Tennis 2016

Rafael Nadal was 21 years old then and still improving his game on other surfaces. Blake's best achievement ever is quarters. Del Potro was 19 then and unseeded. Hewitt was seeded 19th. Ya Gonzalez had a good tournament, as did Soderling when Fed won French but these are not the kind of players you hold any hope for when they reach final against a real top player.Gonzalez apart from that final has reached semis just once in his whole career. Gonzalez, Soderling etc are limited ability players who once in a while have a good run. Federer beating them in his prime is nothing special. At least not even close to the kind of players Djokovic still has to get past right now.

I think you being way harsh on Soderling.

He reached two French open finals and three quarter finals in the other slams. Losing to Federer, Djokovic or Nadal. He wasn't some flash in the pan. He had two very good years and then he got Mono, when he was at his peak. He was also a world number 4. Not like someone who had one good tournament.
 
I think you being way harsh on Soderling.

He reached two French open finals and three quarter finals in the other slams. Losing to Federer, Djokovic or Nadal. He wasn't some flash in the pan. He had two very good years and then he got Mono, when he was at his peak. He was also a world number 4. Not like someone who had one good tournament.
Ya I was bit harsh on Soderling. I was more thinking about Gonzalez and just put Soderling in there. Soderling, on Clay was definitely a v. good and consistent player and not flash in pan. But again, Fed is/was not as average on Clay as say Sampras. So Soderling, in final was not going to be enough. I was a bit relieved then that Nadal lost earlier as I like all of them (the big 3) almost equally and wanted all 3 to end up with career slams. 2 down, 1 to go. Should be done with this year :)
 
Also Soderling won 10 titles in his career. In his last active year in 2011 he played 14 tournaments and won 4. Beating T'songa, Ferrer, Cillic and Roddick in finals. Three of the four are top 10 players today. So he definitely was on the up before he got sick. He wouldn't have got close to Fed, Nadal or Djokovic obviously. But he would have had a very good career and was only 26 when he got Mono.
 
That's because after his US open win he got a wrist injury which kept him out for a year. He then came back and was still having trouble with his wrists. He slowly started getting back to his best in 2013 and put a great performance vs Djokovic at Wimbledon. But the last few years again he has been troubled by wrist problems.

I'm not saying he'd beat Djokovic. But he would definitely at his peak have the game to trouble him. Also first guy to beat Nadal and Federer in a slam which shouldn't be underestimated. When at a time Murray and Djokovic were struggling to beat them in slams. If he didn't pick up the stupid wrist injury he'd definitely have more than one slam.

He has missed 12 slams since 2009 and played in 13. That's basically 3 years the injury has robbed him.
I should hav put it in bold, but I was referring to Roddick not Del Potro.
 
I should hav put it in bold, but I was referring to Roddick not Del Potro.

I'd argue for Roddick too about his GS record.

Roddick reached four AO semi finals, three Wimbledon finals and won a US open.

I would say that's a good record in grand slams.

People are too spoiled by the consistency of the top four of reaching every semi final or final in every tournament. This wasn't the case before these guys arrived. Consistency these players have showed is insane.
 
I don't think there's too much to separate Nadal, Federer & Djokovic tbh. It's pretty tight up there.

Personally I think, Nadal's career and legacy is a lot more epic than any of the other twos though. He was still essentially a kid when he rose up to challenge Federer's dominance, became a complete force between 2008-2010 and again managed a renaissance in 2013 to overcome Djokovic.

Have to agree. Federer had a couple of years before Nadal turned up where he didn't have much in the way of competition and it took Nadal another couple of years before he acclimatized to other surfaces. For Federer to lose in those times, he either had to have an off day (very very rare) or someone had to play out of their skins (Safin in Aus). Djokovic is now having a couple of those years with no one really at level although e seems to come up against players playing out of their skins far more than Fed did. Nadal on the other hand has pretty much played all his Tennis when either Federer or Djokovic were at their peak.
 
I'd argue for Roddick too about his GS record.

Roddick reached four AO semi finals, three Wimbledon finals and won a US open.

I would say that's a good record in grand slams.

People are too spoiled by the consistency of the top four of reaching every semi final or final in every tournament. This wasn't the case before these guys arrived. Consistency these players have showed is insane.
I probably am taking the top 4's consistency for granted, but I think that is exactly why I don't think he would have much joy if he was playing against these guys.
 
I'd argue for Roddick too about his GS record.

Roddick reached four AO semi finals, three Wimbledon finals and won a US open.

I would say that's a good record in grand slams.

People are too spoiled by the consistency of the top four of reaching every semi final or final in every tournament. This wasn't the case before these guys arrived. Consistency these players have showed is insane.

That's exactly why there is argument of rating someone like Wawrinka above Roddick. Maybe top 4 force others to raise their game and when Fed dominated there was Fed and then huge gap, then Roddick, Hewitt etc and they didn't raise their game that much. Safin was someone capable but he was too eccentric. So, in the end, even we agree Roddick had comparable talent, Wawrinka will rank higher and is a tougher opponent.
 
Have to agree. Federer had a couple of years before Nadal turned up where he didn't have much in the way of competition and it took Nadal another couple of years before he acclimatized to other surfaces. For Federer to lose in those times, he either had to have an off day (very very rare) or someone had to play out of their skins (Safin in Aus). Djokovic is now having a couple of those years with no one really at level although e seems to come up against players playing out of their skins far more than Fed did. Nadal on the other hand has pretty much played all his Tennis when either Federer or Djokovic were at their peak.

He does? I'd say the only one who has done that was Wawrinka
 
Djokovic could hold all four slams if he wins the French this year, which I'd expect him to.

Great player.
 
I don't think there's too much to separate Nadal, Federer & Djokovic tbh. It's pretty tight up there.

Personally I think, Nadal's career and legacy is a lot more epic than any of the other twos though. He was still essentially a kid when he rose up to challenge Federer's dominance, became a complete force between 2008-2010 and again managed a renaissance in 2013 to overcome Djokovic.
Djokovic is a late developer compared to Nadal. Having said that, I think he has a more complete game and is playing at a higher level than Nadal ever was. And he is not far behind in majors now. If he can keep up with the physical demands who is there to stop him? The ATP ranking points show just how dominant he is nowadays.
 
Revealed: tennis umpires secretly banned over gambling scam

Exclusive by Sean Ingle
Tuesday 9th February 2016


Two international tennis umpires have been secretly banned, while four others face being thrown out of the sport for life on charges of serious corruption, the Guardian can reveal.

Umpires from Kazakhstan, Turkey and Ukraine are among those alleged to have taken bribes from betting syndicates in exchange for manipulating live scores on the International Tennis Federation’s Futures Tour – which allowed crooked gamblers to place bets already knowing the outcome of the next point.

The Guardian has also learned that Kirill Parfenov, an umpire from Kazakhstan, was decertified for life in February 2015 for contacting another official on Facebook in an attempt to manipulate the scoring of matches. Yet the tennis authorities never publicly released details, alerting only a small number of tournament directors and national tennis federations.

The International Tennis Federation also kept quiet over the case of another umpire, Denis Pitner of Croatia, who was suspended for 12 months at the start of August 2015 for regularly logging on to a betting account from which bets were placed on tennis matches. The ITF has also never publicly acknowledged that four more officials are facing serious corruption charges, and only did so when prompted by this newspaper.

The Guardian’s investigation will raise fresh concerns about the extent of corruption in tennis and the lack of transparency at the ITF, the governing body of the sport. There are also questions over whether the ITF inadvertently created the conditions for corruption to thrive.

In 2012 it signed a lucrative five-year deal worth $70m with the data company Sportradar to distribute live scores from very small tournaments around the globe. That meant the bookmakers could provide odds on those matches, particularly on the lucrative in-play market, where odds shift as the games progress – and unscrupulous gamblers had a prime opportunity which they could ruthlessly exploit.
Advertisement

Under the terms of the Sportradar deal, umpires are asked to immediately update the scoreboard after each point using their official IBM tablets. This score is then transmitted around the world to live-score sites and bookmakers, allowing the latter to update their prices as the match proceeds.

However, the umpires are alleged to have deliberately delayed updating the scores for up to 60 seconds – allowing gamblers to place bets knowing what was going to happen next. In some cases, the Guardian has learned, umpires are alleged to have texted the gamblers directly before updating the score on their tablet computer.

In effect the umpires are accused of “courtsiding” – a practice among gamblers whereby observing events live can provide an edge before betting markets react to changing scores – and it meant that bets could be placed on the outcome of games and sets in the knowledge that the chances of them winning were much higher than the odds implied.

The ruse was carried out in ITF futures tournaments in eastern Europe, the lowest rung of professional tennis, where there was little or no television coverage or security, and the poorly paid or volunteer umpires were more susceptible to taking bribes.

The Guardian approached Richard Ings, a former professional umpire for seven years who was also a senior executive responsible for umpires at the Association of Tennis Professionals, who said the revelations were “deeply troubling”.

“Over a 15-year period I have been involved in professional tennis officiating both as a professional umpire and administrator of officiating for the ATP,” he said. “During that period I have seen tennis umpires breach the code for officials for relatively minor offences. But I have never before seen umpires breach it for tennis-integrity issues related to gambling on tennis and courtsiding.

“It is deeply troubling, but not at all surprising, that the risk to the integrity of tennis driven by gambling has expanded beyond players and their entourages to now include umpires and other tournament officials.”

In 2014 the French umpire Morgan Lamri, who worked on the Challenger and Futures tours, was banned for life after being found guilty of being in breach of four unspecified articles of the Tennis Integrity Unit’s rulebook. However this is the first time that so many umpires – those charged with protecting the integrity of the game – have either been banned or faced bans.

Senior figures inside the sport have told the Guardian they fear the allegations are more damaging than the recent more historical claims around match-fixing, for several reasons.

• It shows that corruption extends beyond players’ fixing matches and into those who are supposed to be the game’s arbiters.

• It also exposes the fault lines in tennis’s claims that is doing all it can to be transparent. In the past the names of players who have been banned for life have always been publicly released. Yet here the ITF stayed quiet until it was pressed by the Guardian.

• The revelations raise the question as to whether the ITF decided not to release that fact that Parfenov and Pitner had been suspended because it feared the embarrassment.

• It calls into question whether the ITF’s $14m-per-annum contract with Sportradar has acted as an inadvertent facilitator of corruption. By providing a live data stream from those events most vulnerable to corruption due to small prize pools, a lesser degree of oversight, and negligible media attention, did it help corruption thrive?

In a statement, the ITF said that it could not comment further on the four officials are who currently suspended pending the completion of ongoing investigations.

“In order to ensure no prejudice of any future hearing we cannot publicly disclose the nature or detail of those investigations,” it added. “Should any official be found guilty of an offence, it will be announced publicly. The ITF code of conduct for officials was amended in December 2015 to include public reporting of officiating sanctions from 2016 onwards.

It also insisted that the Sportradar deal had helped the game expose corruption, not fuel it.

It added: “Our deal with Sportradar, like those in place with ATP and WTA, by creating official, accurate and immediate data, acts as a deterrent to efforts by anyone trying to conduct illegal sports betting and/or unauthorised use of data for non-legal purposes.”

The revelations have also renewed the spotlight on a sport stung by claims at the Australian Open that players on the men’s main ATP tour have fixed matches.

Partly due to the explosion in the number of events that can be gambled on during play, the number of suspicious incidents flagged up by bookmakers has risen sharply in the past three years.

Figures from the European Sports Security Association, a trade body that represents 18 bookmakers including William Hill and Ladbrokes, show that 49 suspicious gambling alerts were raised about tennis in the first nine months of 2015. In contrast, only 16 alerts were raised about other sports over the same period.

The world No2 Andy Murray has already urged the game’s authorities to be more “proactive” – warning them that “as a player, you just want to be made aware of everything that’s going on. I think we deserve to know everything that’s out there”.

Senior sources within the sports integrity community believe that the introduction of the Tennis Integrity Unit (TIU) in 2008 has helped stem the flow of new cases at the very top of the game. But they fear the TIU, which is supposed to be the sport’s watchdog, does not have the resources or power to tackle widespread abuse at the lower rungs of the tennis ladder.

During the Australian Open a combined statement from the ATP, WTA, ITF and heads of all four grand slam events, announced an independent review into the TIU “aimed at further safeguarding the integrity of the game”.

That review, headed by Adam Lewis QC, will also address issues of transparency and resourcing at the TIU and how to extend the scope of tennis’s anti-corruption education programmes.

As the TIU board chairman, Philip Brook, admitted last month: “It is vital we repair the damage and do so quickly. We are determined to do anything we need to remove corruption from our sport.”

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/feb/09/revealed-tennis-umpires-secretly-banned-gambling-scam
 
Federer had a very weak pool of competition. Djokovic's looks weak because he is going through them like butter right now.

If you put any one of 15/16 Murray, Federer or Wawrinka into that era of tennis, no doubt they would be top 2 with Federer of that time (Although Federer would still be collecting the majority of trophies).

I feel bad for Murray. He should be on 4/5 GS titles in all honesty and any other era bar the one he is in currently and he would have that.
 
Federer had a very weak pool of competition. Djokovic's looks weak because he is going through them like butter right now.

If you put any one of 15/16 Murray, Federer or Wawrinka into that era of tennis, no doubt they would be top 2 with Federer of that time (Although Federer would still be collecting the majority of trophies).

I feel bad for Murray. He should be on 4/5 GS titles in all honesty and any other era bar the one he is in currently and he would have that.

Or they actually aren't all that great?

Agree re: Murray though. He's also had some tough luck with the back injury just when he was reaching a high level.
 
Nadal looking very poor, even on clay. First he scraped past Monaco. I watched the first set against Lorenzi, where he looked awful. At the moment he's a set down to Thiem.

Watching this match at the moment and Thiem doesn't even look good but he's more than competing with Rafa.
 
Nadal loses another semi final again.

He can't win the South American tournaments where there are not many top 20 players in them. He has little chance of winning the European clay tournaments.

It was basically the same performance as the last year. Choked on big points. Serve was awful and his opponents just outgunned him. He was just looking to put the ball back in play and hope his opponents make unforced errors.

He really should just get a new coach.
 
Last edited:
Murray with more clutch Davis cup play. Brilliant, brilliant player.
 
Missed a classic game apparently and Djokovic apparently had a epic game too.
 
Sharpova making major announcement tomorrow. Rumour has it retirement.
 
Federer had a very weak pool of competition. Djokovic's looks weak because he is going through them like butter right now.

If you put any one of 15/16 Murray, Federer or Wawrinka into that era of tennis, no doubt they would be top 2 with Federer of that time (Although Federer would still be collecting the majority of trophies).

I feel bad for Murray. He should be on 4/5 GS titles in all honesty and any other era bar the one he is in currently and he would have that.

How is Djokovic's pool any stronger? His best opponent is a 34 year old Fed. :lol:

Fed at his peak would have crushed the current Djokovic IMO. Nadal was justt his kryptonite
 
How is Djokovic's pool any stronger? His best opponent is a 34 year old Fed. :lol:

Fed at his peak would have crushed the current Djokovic IMO. Nadal was justt his kryptonite
Murray, 34 year old Federer and Wawrinka are better then Roddick IMO.
 
Substance she's been taking since 2006, just added to the banned list since January.
 
Nothing major then. The substance was banned in January. She has been taking it for 10 years. But she did not bother to check the email for the updated list on banned substances.
 
Hmm, well at least she's not a 'drug cheat', as that was my initial reaction to when I say the failed a drugs test title
 
Out of Olympics at the very least :(
 
Hmm, well at least she's not a 'drug cheat', as that was my initial reaction to when I say the failed a drugs test title

I don't think it's possible to compete at that level of tennis without being a drugs cheat.
 
Meldonium, it increases endurance. Find it hard to believe that she didn't check it was on the banned list.
Maybe she is lying but I think he reasons are plausible. I and I'm sure other people have ignored important messages. No doubt it's naive to not check, but I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt.

A bit like Real Madrid not checking that one of their players was banned in the cup.

The consequences rightly be whatever they are, but not sure any malice was meant by it.

What I'm not convinced on is that it was for a condition. I'm sure many athletes take PED drugs and practices that are 'legal' but probably shouldn't be.
 
Meldonium, it increases endurance. Find it hard to believe that she didn't check it was on the banned list.
Aye, load of bollocks that explanation. She apparently had this career-damaging condition throughout her career and didn't think to once mention it.

Also and this is something conveniently ignored when doping stories are told...there are spots on the forms where you fill in what medications you are taking. It'll be very interesting to see if she was including that all of the time. And if so and her excuse remains that she didn't know, it'll surely be the case that she'll have declared it on the forms she's signed since it entered onto the list.
 
Aye, load of bollocks that explanation. She apparently had this career-damaging condition throughout her career and didn't think to once mention it.

Also and this is something conveniently ignored when doping stories are told...there are spots on the forms where you fill in what medications you are taking. It'll be very interesting to see if she was including that all of the time. And if so and her excuse remains that she didn't know, it'll surely be the case that she'll have declared it on the forms she's signed since it entered onto the list.


Yeah, it's damage limitation... She has to save her brand. Apparently she's one of the most professional tennis players in the world, not clicking on email attachments is the type of excuse school kids make for not doing their homework. Laughable.