz it looked like a genuine fight to me.

you're often right that where there is smoke there tends to be fire in topsport.
But in this case i don't even see any smoke.
No suspicious rallies, nothing. No give aways. No odd drop in form during the match.
Djokovic was at a pretty constant level. Even when he was frontrunning in sets 2 and 3, he never really dropped his level, but Murray simply upped his game and came up with a lot of extra class on difficult moments.
Stunning mental and physical display by Murray, if you ask me.

Both players doped to the gills, of course, but nobody threw nothing here, imo.

 

[faraday]

Dont forget that in the Chic's world, your low post count means you know nothing. So run along now, son!

What, no-one bought my story about the low post count being a conspiracy?
Thanks for the heads-up Dad!

 

[lemoogle]

that final wasn't fixed, cycling chic.
Or if it was, both players deserve an Oscar, cuz it looked like a genuine fight to me.

I'm not arguing that Djokovic threw the game, but tennis is one of the easiest sports to throw. You can play full on 99% of the points and a couple of unforced errors throw it for you.
I mean so many games end up with a forfeit etc, for no apparent reason, call the trainer for a few massages to your leg or knee and you're done.

I'm not up for looking up loads of sources right now, but I've read many articles about match-fixing and gambling being a problem in Tennis, both at the top level and at lower levels ( with only lower level players getting caught of course ).