Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[ashkor87]

thanks.. what is the story of Kerber? I believe she is half Polish, possibly on her mother's side..?

[ti-amie]

[Deuce]

I've 'transplanted' this discussion (in my simpleton 'copy & paste' manner) from the 'Birmingham' thread, in case it becomes an ongoing discussion, and because it does not relate only to the Birmingham tournament, of course, but to tennis in general...
Those with the 'power' to do so can also transplant posts #63, #64, and #65 from the Birmingham thread if they wish to for added context here, and place them above this post.

2 women's Finals yesterday, and 2 in-match retirements.
The disturbing trend continues...

nothing to be disturbed about.. players not taking chances before Wimbledon, that is all, I suspect..

Of course not. I'd say it's even more justified than "playing it safe" - Bencic rolled her ankle and Zhang was playing her second match of the day (and had played a lot of doubles). There's no reason to think a 33-year-old professional athlete was being a baby and just didn't feel like playing anymore. She wouldn't have withdrawn from the doubles final later that day lightly. Obviously she felt she needed to do it and doesn't deserve to be second-guessed.

I completely - and strongly - disagree with you on this, Megan.

If a player enters the singles and doubles draw in a tournament, that player should absolutely be ready to play every match in singles and doubles right through to the Final. If they are not ready to do that - or if they don't believe they'll be able to do that, then they SHOULD NOT ENTER BOTH DRAWS!!
It's a very simple equation.

If you take to the court, you take to the court to give your best effort until the match is finished - NOT just until it becomes 'inconvenient' or 'uncomfortable' for you.
The coach of a current pro player told me a few weeks ago "Pain and discomfort are normal things that happen to every player, and you should play through them. Legitimate injury is a different matter."

It's highly disturbing how these millionaires seem to think more and more that every match they are scheduled to play is OPTIONAL! It's ridiculous. They are so spoiled - by the amount of money they make in winnings and in endorsements, and by being treated as demi-gods everywhere they go - that they feel they owe NOTHING to the fans (who certainly help to pay their winnings), or to the sport itself.

Again - barring serious injury or urgent circumstance, if you're not prepared to play every match that you're scheduled to play during a tournament in every draw you've entered... then DON'T PLAY THE TOURNAMENT.
Simple.
It used to be like this - when the players respected the game and its fans.

Again - we didn't see this BS 30 or 40 years ago, and longer. It's something that is exclusive to the recent generation(s) of players - and I, personally, am convinced that it is directly related to the huge increase in money in tennis AND to the fact that players are now treated as demi-gods.
I've been playing and watching tennis for 40 years, and I cannot believe that professional tennis is that much more physically taxing for players today that it is not compensated for by the huge increase in training and in fitness levels and in fitness equipment over 30 and 40 years ago. No way. At best, it comes to even. At worst, the players of today have the advantage because they train much more and much better than the players of yesterday.

Here's an article from 10 years ago, when people began noticing it becoming a serious problem. Now, 10 years later, it's still a serious problem - more so in the WTA than the ATP at the moment...

From the article:
"Time was, a player retired during a match not because he didn't want to go on, but because he couldn't go on. Or, in trying to continue, he or she ran risk of incurring a serious, career-ending injury. ...a player assumes certain obligations and responsibilities, and reaps certain rewards. One of those obligations is to give a full and honest effort every time he or she sets foot on a court. The players have a contractual obligation to give the ticket-buying public its money's worth, in terms of effort expended if not necessarily time spent. And they also owe their opponents the right to get a win that ends with a numeral, not the abbreviation 'RET.'"

Article here:
Player Retirements Are a Problem...

.

[3mlm]

If the withdrawal problem is related to the "huge increase in money in tennis," why is the problem more serious in the WTA than the ATP since ATP tournaments have much higher prize money than WTA tournaments?

Note that slams, which have equal pay for men and women, are not ATP or WTA tournaments.

[Deuce]

If the withdrawal problem is related to the "huge increase in money in tennis," why is the problem more serious in the WTA than the ATP since ATP tournaments have much higher prize money than WTA tournaments?

Note that slams, which have equal pay for men and women, are not ATP or WTA tournaments.

I think maybe the worst offenders fluctuate between the WTA and the ATP. Right now, the WTA is worse with regards to in-match retirements and withdrawals. Maybe in 2 months, the ATP will be worse. (The article I linked to above mentions both the ATP and WTA, but focuses more on in-match retirements on the ATP side.)

Either way, even if the women are making less than the men, that was also the case in the past... So nothing has changed in relative terms. Even factoring in the cost of living change over the years, the women players today are still making LOADS more than the women players of 30 and 40 years ago were making (the women players today are making more than the MALE players were making back then, as well) - and so my reasoning stands because the difference in pay is relative to 30, 40 years ago when there were only a tiny fraction of today's in-match retirements and withdrawals.

Another possible reason for there being more in the WTA now could be that maybe more men think it's 'not macho' to retire/withdraw, and are perhaps afraid of developing a reputation of being 'weak'. For some men, a 'macho ego' is very prevalent.

[ashkor87]

I've 'transplanted' this discussion (in my simpleton 'copy & paste' manner) from the 'Birmingham' thread, in case it becomes an ongoing discussion, and because it does not relate only to the Birmingham tournament, of course, but to tennis in general...
Those with the 'power' to do so can also transplant posts #63, #64, and #65 from the Birmingham thread if they wish to for added context here, and place them above this post.

nothing to be disturbed about.. players not taking chances before Wimbledon, that is all, I suspect..

Of course not. I'd say it's even more justified than "playing it safe" - Bencic rolled her ankle and Zhang was playing her second match of the day (and had played a lot of doubles). There's no reason to think a 33-year-old professional athlete was being a baby and just didn't feel like playing anymore. She wouldn't have withdrawn from the doubles final later that day lightly. Obviously she felt she needed to do it and doesn't deserve to be second-guessed.

I completely - and strongly - disagree with you on this, Megan.

If a player enters the singles and doubles draw in a tournament, that player should absolutely be ready to play every match in singles and doubles right through to the Final. If they are not ready to do that - or if they don't believe they'll be able to do that, then they SHOULD NOT ENTER BOTH DRAWS!!
It's a very simple equation.

If you take to the court, you take to the court to give your best effort until the match is finished - NOT just until it becomes 'inconvenient' or 'uncomfortable' for you.
The coach of a current pro player told me a few weeks ago "Pain and discomfort are normal things that happen to every player, and you should play through them. Legitimate injury is a different matter."

It's highly disturbing how these millionaires seem to think more and more that every match they are scheduled to play is OPTIONAL! It's ridiculous. They are so spoiled - by the amount of money they make in winnings and in endorsements, and by being treated as demi-gods everywhere they go - that they feel they owe NOTHING to the fans (who certainly help to pay their winnings), or to the sport itself.

Again - barring serious injury or urgent circumstance, if you're not prepared to play every match that you're scheduled to play during a tournament in every draw you've entered... then DON'T PLAY THE TOURNAMENT.
Simple.
It used to be like this - when the players respected the game and its fans.

Again - we didn't see this BS 30 or 40 years ago, and longer. It's something that is exclusive to the recent generation(s) of players - and I, personally, am convinced that it is directly related to the huge increase in money in tennis AND to the fact that players are now treated as demi-gods.
I've been playing and watching tennis for 40 years, and I cannot believe that professional tennis is that much more physically taxing for players today that it is not compensated for by the huge increase in training and in fitness levels and in fitness equipment over 30 and 40 years ago. No way. At best, it comes to even. At worst, the players of today have the advantage because they train much more and much better than the players of yesterday.

Here's an article from 10 years ago, when people began noticing it becoming a serious problem. Now, 10 years later, it's still a serious problem - more so in the WTA than the ATP at the moment...

From the article:
"Time was, a player retired during a match not because he didn't want to go on, but because he couldn't go on. Or, in trying to continue, he or she ran risk of incurring a serious, career-ending injury. ...a player assumes certain obligations and responsibilities, and reaps certain rewards. One of those obligations is to give a full and honest effort every time he or she sets foot on a court. The players have a contractual obligation to give the ticket-buying public its money's worth, in terms of effort expended if not necessarily time spent. And they also owe their opponents the right to get a win that ends with a numeral, not the abbreviation 'RET.'"

Article here:
Player Retirements Are a Problem...

.

yes, times and more have changed, I guess... I remember a Davis Cup match between India and Australia when an Australian Mal Anderson fractured (fractured!) his ankle and kept playing - not only did he keep playing, he did not even show by any gesture or limp that anything was wrong, didnt want to encourage his opponent! Of course, he never played again after that, not sure how long it took him to walk again!

[meganfernandez]

Apostolos Tsitsipas wins!

After Wimbledon, coaching will be allowed across the sport, including the US Open, on a trial basis. And it looks like during the whole match, not once or twice at designated times. I'm guessing I'm the only one happy about coaching trail ... and it's happening at the US Open. What a huge shift in the game. Interested to see how it goes. It says the WTA already has off-court coaching place? I didn't know that? BTW, looks like they define "off court" as the coach staying in her or his seat, not that the talk happens off-court.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/off-cou ... trial-2022

[ponchi101]

If the withdrawal problem is related to the "huge increase in money in tennis," why is the problem more serious in the WTA than the ATP since ATP tournaments have much higher prize money than WTA tournaments?

Note that slams, which have equal pay for men and women, are not ATP or WTA tournaments.

Which is an excellent question and supports my position: WHY is this happening? Is it happening? We may be right now in a confirmation bias position and, as we noticed it once, we are now noticing all the time. If the tours had real, solid data about an increase in retirements, then your question, and others, need to be addressed.

[ponchi101]

Apostolos Tsitsipas wins!

After Wimbledon, coaching will be allowed across the sport, including the US Open, on a trial basis. And it looks like during the whole match, not once or twice at designated times. I'm guessing I'm the only one happy about coaching trail ... and it's happening at the US Open. What a huge shift in the game. Interested to see how it goes. It says the WTA already has off-court coaching place? I didn't know that? BTW, looks like they define "off court" as the coach staying in her or his seat, not that the talk happens off-court.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/off-cou ... trial-2022

You nailed it. What a farce.
From the article:
Off-court coaching will be permitted under the following conditions:

Coaches must sit in the tournament’s designated coach seats
Coaching (verbal and non-verbal) is allowed only if it does not interrupt play or create any hindrance to the opponent
Verbal coaching is permitted only when the player is at the same end of the court
Non-verbal coaching (hand signals) is permitted at any time
Verbal coaching may consist of a few words and/or short phrases (no conversations are permitted)
Coaches may not speak to their player when the player leaves the court for any reason
Penalties and fines will still apply for abuse or misuse of the above coaching conditions

End quote.
Are they really nuts? They can't enforce or even patrol verbal abuse and other blatant violations of the rules, and they are now saying that they will penalize the abuse of coaching? First thing, define ABUSE OF COACHING.
I hope this fails miserably.

[meganfernandez]

If the withdrawal problem is related to the "huge increase in money in tennis," why is the problem more serious in the WTA than the ATP since ATP tournaments have much higher prize money than WTA tournaments?

Note that slams, which have equal pay for men and women, are not ATP or WTA tournaments.

Which is an excellent question and supports my position: WHY is this happening? Is it happening? We may be right now in a confirmation bias position and, as we noticed it once, we are now noticing all the time. If the tours had real, solid data about an increase in retirements, then your question, and others, need to be addressed.

I'm very unconvinced that this is actually a problem or happening. I think it's an area of interest among some fans, and some confirmation bias has turned perception into a reality here. And it just ignores logic. These players are competitive beasts or they wouldn't even be there. They want to win matches and titles more than we want to watch matches. They have more agency than anyone judging them. In 2015, Jeff Sackman crunched some data based on similar perceptions, and he found no real issue. In fact, the numbers showed the opposition of the perception.

The whole things smells like the age-old dismissal of women in the healthcare system, blowing off their legitimate concerns and observations about their own bodies and minds. Saying Zhang could and should have played on isn't too far removed from doctors gaslighting women about their health.

[ti-amie]

Apostolos Tsitsipas wins!

After Wimbledon, coaching will be allowed across the sport, including the US Open, on a trial basis. And it looks like during the whole match, not once or twice at designated times. I'm guessing I'm the only one happy about coaching trail ... and it's happening at the US Open. What a huge shift in the game. Interested to see how it goes. It says the WTA already has off-court coaching place? I didn't know that? BTW, looks like they define "off court" as the coach staying in her or his seat, not that the talk happens off-court.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/off-cou ... trial-2022

You nailed it. What a farce.
From the article:
Off-court coaching will be permitted under the following conditions:

Coaches must sit in the tournament’s designated coach seats
Coaching (verbal and non-verbal) is allowed only if it does not interrupt play or create any hindrance to the opponent
Verbal coaching is permitted only when the player is at the same end of the court
Non-verbal coaching (hand signals) is permitted at any time
Verbal coaching may consist of a few words and/or short phrases (no conversations are permitted)
Coaches may not speak to their player when the player leaves the court for any reason
Penalties and fines will still apply for abuse or misuse of the above coaching conditions

End quote.
Are they really nuts? They can't enforce or even patrol verbal abuse and other blatant violations of the rules, and they are now saying that they will penalize the abuse of coaching? First thing, define ABUSE OF COACHING.
I hope this fails miserably.

If the ATP is giving in to Stefanos Tsitsipas and his father what's next? Will the ATP follow the WTA and reduce the number of sets for an ATP player in a Slam to three, thus making the Slams "Major" in name only?

This is the first step in admitting that the "Next Gen" players aren't able to navigate their way through a three set match let alone a five setter.

I hope that this fails too.

[ponchi101]

...

If the ATP is giving in to Stefanos Tsitsipas and his father what's next? Will the ATP follow the WTA and reduce the number of sets for an ATP player in a Slam to three, thus making the Slams "Major" in name only?

This is the first step in admitting that the "Next Gen" players aren't able to navigate their way through a three set match let alone a five setter.

I hope that this fails too.

I had not even thought of that. Exactly.

[Deuce]

If the withdrawal problem is related to the "huge increase in money in tennis," why is the problem more serious in the WTA than the ATP since ATP tournaments have much higher prize money than WTA tournaments?

Note that slams, which have equal pay for men and women, are not ATP or WTA tournaments.

Which is an excellent question and supports my position: WHY is this happening? Is it happening? We may be right now in a confirmation bias position and, as we noticed it once, we are now noticing all the time. If the tours had real, solid data about an increase in retirements, then your question, and others, need to be addressed.

I'm very unconvinced that this is actually a problem or happening. I think it's an area of interest among some fans, and some confirmation bias has turned perception into a reality here. And it just ignores logic. These players are competitive beasts or they wouldn't even be there. They want to win matches and titles more than we want to watch matches. They have more agency than anyone judging them. In 2015, Jeff Sackman crunched some data based on similar perceptions, and he found no real issue. In fact, the numbers showed the opposition of the perception.

The whole things smells like the age-old dismissal of women in the healthcare system, blowing off their legitimate concerns and observations about their own bodies and minds. Saying Zhang could and should have played on isn't too far removed from doctors gaslighting women about their health.

It's very unfortunate that you're trying to twist this issue into an 'anti-female' thing, Megan - and, frankly, I find that angle to be completely ridiculous, and not one that I appreciate.
I'll question ANY player who quits mid-match or withdraws due to something that is far less than apparent - and I have certainly done that with male players. Right now, WTA players are doing it more, and so my comments are about what is occurring now.

As for your assertion that observing that in-match retirements and withdrawals are occurring more now than 30 or 40 years ago "defies logic" - no... it's actually very logical, as it has been proven many, many times throughout history that money is a very significant factor in motivating people. And once one has enough money to live a life of luxury for the remainder of one's existence - as is the case with many pro tennis players - there is much less need for money, and so the motivation to perform the task for which they are financially compensated very often declines noticeably.
Of course, there are always exceptions - people who play the sport - whatever sport - for 'the love of the game'. But, as salaries and winnings in pro sports increase, these exceptions are fewer and fewer.

Many athletes in other sports have been accused of not giving full efforts, or of sitting out with injuries longer than needed, etc., because they have enough money so as to not care about the sport or its fans. It's unfortunate - and 'defies logic' - that you feel tennis players should be immune to the same questioning/criticisms as pro athletes in other sports face.

[Deuce]

As for the coaching circumstance... I see it as the ATP simply doing what the WTA has been doing for a few years now - and I don't think it's a big deal.

I've often said over the years that I found it ridiculous - and disrespectful to the women players - that in-match coaching is permitted for the women, but not for the men - as this sends the rather clear message that women require outside in-match help more than men do. I don't believe that women require in-match coaching help more than men do - not at all. Add the fact that most of the coaches in the WTA are men, and the message is even worse: that women require outside help FROM MEN, where men don't require outside help at all. I think that's absurd and is insulting to the women players.

If they want to allow coaching only for a certain segment of players, then that segment should be young players under a certain age - pick an age - 20, 21, whatever - BOTH MALE AND FEMALE.
Otherwise, as I've said many times, either allow coaching in both the WTA and ATP, or don't allow coaching in both the WTA and ATP.
Now, with coaching being permitted in the ATP on a similar level as it is in the WTA, they are finally evening out the playing field, which I think is a good thing that was overdue. Whether it was evened out by allowing coaching in the ATP, or removing coaching in the WTA isn't that important in my view, as long as it's the same for both.

[ponchi101]

I found an entire data set for WTA matches.
As we were talking about an increase in the number of retirements, I calculated the simple percentage from this series, starting in 2007. And the result is:
We just displayed a very good sample of confirmation/availability bias.

These are the numbers, in percentage, for each year, starting in 2007:
Year Percentage
2007 3.81%
2008 3.41%
2009 3.45%
2010 2.98%
2011 3.89%
2012 4.99%
2013 2.91%
2014 3.51%
2015 4.01%
2016 3.33%
2017 3.84%
2018 3.65%
2019 3.96%
2020 2.18%
2021 4.42%

The simple Population Standard Deviation is 0.64%
A graph shows:

retirements_WTA.jpg

The red line is the trend, which is as flat as can be.
So, at least from 2007 until today, there is no significant increase in the number of retirements in the WTA, and the variation seems random. We can sleep well, knowing that the ladies of the WTA are putting a reliable effort in completing their matches.