by ti-amie Pablo Amalfitano
@AmalfiTenis
Novedades de la qualy del
@AustralianOpen
:
-Comenzará el 18 o el 19 de diciembre y durará cuatro días
-Tendrá dos sedes: las mujeres en #Dubai y los hombres en #AbuDhabi.
-Los clasificados saldrán en vuelos privados el 26 o el 27 rumbo a Melbourne.
Translated from Spanish by Google
News of the qualy
@AustralianOpen
:
-It will start on December 18 or 19 and will last four days
-It will have two locations: women in #Dubai and the men in #AbuDhabi .
-The classifieds will depart on private flights on the 26th or 27th to Melbourne.
Machine translations are terrible. That is my guess too.
by JazzNU Yes, that's what it says.
Some translations are better than others. I've found Instagram's to be superior to Twitter's more often than not.
by JazzNU In terms of the information - these dates are crazy yet again. It's such a long commitment and they are restricting their movement for a 2 week quarantine again according to reports going full bubble mode, with only minor changes basically. For fully vaccinated players. It's like time has stood still in Australia.
by Suliso Honestly I think they're being stupid...
by mmmm8 I'm super on the side of caution with this stuff and even I think they're being silly, especially since they're presumably being tested in the UAE as well. Quarantine them until 2 PCRs come back negative, then let them leave the hotel but require continued testing.
by meganfernandez
mmmm8 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:04 pm
I'm super on the side of caution with this stuff and even I think they're being silly, especially since they're presumably being tested in the UAE as well. Quarantine them until 2 PCRs come back negative, then let them leave the hotel but require continued testing.
If it keeps Djokovic at 20 for the most poetic reason possible, I'm fine with it.
I don't care if he gets 21 - don't care who ends up with the most Slams. But really hope they all tie at 20, and this particular plot twist would be so apropos.
by skatingfan I was hoping he'd get the Grand Slam, but now that that run is over I want to see new players win majors.
by ti-amie
by meganfernandez I hope they aren't doing both a vaccine mandate AND 2-week quarantine upon arrival. Overkill. I could see maybe a negative text upon arrival.
by JazzNU I would like to open this thread and read that players won't have a 14-day quarantine. I'll take any change that makes me think Australia knows it's not December 2020 with almost no one vaccinated. Even if it's just down to 7 or 10 day quarantine, but something different.
by JazzNU
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:58 pm
I hope they aren't doing both a vaccine mandate AND 2-week quarantine upon arrival. Overkill. I could see maybe a negative text upon arrival.
Oh but they are. It's what they are doing with vaccinated Aussies returning right now, and why you read that story about Nick and his girlfriend during quarantine. So it would have to be a change to the status quo, and it couldn't just be an Aussie rule, it needs to be a Victorian rule, as they have had stricter measures than the rest of the country throughout the pandemic.
3-day quarantine for vaccinated players and two negative PCR tests over 24 hours apart (most sports leagues employ this testing method) unless an individual is showing symptoms should be more than enough.
by JazzNU
by JazzNU Djokovic non-committal about Australia in recent article with that same reporter where he laid out the rest of his schedule for the year. He's concerned about the quarantine period and doesn't share his vaccination status (which always means one thing and I'm not sure why they even bother avoiding a no).
by ti-amie
The tl;dr
“Of course I want to go [to Australia],” Djokovic said.
“Australia is my most successful grand slam tournament. I want to compete, I love this sport and I am still motivated.
“I am following the situation regarding the Australian Open and I understand the final decision [on COVID-related restrictions] will be made in two weeks. I believe there will be a lot of restrictions just like this year, but I doubt there will be too many changes.
“My manager, who is in contact with the Australian Tennis Federation, tells me they are trying to improve the conditions for everyone, both for those who have been vaccinated and those who have not.”
As reported last month by The Age, Tennis Australia boss Craig Tiley had been worried about the implications for the southern hemisphere’s only grand slam. However, he has dropped his opposition to what two government sources said was the strong likelihood Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton would only permit vaccinated players.
“Tiley said we won’t get star players and the state government effectively said ‘suck it up’, ” a source with direct knowledge of the negotiations said. “They capitulated.”
by ponchi101 Which is the way to deal with entitled little kids.
"But I don't like it!!! "
"Too (expletive) bad"
by JazzNU Suck it up is correct here. Australian Open Golf for both women and men was just cancelled last week, so Tennis Australia needs to be very happy they are being allowed to hold the event at all.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie Shots fired
by skatingfan I'm confused by Azarenka's reaction - why does she think that Ben hasn't read the information? It's not that long. Also, many of the tweets replying are wondering why he tweeted a 'confidential' email as if Ben was to be held to the confidentiality of the information in the email.
by JazzNU Vika is right to question the sharing of confidential information. Ben is correct that in saying that it's his job to share stuff he receives such as this, but after sharing it, he's not above being questioned for doing so.
Interestingly enough, Ben sharing this confidential information seems highly likely to torch this allowance of unvaccinated players because Aussies are seeing it, Aussie news outlets are picking it up, and it seems likely this will go up in smoke under public pressure if nothing else. There's a reason they said to keep it confidential until it was worked out with the government.
by ponchi101 Apart from the "confidential" stuff, it sounds reasonable. If you are vaccinated, no need for quarantine. If you are not, you stick to last year's rules.
by JazzNU FYI, this was announced today. At the same time the WTA is saying unvaccinated players are good to go? This was why they said keep it confidential, this was a shaky agreement at best from Tennis Australia.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:14 am
Apart from the "confidential" stuff, it sounds reasonable. If you are vaccinated, no need for quarantine. If you are not, you stick to last year's rules.
Reasonable is relative here. This may be a good rule elsewhere. But there are still vaccinated Aussies that haven't been able to return to the country and unvaccinated Aussies in Australia haven't been able to travel into Victoria because of the rules. And it sounds as if unvaccinated foreign visitors aren't allowed at all generally and there are no plans to allow them in unlike a pathway being set for vaccinated Aussies to start travelling to and within the country. So to create an exception and let in unvaccinated tennis players is going to be a tough sell to the general public especially as they've grown a good deal more weary than they were when the last Aussie Open was held.
by Deuce It's obvious that Ben loves the attention of a 'scoop', and too often writes to be 'sensational'... but, honestly, I don't see anything in that E mail that should be considered 'confidential'. There's no personal information about any player there... The Australian population have a right to know that the players are getting special treatment, and to react as they see fit to this news.
The reason they wanted to keep it 'confidential' is because they wanted to hide the truth from the citizens because they knew that many citizens would object. Concealing a truth which could affect the populace is not a legitimate reason for something to be kept confidential or secret (just because governments do it all the time certainly doesn't mean it's right).
As for Azarenka's reaction... someone just needs to let her know that the 'Victoria' referred to in the E mail is not her.
by meganfernandez Aussies would have found out eventually, and probably sooner than later, because there are journalists in Australia who care more about this than Ben or any of us, and they would have made the public aware. I agree that Australians in particular have a right to know this after what they have been asked to sacrifice. It's kind of silly for the WTA or Tennis Australia or anyone to think it wouldn't have gotten out soon. But whatever, it's won't matter much in the end. It's just a PR oops.
by JTContinental In a rare move, I’m team Ben on this one
by ti-amie
JazzNU wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:05 am
Vika is right to question the sharing of confidential information. Ben is correct that in saying that it's his job to share stuff he receives such as this, but after sharing it, he's not above being questioned for doing so.
Interestingly enough, Ben sharing this confidential information seems highly likely to torch this allowance of unvaccinated players because Aussies are seeing it, Aussie news outlets are picking it up, and it seems likely this will go up in smoke under public pressure if nothing else. There's a reason they said to keep it confidential until it was worked out with the government.
by JazzNU
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:17 pm
Aussies would have found out eventually, and probably sooner than later, because there are journalists in Australia who care more about this than Ben or any of us, and they would have made the public aware. I agree that Australians in particular have a right to know this after what they have been asked to sacrifice. It's kind of silly for the WTA or Tennis Australia or anyone to think it wouldn't have gotten out soon. But whatever, it's won't matter much in the end. It's just a PR oops.
Aussies would of course find out, but timing matters here. If this is kept quiet during negotiations and the Victorian govt makes the decision to take the PR hit with the public, likely because they've determined the revenue from the Aussie Open is worth it, then it's one thing for it to get out. It's another for it to get out now, while negotiations are ongoing and no decision has been made and public pressure is introduced into the decisionmaking. You can tell from the replies on any related story that Aussies had no idea that it was a possibility that an unvaxxed visitor would be permitted to travel to the country because is goes against just about everything their government has been communicating to them recently about next steps to stop with all the lockdown measures.
by JazzNU Also, about Vika. I have no idea what kind of schooling she has done over the years and she's certainly been in the US for a good while, but I've been under the impression she's been here playing tennis, having fun, and soaking up pop culture more than gaining a more formal education and learning about the particulars of how the free press works here. She's still Belarusian at the end of the day and I'd guess a reporter doing something like this there would be an issue and can easily see where she wouldn't know the confidentiality mentioned in the email doesn't extend to a reporter that the story has been leaked to, thus breaking that confidentiality.
by ti-amie
by the Moz
by ponchi101 In a different article I read, the man said "The issue is settled because we will not authorize non-vaccinated people in".
Straight and to the point. Refreshing, for a politician.
Now, let's see where Novak's principles are. In one way, I don't mind Kyrie Irving's position; he is being a fool, but he has been a consistent fool. Let's see whether Novak takes the vaccine (meaning, he really does not believe in his "scientific" position) or or sticks to it (he is a fool for not being vaccinated).
by dmforever
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:17 pm
In a different article I read, the man said "The issue is settled because we will not authorize non-vaccinated people in".
Straight and to the point. Refreshing, for a politician.
Now, let's see where Novak's principles are. In one way, I don't mind Kyrie Irving's position; he is being a fool, but he has been a consistent fool. Let's see whether Novak takes the vaccine (meaning, he really does not believe in his "scientific" position) or or sticks to it (he is a fool for not being vaccinated).
Novak et al.
Kevin
by ponchi101 I understand that there are other players not vaccinated (Sabalenka, for example) but this story will be 99% about Novak. He is going for Slam 21 at his most successful venue, and not participating due to a refusal to take a vaccine will be a huge story. If, as Megan has said, we end up with the three greatest players tied at 20 slams a piece, because of age, injuries and spurious science, it will be an incredible story, for the eternity of professional tennis (Roger and Rafa could not control their situations; Novak can).
by JazzNU Novak's fans are going to be more unbearable in the next few months on social media, and they already set the standard for unbearable tennis fans.
by ashkor87 I wonder if the atp would withdraw accreditation to the ausopen if it doesn't allow non- vaccinated players ...any atp event has to be Open? There have been precedents, I think, when countries have had tournaments taken away because they would not allow certain players to play.... Usually, political grounds, of course...COVID is certainly testing us all...!
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote:I wonder if the atp would withdraw accreditation to the ausopen if it doesn't allow non- vaccinated players ...any atp event has to be Open? There have been precedents, I think, when countries have had tournaments taken away because they would not allow certain players to play.... Usually, political grounds, of course...COVID is certainly testing us all...!
This would amount to the ATP would not offering points and providing support staff, like trainers. Guessing the ITF doesn’t have their own. Players could still enter and earn the prize money. I don’t think this will happen, but the thought exercise is interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ponchi101 Slams belong to the ITF so I doubt the ATP has any say.
by ashkor87 True...
by JazzNU Vaccinated now or plans to be?
by mmmm8 He's been so weird in his explanations about it being private medical data and that people will have to wait until Australia to see. I wonder if he'd been vaccinated all along.
by ti-amie
by JazzNU Not sure it was posted here, I don't recall seeing it, but Rublev has confirmed that he will get vaccinated in the off-season so he can be ready to travel to Melbourne. He was one who had previously stated he would not be getting the vaccine.
by the Moz Welcome to the fold Andrey
by ashkor87
JazzNU wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 7:24 pm
Djokovic non-committal about Australia in recent article with that same reporter where he laid out the rest of his schedule for the year. He's concerned about the quarantine period and doesn't share his vaccination status (which always means one thing and I'm not sure why they even bother avoiding a no).
i read a comment, I think by Cahill, that Djokovic had been to a concert in New York, which he would not have been allowed to, had he not been vaccinated.. so there is a chance he is just being coy, on principle - he is actually vaccinated..
by Deuce
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:24 pm
i read a comment, I think by Cahill, that Djokovic had been to a concert in New York, which he would not have been allowed to, had he not been vaccinated.. so there is a chance he is just being coy, on principle - he is actually vaccinated..
... or that he simply got preferential treatment at the concert because he's 'famous'.
Given how 'celebrities' can get away with just about anything in the celebrity obsessed culture of North America, that would be my guess.
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:24 pm
i read a comment, I think by Cahill, that Djokovic had been to a concert in New York, which he would not have been allowed to, had he not been vaccinated.. so there is a chance he is just being coy, on principle - he is actually vaccinated..
... or that he simply got preferential treatment at the concert because he's 'famous'.
Given how 'celebrities' can get away with just about anything in the celebrity obsessed culture of North America, that would be my guess.
True enough...
by ti-amie
by ashkor87 Djokovic is losing it..made a silly comment about how Russian and Chinese vaccines might be ok..what sense does that make?
ashkor87 wrote:I wonder if the atp would withdraw accreditation to the ausopen if it doesn't allow non- vaccinated players ...any atp event has to be Open? There have been precedents, I think, when countries have had tournaments taken away because they would not allow certain players to play.... Usually, political grounds, of course...COVID is certainly testing us all...!
This would amount to the ATP would not offering points and providing support staff, like trainers. Guessing the ITF doesn’t have their own. Players could still enter and earn the prize money. I don’t think this will happen, but the thought exercise is interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If WTA can pull events from China for the reason that constitutional rights of one retired player were violated, I don't see why ATP can't exercise its authority. This concerns plenty of players who do not want their rights to be violated. And ATP is association of players above all (at least it should be). Slams belong to ITF as a trademark and financially (but mostly each slam is its own enterprise). But ATP has some authority here - it awards ranking points. If ATP does not recognize an event - it essentially becomes and exo. It will be forever asterisked and the winner may not be considered "real slam winner" if the field will be severely depleted. Remember Wimbledon boycott of 1973. I dare you to find an article about Kodes win, that does not mention a boycott.
by Deuce Well, firstly, it is not the ATP or ITF deciding that non-vaccinated players cannot play. At this point, these entities simply don't seem to have the balls to do that, unfortunately. So they can't be held responsible - what are they supposed to do? Move the tournament to a country which allows non-vaccinated people to enter? No.
It is the country of Australia / state of Victoria which is not permitting unvaccinated persons to enter.
Secondly, the tournament IS open to everyone who qualifies. And people who are not vaccinated simply don't qualify - just like the player ranked #953 in the world doesn't qualify. Just like someone who's not permitted entry to Australia for any reason doesn't qualify.
I see no problem with this at all.
What if a player was convicted of a crime which resulted in him not being allowed to enter Australia (or the USA, or England, or France) - would that Major then not be called an 'open' tournament just because that player couldn't play in it?
And this situation is much more easily remedied than if the player had committed a crime which rendered him ineligible to enter a country. In this case, he needs only to get vaccinated to be able to enter the country.
It seems pretty evident that it's much easier and quicker for a person ranked in the top 20 to get vaccinated in order to qualify to play in the main draw of the tournament than it is for the 953rd ranked player to get into the top 100 or so to qualify to play in the qualification round.
The player who simply needs to get vaccinated in order to qualify to play has his fate entirely in his own hands - it does not depend on anyone else, or on him being good enough to qualify. He has a black and white decision to make, and he knows the benefits and consequences of each choice. He makes his choice - either way -, and that's the end of the story.
So, in the end, it is indeed an open tournament - but there are certain criteria which must be met, as is the case with pretty much everything in life. Being vaccinated is just one of the criteria to be able to enter into this country to play in the tournament - and is probably the easiest one to accomplish, at that.
by ashkor87
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:14 am
Well, firstly, it is not the ATP or ITF deciding that non-vaccinated players cannot play. At this point, these entities simply don't seem to have the balls to do that, unfortunately. So they can't be held responsible - what are they supposed to do? Move the tournament to a country which allows non-vaccinated people to enter? No.
It is the country of Australia / state of Victoria which is not permitting unvaccinated persons to enter.
Secondly, the tournament IS open to everyone who qualifies. And people who are not vaccinated simply don't qualify - just like the player ranked #953 in the world doesn't qualify. Just like someone who's not permitted entry to Australia for any reason doesn't qualify.
I see no problem with this at all.
What if a player was convicted of a crime which resulted in him not being allowed to enter Australia (or the USA, or England, or France) - would that Major then not be called an 'open' tournament just because that player couldn't play in it?
And this situation is much more easily remedied than if the player had committed a crime which rendered him ineligible to enter a country. In this case, he needs only to get vaccinated to be able to enter the country.
It seems pretty evident that it's much easier and quicker for a person ranked in the top 20 to get vaccinated in order to qualify to play in the main draw of the tournament than it is for the 953rd ranked player to get into the top 100 or so to qualify to play in the qualification round.
The player who simply needs to get vaccinated in order to qualify to play has his fate entirely in his own hands - it does not depend on anyone else, or on him being good enough to qualify. He has a black and white decision to make, and he knows the benefits and consequences of each choice. He makes his choice - either way -, and that's the end of the story.
So, in the end, it is indeed an open tournament - but there are certain criteria which must be met, as is the case with pretty much everything in life. Being vaccinated is just one of the criteria to be able to enter into this country to play in the tournament - and is probably the easiest one to accomplish, at that.
Oh you are quite right but this is an interesting thought-exercise...where do we draw the line? Djokovic and other anti-vaxxers may have a semi-religious principle they are standing on.. Wimbledon also insists on wearing white! I always wondered what would happen if that rule is challenged in a court! Interestingly, the Queen never wears white, for quite another reason, of course.
by Deuce Are you saying that the Queen is not a virgin?
I think where we draw the line is with the rules of entry of any given country.
The issue here is the age old one of a country's or entity's rights vs. the individual's rights.
Every country is an independent entity. There is no universal law which applies in every country. For example, at the recent Formula 1 race in Qatar, all team members were not permitted to wear shorts at any time. This, despite the hot weather. While this may seem silly and impractical to us here in North America, it is quite normal and accepted in Qatar and some other countries. And the best course of action is to respect that. If one disagrees strongly with the laws and/or customs of a country, that person can choose not to go to the country. Going to the country and defying the country's laws and customs usually doesn't end well.
It's similar with the Wimbledon whites. As an independent entity - much like an independent country - Wimbledon has the right to establish its own rules and policies. Therefore, I don't see how any court challenge would ever be permitted against the rule of wearing white clothing at Wimbledon.
If WTA can pull events from China for the reason that constitutional rights of one retired player were violated, I don't see why ATP can't exercise its authority. This concerns plenty of players who do not want their rights to be violated. And ATP is association of players above all (at least it should be). Slams belong to ITF as a trademark and financially (but mostly each slam is its own enterprise). But ATP has some authority here - it awards ranking points. If ATP does not recognize an event - it essentially becomes and exo. It will be forever asterisked and the winner may not be considered "real slam winner" if the field will be severely depleted. Remember Wimbledon boycott of 1973. I dare you to find an article about Kodes win, that does not mention a boycott.
There would not even be a need for the WTA or ATP to get involved in any of this if the players, individually or collectively, would simple announce that they will not play China until they can meet with Peng, outside of China, behind closed doors (for the people in the meeting) and get her side of the story. A letter signed by Serena, Naomi, Barty, and almost all players of significance (Raducanu, fluent in Mandarin, could be highly symbolic) would do much more than anything the WTA can really achieve.
For the ATP, a win-win scenario. Roger, Rafa, Novak and the new crew would score a major PR victory by standing by Peng. Of course, Roger has too many financial interests in China, but all other players would stand to win considerable respect if doing so.
Now, if you allow me, I am going to write my letter to Santa for my Xmas presents. I do it alphabetically and my first gift will be ATOM BOMB LAUNCHER.
by ponchi101
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 29, 2021 1:34 pm
...
Oh you are quite right but this is an interesting thought-exercise...where do we draw the line? Djokovic and other anti-vaxxers may have a semi-religious principle they are standing on.. Wimbledon also insists on wearing white! I always wondered what would happen if that rule is challenged in a court! Interestingly, the Queen never wears white, for quite another reason, of course.
I love your idea of the SEMI RELIGIOUS principle. If it is semi-religious, it is also semi-secular, as it stands in the middle
Serious here, you hit the nail on the head with the Wimby example. Wimbledon demands that you wear right, and nobody's rights are being trampled. Agreed, getting a medicine is something of a different nature, but the point is that it is not TENNIS AUSTRALIA imposing the condition, it is AUSTRALIA, the country.
There is really so little else to talk about it. And knowing some of these players, I would really look out for the fake ID. Totally a possibility.
by Fastbackss Saudi Arabia has removed their dress code indicating shorts were not okay for the impending f1 race
Secondly, the tournament IS open to everyone who qualifies. And people who are not vaccinated simply don't qualify - just like the player ranked #953 in the world doesn't qualify. Just like someone who's not permitted entry to Australia for any reason doesn't qualify.
I see no problem with this at all.
...
I see PLENTY of problems with this statement. "ANY reason"? ANY? Ok, say the tornament in Saudi Arabia says that jews can't qualify for their event. Would your sentiment be the same? Can the organizers then call their event "Open" and keep a straight face?
For a tennis (or rather any sports) person "qualify" means one thing - merit. You win the qualification or you reach certain ranking position and you qualify. All other stuff is not about tennis, but rather about politics (or whatever drives this insanity of over-restricting every aspect of life).
And one does not even have to go to the different country to see different rules for quarantine and whatnot. He only has to go to Western Australia.
by JTContinental The vaccine is science, not politics. Your comparison of discrimination based on ethnicity to getting a shot in the arm is an obvious false equivalent.
by mick1303
JTContinental wrote: ↑Mon Nov 29, 2021 5:41 pm
The vaccine is science, not politics. Your comparison of discrimination based on ethnicity to getting a shot in the arm is an obvious false equivalent.
It was not intended to be an exact equivalent. It was to show that both are equally not related to sports. Regarding that "the vaccine is science" - it is very naive. Are you going to say that EU/US does not recognize Russian/Chinese/Indian vaccines purely basing on scientific motives?
by ponchi101 The trials for the Chinese vaccine were performed on Young Chinese Men from the Chinese Army. Not a representative group (my nephew in Venezuela, age 17, got that one. I really think he will escape any virulent form of the disease because he already got it and it went by him as if nothing, not because of the vaccine).
The Russian vaccine skipped the entire stage 3 testing. By now, a mute point, as it was then tested on a very large population (several S. American countries, for example) but it did not follow established trial procedures.
Sometimes, not everything is politics.
by the Moz I'm double vaxxed, but I also agree with No-vax that it is a personal choice whether or not to get the shots. But in the context of putting on the AO 2022 his point is moot times infinity. Novak does not have a right to enter any country on the planet he wants by his own rules. The fact that he carries a passport is tacit acknowledgement of such. Whatever the government of Australia or state of Victoria has decided or will decide is their right and they really don't have to explain or justify their actions. Vaccination status and crossing international borders transcends tennis, so the entitlement bubble needs a better argument methinks.
If WTA can pull events from China for the reason that constitutional rights of one retired player were violated, I don't see why ATP can't exercise its authority. This concerns plenty of players who do not want their rights to be violated. And ATP is association of players above all (at least it should be). Slams belong to ITF as a trademark and financially (but mostly each slam is its own enterprise). But ATP has some authority here - it awards ranking points. If ATP does not recognize an event - it essentially becomes and exo. It will be forever asterisked and the winner may not be considered "real slam winner" if the field will be severely depleted. Remember Wimbledon boycott of 1973. I dare you to find an article about Kodes win, that does not mention a boycott.
There would not even be a need for the WTA or ATP to get involved in any of this if the players, individually or collectively, would simple announce that they will not play China until they can meet with Peng, outside of China, behind closed doors (for the people in the meeting) and get her side of the story. A letter signed by Serena, Naomi, Barty, and almost all players of significance (Raducanu, fluent in Mandarin, could be highly symbolic) would do much more than anything the WTA can really achieve.
For the ATP, a win-win scenario. Roger, Rafa, Novak and the new crew would score a major PR victory by standing by Peng. Of course, Roger has too many financial interests in China, but all other players would stand to win considerable respect if doing so.
Now, if you allow me, I am going to write my letter to Santa for my Xmas presents. I do it alphabetically and my first gift will be ATOM BOMB LAUNCHER.
So, let's say the players demand to meet with Peng outside of China privately. The Chinese government has Peng issue a statement saying she doesn't want to and the government says they won't violate her rights and make her. Then what?
Secondly, the tournament IS open to everyone who qualifies. And people who are not vaccinated simply don't qualify - just like the player ranked #953 in the world doesn't qualify. Just like someone who's not permitted entry to Australia for any reason doesn't qualify.
I see no problem with this at all.
...
I see PLENTY of problems with this statement. "ANY reason"? ANY? Ok, say the tornament in Saudi Arabia says that jews can't qualify for their event. Would your sentiment be the same? Can the organizers then call their event "Open" and keep a straight face?
For a tennis (or rather any sports) person "qualify" means one thing - merit. You win the qualification or you reach certain ranking position and you qualify. All other stuff is not about tennis, but rather about politics (or whatever drives this insanity of over-restricting every aspect of life).
And one does not even have to go to the different country to see different rules for quarantine and whatnot. He only has to go to Western Australia.
If WTA can pull events from China for the reason that constitutional rights of one retired player were violated, I don't see why ATP can't exercise its authority. This concerns plenty of players who do not want their rights to be violated. And ATP is association of players above all (at least it should be). Slams belong to ITF as a trademark and financially (but mostly each slam is its own enterprise). But ATP has some authority here - it awards ranking points. If ATP does not recognize an event - it essentially becomes and exo. It will be forever asterisked and the winner may not be considered "real slam winner" if the field will be severely depleted. Remember Wimbledon boycott of 1973. I dare you to find an article about Kodes win, that does not mention a boycott.
There would not even be a need for the WTA or ATP to get involved in any of this if the players, individually or collectively, would simple announce that they will not play China until they can meet with Peng, outside of China, behind closed doors (for the people in the meeting) and get her side of the story. A letter signed by Serena, Naomi, Barty, and almost all players of significance (Raducanu, fluent in Mandarin, could be highly symbolic) would do much more than anything the WTA can really achieve.
For the ATP, a win-win scenario. Roger, Rafa, Novak and the new crew would score a major PR victory by standing by Peng. Of course, Roger has too many financial interests in China, but all other players would stand to win considerable respect if doing so.
Now, if you allow me, I am going to write my letter to Santa for my Xmas presents. I do it alphabetically and my first gift will be ATOM BOMB LAUNCHER.
So, let's say the players demand to meet with Peng outside of China privately. The Chinese government has Peng issue a statement saying she doesn't want to and the government says they won't violate her rights and make her. Then what?
They demand to meet with her in China, privately, with their own security?
by meganfernandez
the Moz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:14 pm
I'm double vaxxed, but I also agree with No-vax that it is a personal choice whether or not to get the shots.
Sure, as long as the non-vaccinated accept the (restrictive) conditions that come with exercising that choice - which will eventually amount to house arrest and walks in the wilderness, or the personal expense of constant testing. That's not what the Novaxes of the world believe.
by ashkor87 Wel, that was a fun discussion, anyway..always good to explore the bounds of sense (book by Strawson btw)
the Moz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:14 pm
I'm double vaxxed, but I also agree with No-vax that it is a personal choice whether or not to get the shots.
Sure, as long as the non-vaccinated accept the (restrictive) conditions that come with exercising that choice - which will eventually amount to house arrest and walks in the wilderness, or the personal expense of constant testing. That's not what the Novaxes of the world believe.
The problem with it being a personal choice is that they end up using scarce resources (ICU beds, for example) that others need. I get that making people get vaccinated is perhaps a step too far, but their idiocy is not victimless. Also, they may end up transmitting it without even knowing it, so the full scope of their actions is never really known. But y'all know all of this already. It's just so frustrating and even 2 years later, I still feel almost as frustrated as before.
the Moz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:14 pm
I'm double vaxxed, but I also agree with No-vax that it is a personal choice whether or not to get the shots.
Sure, as long as the non-vaccinated accept the (restrictive) conditions that come with exercising that choice - which will eventually amount to house arrest and walks in the wilderness, or the personal expense of constant testing. That's not what the Novaxes of the world believe.
The problem with it being a personal choice is that they end up using scarce resources (ICU beds, for example) that others need. I get that making people get vaccinated is perhaps a step too far, but their idiocy is not victimless. Also, they may end up transmitting it without even knowing it, so the full scope of their actions is never really known. But y'all know all of this already. It's just so frustrating and even 2 years later, I still feel almost as frustrated as before.
Kevin
There is another problem which is often overlooked in this discussion. All the restrictive measures give an ammunition to power abusers. Not big power abusers (on the level of country dictatorship), but run-of-the-mill everyday power abusers. Like those Australian policemen that were putting the guy on the ground and nearly in the choke-hold because he was not wearing a mask - ON THE STREET IN THE OPEN AIR (it was on YouTube). You think that their idiocy is victimless?
So, let's say the players demand to meet with Peng outside of China privately. The Chinese government has Peng issue a statement saying she doesn't want to and the government says they won't violate her rights and make her. Then what?
You call their bluff and say that the Chinese government is lying. That is the advantage that the players have; they don't have to go the diplomacy route. The big names in the WTA (Serena and Naomi, for example) don't have to kowtow to the Chinese. They can speak freely.
So, let's say the players demand to meet with Peng outside of China privately. The Chinese government has Peng issue a statement saying she doesn't want to and the government says they won't violate her rights and make her. Then what?
You call their bluff and say that the Chinese government is lying. That is the advantage that the players have; they don't have to go the diplomacy route. The big names in the WTA (Serena and Naomi, for example) don't have to kowtow to the Chinese. They can speak freely.
Ok, you tell the world the Chinese government is lying, which the world already knows. The WTA already did that Then what?
(And to Megan's suggestion, they can have Peng say she doesn't want to meet them in China either.)
My point is that there is no winning way out of this, unless someone knows where Peng is and wants to track her down and extract her without Chinese government's involvement. And that would have to be a government entity, not tennis players.
So, let's say the players demand to meet with Peng outside of China privately. The Chinese government has Peng issue a statement saying she doesn't want to and the government says they won't violate her rights and make her. Then what?
You call their bluff and say that the Chinese government is lying. That is the advantage that the players have; they don't have to go the diplomacy route. The big names in the WTA (Serena and Naomi, for example) don't have to kowtow to the Chinese. They can speak freely.
Ok, you tell the world the Chinese government is lying, which the world already knows. The WTA already did that Then what?
(And to Megan's suggestion, they can have Peng say she doesn't want to meet them in China either.)
My point is that there is no winning way out of this, unless someone knows where Peng is and wants to track her down and extract her without Chinese government's involvement. And that would have to be a government entity, not tennis players.
Do you think she is detained somewhere, or living independently but not freely, being monitored and threatened? If there's no progress, then the WTA pulls out of China altogether, and hopefully some athletes boycott the Olympics. Doesn't help Peng, but as you said, if she is under their control and didn't use the opportunity last week or whenever to signal for help, there's really nothing anyone can do, as far as I know.
Sure, as long as the non-vaccinated accept the (restrictive) conditions that come with exercising that choice - which will eventually amount to house arrest and walks in the wilderness, or the personal expense of constant testing. That's not what the Novaxes of the world believe.
The problem with it being a personal choice is that they end up using scarce resources (ICU beds, for example) that others need. I get that making people get vaccinated is perhaps a step too far, but their idiocy is not victimless. Also, they may end up transmitting it without even knowing it, so the full scope of their actions is never really known. But y'all know all of this already. It's just so frustrating and even 2 years later, I still feel almost as frustrated as before.
Kevin
There is another problem which is often overlooked in this discussion. All the restrictive measures give an ammunition to power abusers. Not big power abusers (on the level of country dictatorship), but run-of-the-mill everyday power abusers. Like those Australian policemen that were putting the guy on the ground and nearly in the choke-hold because he was not wearing a mask - ON THE STREET IN THE OPEN AIR (it was on YouTube). You think that their idiocy is victimless?
I don't understand your comment. Are you saying or implying that I think choking anti vaxxers is OK?
The problem with it being a personal choice is that they end up using scarce resources (ICU beds, for example) that others need. I get that making people get vaccinated is perhaps a step too far, but their idiocy is not victimless. Also, they may end up transmitting it without even knowing it, so the full scope of their actions is never really known. But y'all know all of this already. It's just so frustrating and even 2 years later, I still feel almost as frustrated as before.
Kevin
There is another problem which is often overlooked in this discussion. All the restrictive measures give an ammunition to power abusers. Not big power abusers (on the level of country dictatorship), but run-of-the-mill everyday power abusers. Like those Australian policemen that were putting the guy on the ground and nearly in the choke-hold because he was not wearing a mask - ON THE STREET IN THE OPEN AIR (it was on YouTube). You think that their idiocy is victimless?
I don't understand your comment. Are you saying or implying that I think choking anti vaxxers is OK?
Kevin
First of all, "Anti vaxxers" is putting a label and oversimplification. Some people are maybe vaccinated but nonetheless they are against extreme measures and vilification of everyone who is not vaccinated. And that rationalization of ostracizing "others" (i.e those who are not vaccinated) is a step in the same direction. Sure, you are not directly calling for choking "anti vaxxers". But what is the logical next step after you proclaimed that they "using scarce resources"?
Ok, you tell the world the Chinese government is lying, which the world already knows. The WTA already did that Then what?
(And to Megan's suggestion, they can have Peng say she doesn't want to meet them in China either.)
My point is that there is no winning way out of this, unless someone knows where Peng is and wants to track her down and extract her without Chinese government's involvement. And that would have to be a government entity, not tennis players.
Oh, I didn't say either that there was a way out of this. Remember my comment about writing my letter to Santa. You are a citizen of a dictatorship (or have close ties), so am I. I know Peng is basically on her own and doomed. But the other players can make a point. At least a little moral posturing which, if they boycott the entire Chinese WTA circuit, will be noticed.
Won't help Peng one bit, but it is the most that can be done. I am old enough to remember Tiananmen and know that the Chinese have no qualms to disappear a female tennis player, forever.
There is another problem which is often overlooked in this discussion. All the restrictive measures give an ammunition to power abusers. Not big power abusers (on the level of country dictatorship), but run-of-the-mill everyday power abusers. Like those Australian policemen that were putting the guy on the ground and nearly in the choke-hold because he was not wearing a mask - ON THE STREET IN THE OPEN AIR (it was on YouTube). You think that their idiocy is victimless?
I don't understand your comment. Are you saying or implying that I think choking anti vaxxers is OK?
Kevin
First of all, "Anti vaxxers" is putting a label and oversimplification. Some people are maybe vaccinated but nonetheless they are against extreme measures and vilification of everyone who is not vaccinated. And that rationalization of ostracizing "others" (i.e those who are not vaccinated) is a step in the same direction. Sure, you are not directly calling for choking "anti vaxxers". But what is the logical next step after you proclaimed that they "using scarce resources"?
The post that I was responding to was specifically about the non vaccinated. That is the group that I expressed frustration with, and that is who I was calling anti vaxxers because they are anti vaccination.
I don't know what the next step is. I didn't even imply that there is a next step. I was simply expressing frustration with people who refuse to get vaccinated because they are prolonging this health crisis and are hypocritical because when they do get sick and need medical care, all of a sudden their mistrust in medicine and science goes out the window. And their actions can directly hurt other people even without them knowing it.
Kevin
by mmmm8
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Tue Nov 30, 2021 4:40 pm
Do you think she is detained somewhere, or living independently but not freely, being monitored and threatened? If there's no progress, then the WTA pulls out of China altogether, and hopefully some athletes boycott the Olympics. Doesn't help Peng, but as you said, if she is under their control and didn't use the opportunity last week or whenever to signal for help, there's really nothing anyone can do, as far as I know.
I don't know what the next step is. I didn't even imply that there is a next step. I was simply expressing frustration with people who refuse to get vaccinated because they are prolonging this health crisis and are hypocritical because when they do get sick and need medical care, all of a sudden their mistrust in medicine and science goes out the window. And their actions can directly hurt other people even without them knowing it.
Guessing a player - especially a rich one - could hire find a doctor to certify "a history of anaphylaxis to all approved vaccines."
by ponchi101 The same doctor that declared Tiny to be the fittest president ever. He must be around.
by skatingfan
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 01, 2021 11:01 pm
The same doctor that declared Tiny to be the fittest president ever. He must be around.
Yeah, he's a member of the US Congress.
by JTContinental
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 01, 2021 11:01 pm
The same doctor that declared Tiny to be the fittest president ever. He must be around.
yes, he is in congress now
by ti-amie Look who went first...
by JazzNU I think her explanation makes sense. Given what she said, it's a year to spend the holidays with family and the early Aussie schedule makes that difficult. She was definitely in Dubai training last Christmas, not sure about 2018, but given her results in Australia in 2019, I'd guess she was already there and not in Canada or with her family then too.
by ti-amie I just figured that she's not vaccinated despite all of the family history she cited in that word salad. I read that she attended a hockey game recently and that only vaccinated people were allowed in. It was a Leafs game I think. Could she have done an Aaron Rodgers and said she was immunized?
by ponchi101 I don't know. The mental aspects are on the table now, and in this case, she is citing them clearly. I would not consider Bianca to be such a sleaze bag to invoke mental health issues if the reason for not going to Australia was not being vaccinated. If that were the case, invoking a simple "I am not in shape" would suffice.
by JazzNU
ti-amie wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:16 pm
I just figured that she's not vaccinated despite all of the family history she cited in that word salad. I read that she attended a hockey game recently and that only vaccinated people were allowed in. It was a Leafs game I think. Could she have done an Aaron Rodgers and said she was immunized?
Don't think so. I do think people are bound to take any Aussie Open withdraw as meaning they are unvaccinated, but doubt that's the case with Bianca. She openly said she wanted to get the vaccine earlier in the year when it became available to her, and that was after she already had covid.
by Deuce Andreescu deciding to not play a tournament is not news.
It's more news when she actually DOES play a tournament.
I know she's still young... but I increasingly see her as someone who is desperately wanting to rest on her laurels - and her laurels are precisely 6 months of success in tennis at the pro level - and that was more than 2 years ago.
It seems that she always has some sort of excuse for withdrawing from tournaments, and for not playing at nearly the level she played at during those successful 6 months. These latest comments are just a different angle - and are more excuses. She leads the tour in excuses - by a long way.
Regardless of her level of play, I'll begin to respect her when she stays quiet and just lets her tennis do the talking.
Until then - what was it that Kerber called her?
Yeah...
by ashkor87 Too bad, she is an asset to the tour..the most complete player out there, capable of playing at a high level..I hope she will be back soon.
Players are human, and I, for one, would not want to speculate too much about her motives ..I certainly don't know her well enough to do that!
by ashkor87 Time for some farfetched predictions! Muguruza to win the AusOpen.. following the footsteps of Wozniacki..
much harder to predict the men this time - depends too much on a certain (maybe) unvaccinated player..
by ponchi101 Have you checked Mugu's record AFTER she wins a big tournament? She goes into tennis hibernation for almost an entire year. Next big Mugu win: 2023 Canadian Open. The earliest
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:15 pm
Have you checked Mugu's record AFTER she wins a big tournament? She goes into tennis hibernation for almost an entire year. Next big Mugu win: 2023 Canadian Open. The earliest
Ponchi, your fandom continues to confuse me. Have some faith. She wasn't coached long term by Conchita those times.
by ponchi101 Didn't she switch to Conchita shortly after her W victory? And she has been with her since 2019, at least.
You know I hope she will make me eat my words. But Garbie is not a tournament winning machine. She plays selectively, and then gets 2, 3 tourneys a year, max.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 9:26 pm
Didn't she switch to Conchita shortly after her W victory? And she has been with her since 2019, at least.
You know I hope she will make me eat my words. But Garbie is not a tournament winning machine. She plays selectively, and then gets 2, 3 tourneys a year, max.
No, Conchita consulted and was the driving force behind that Wimbledon run, but she was never her full-time coach. And by 2019, I assume you know that is the very end of 2019, so really starting in the shortened 2020 season, when soon after they reunited, Garbine made the Aussie Open finals.
by JazzNU Novak is listed among the entrants for the Aussie Open. Maybe more concrete info will become available later in the day in Australia, but several of the Aussie media accounts on Twitter are speculating that Novak is on the entry list and seeking a medical exemption rather than actually being vaccinated, this rumor has apparently been floating around there in recent days.
Also, Serena is not on the entry list, she's not going to be ready to compete by then.
by ashkor87
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:15 pm
Have you checked Mugu's record AFTER she wins a big tournament? She goes into tennis hibernation for almost an entire year. Next big Mugu win: 2023 Canadian Open. The earliest
He he true but maybe winning YEC does something for you..
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:15 pm
Have you checked Mugu's record AFTER she wins a big tournament? She goes into tennis hibernation for almost an entire year. Next big Mugu win: 2023 Canadian Open. The earliest
He he true but maybe winning YEC does something for you..
Too late, I've already got my hopes up that Mugu has a great shot the Australian Open, as long as she doesn't inexplicably get injured before then. I'm choosing faith over cynicism and raw data.
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:45 am
Time for some farfetched predictions! Muguruza to win the AusOpen.. following the footsteps of Wozniacki..
much harder to predict the men this time - depends too much on a certain (maybe) unvaccinated player..
Good recall, Wozniacki, winning the Tour Finals then winning the Aussie. But let's hope Mugu doesn't go down a set and 5-1 in R2, like Caro did.
Since you mentioned Caro winning the Aussie, that was the cap on an interesting 12 months for her. In 2017, Wozniacki was still on her climb back from falling out of the Top 10 but playing really well. She lost six finals that year, starting in Dubai in February, until she won in Tokyo in September, then Singapore (tour finals), then the Aussie. She talked about how hard it was to maintain her belief after going 0/6 in finals, but she kept thinking that one had to fall her way eventually. Winning Tokyo and Shanghai definitely built the confidence she needed to get through the 2018 Australian Open. Interesting trajectory...
by meganfernandez Serena out of the Australian, hasn't played since withdrawing from R1 at Wimbledon IN JUNE with a torn hamstring. See you at Wimbledon, maybe.
Too late, I've already got my hopes up that Mugu has a great shot the Australian Open, as long as she doesn't inexplicably get injured before then. I'm choosing faith over cynicism and raw data.
Of course she has a shot. She has made the finals there, last year (as you earlier pointed out) she was the sole player that gave Naomi a real test, and she is playing some of her best tennis.
But there are at least 12 players that have a shot: basically, the entire top ten and Miss "Other", who has won two of the last four slams (Krejcikova and Raducanu coming out of nowhere). She is in the top tier of Contenders, but that is what makes it so hard for her to win. It will be hard to win for anybody.
And we don't know when a Kostyuk or a Muchova decides to finally get her game in shape. You know that when we open that topic I will start up a poll, and I am wondering if I should put OTHER on top.
by ponchi101
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Dec 08, 2021 2:38 pm
Serena out of the Australian, hasn't played since withdrawing from R1 at Wimbledon IN JUNE with a torn hamstring. See you at Wimbledon, maybe.
...
Maybe indeed. RG would be her least viable choice for #24, and Wimby is her favorite. Also, if there is a place to retire for her, Centre Court should be it.
Too late, I've already got my hopes up that Mugu has a great shot the Australian Open, as long as she doesn't inexplicably get injured before then. I'm choosing faith over cynicism and raw data.
Of course she has a shot. She has made the finals there, last year (as you earlier pointed out) she was the sole player that gave Naomi a real test, and she is playing some of her best tennis.
But there are at least 12 players that have a shot: basically, the entire top ten and Miss "Other", who has won two of the last four slams (Krejcikova and Raducanu coming out of nowhere). She is in the top tier of Contenders, but that is what makes it so hard for her to win. It will be hard to win for anybody.
And we don't know when a Kostyuk or a Muchova decides to finally get her game in shape. You know that when we open that topic I will start up a poll, and I am wondering if I should put OTHER on top.
I meant GREAT shot. Like she'll be one of the top 2 favorite if not THE favorite, a slight tier ahead of the rest of the top 10-15.
The field will seem wide open at first, especially until we know who had a solid off-season, who's healthy, who's motivated, who's vaccinated... Usually i would temper my expectations with Mugu but I think it's too late.
by ponchi101 Ah, the hair splitting part Your knife is much sharper than mine
I would not go that far. I say she has the same chance as Aryna, Anett (who has now become part of the conversation), Barty (she has to break through at home sooner or later), Pliskova and a few others. I want to see Raducanu coming back to a slam, this time with a bullseye on her back (Leylah too).
I still say: the field. And will not be surprised one but when another unseeded player takes her first slam.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 08, 2021 4:24 pm
Ah, the hair splitting part Your knife is much sharper than mine
I would not go that far. I say she has the same chance as Aryna, Anett (who has now become part of the conversation), Barty (she has to break through at home sooner or later), Pliskova and a few others. I want to see Raducanu coming back to a slam, this time with a bullseye on her back (Leylah too).
I still say: the field. And will not be surprised one but when another unseeded player takes her first slam.
I'd like to see Raducanu back it up, but I'm not expecting it for quite a while. It's going to be exciting with so many contenders and good storylines, if everyone shows up and shows up healthy. I really don't think Muguruza will win it. Too streaky. I forgot about Anett's hot streak. I keep thinking Badosa will break through - so much fire. Funny that this time last year, Osaka and Brady were the hot players. How quickly things can change.
by ti-amieATP Entry Lists - Singles Main Draw
Seed* Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
1 Novak Djokovic 1 1
2 Daniil Medvedev 2 2
3 Alexander Zverev 3 3
4 Stefanos Tsitsipas 4 4
5 Andrey Rublev 5 5
6 Rafael Nadal 6 6
7 Matteo Berrettini 7 7
8 Casper Ruud 8 8
9 Hubert Hurkacz 9 9
10 Jannik Sinner 10 10
11 Felix Auger-Aliassime 11 11
12 Cameron Norrie 12 12
13 Diego Schwartzman 13 13
14 Denis Shapovalov 14 14
15 Dominic Thiem 15 15
16 Cristian Garin 17 17
17 Aslan Karatsev 18 18
18 Roberto Bautista Agut 19 19
19 Pablo Carreno Busta 20 20
20 Gael Monfils 21 21
21 Nikoloz Basilashvili 22 22
22 Taylor Fritz 23 23
23 John Isner 24 24
24 Daniel Evans 25 25
25 Reilly Opelka 26 26
26 Lorenzo Sonego 27 27
27 Grigor Dimitrov 28 28
28 Karen Khachanov 29 29
29 Marin Cilic 30 30
30 Lloyd Harris 31 31
31 Carlos Alcaraz 32 32
32 Dusan Lajovic 33 33
Alex de Minaur 34 34
Ugo Humbert 35 35
Alexander Bublik 36 36
Fabio Fognini 37 37
Frances Tiafoe 38 38
David Goffin 39 39
Marton Fucsovics 40 40
Sebastian Korda 41 41
Filip Krajinovic 42 42
Tommy Paul 43 43
Federico Delbonis 44 44
Albert Ramos-Vinolas 45 45
Benoit Paire 46 46
Kei Nishikori 47 47
Ilya Ivashka 48 48
James Duckworth 49 49
Alejandro Davidovich Fokina 50 50
Jan-Lennard Struff 51 51
Laslo Djere 52 52
Soonwoo Kwon 53 53
Dominik Koepfer 54 54
Mackenzie McDonald 55 55
Jenson Brooksby 56 56
Botic van de Zandschulp 57 57
Arthur Rinderknech 58 58
Lorenzo Musetti 59 59
Pedro Martinez 60 60
Alexei Popyrin 61 61
Gianluca Mager 62 62
Federico Coria 63 63
Benjamin Bonzi 64 64
Tallon Griekspoor 65 65
Marcos Giron 66 66
Hugo Gaston 67 67
Brandon Nakashima 68 68
Miomir Kecmanovic 69 69
Milos Raonic 70 70
Adrian Mannarino 71 71
John Millman 72 72
Borna Coric 73 73
Jordan Thompson 75 75
Facundo Bagnis 76 76
Jaume Munar 77 77
Stefano Travaglia 78 78
Roberto Carballes Baena 79 79
Kevin Anderson 80 80
Yoshihito Nishioka 81 81
Jiri Vesely 83 83
Daniel Altmaier 84 84
Steve Johnson 85 85
Peter Gojowczyk 86 86
Richard Gasquet 87 87
Alex Molcan 88 88
Thiago Monteiro 89 89
Juan Manuel Cerundolo 90 90
Pablo Andujar 91 91
Corentin Moutet 92 92
Nick Kyrgios 93 93
Mikael Ymer 94 94
Emil Ruusuvuori 95 95
Tennys Sandgren 96 96
Henri Laaksonen 97 97
Pablo Cuevas 98 98
Sebastian Baez 99 99
Marco Cecchinato 100 100
Oscar Otte 101 101
Andreas Seppi 102 102
Holger Rune 103 103
Ricardas Berankis 104 104
Denis Kudla 105 105
Feliciano Lopez 106 106
Sam Querrey 108 108
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
Alternates
Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
1 Aljaz Bedene 109 109
2 Pierre-Hugues Herbert 110 110
3 Carlos Taberner 111 111
4 Maxime Cressy 112 112
5 Egor Gerasimov 113 113
6 Philipp Kohlschreiber 114 114
7 Kamil Majchrzak 115 115
8 Norbert Gombos 116 116
9 Dennis Novak 117 117
10 Daniel Elahi Galan 118 118
11 Hugo Dellien 119 119
12 Andrej Martin 120 120
13 Kyle Edmund 121 121
14 Gilles Simon 122 122
15 Radu Albot 123 123
16 Bernabe Zapata Miralles 124 124
17 Taro Daniel 125 125
18 Yannick Hanfmann 126 126
19 Francisco Cerundolo 127 127
20 J.J. Wolf 174 127 (PR)
21 Yuki Bhambri 1041 127 (PR)
22 Liam Broady 128 128
23 Juan Pablo Varillas 129 129
24 Tomas Martin Etcheverry 130 130
25 Thiago Seyboth Wild 131 131
Withdrawals
Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
Roger Federer 16 16
Guido Pella 74 74
Stan Wawrinka 82 82
by ti-amie People should remember that the first entry lists for a Slam always include everyone who is eligible unless, like Serena, Wawrinka, Federer and Andreescu they withdraw before the entry list is released.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 08, 2021 4:15 pm
Also, if there is a place to retire for her, Centre Court should be it.
Why? Strongly disagree.
by ponchi101 Arthur Ashe too, of course. I forgot.
by Owendonovan
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:45 am
Time for some farfetched predictions! Muguruza to win the AusOpen.. following the footsteps of Wozniacki..
much harder to predict the men this time - depends too much on a certain (maybe) unvaccinated player..
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:45 am
Time for some farfetched predictions! Muguruza to win the AusOpen.. following the footsteps of Wozniacki..
much harder to predict the men this time - depends too much on a certain (maybe) unvaccinated player..
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:45 am
Time for some farfetched predictions! Muguruza to win the AusOpen.. following the footsteps of Wozniacki..
much harder to predict the men this time - depends too much on a certain (maybe) unvaccinated player..
Vika.
Owen!!! Baby heart!!! Great to see you.
It's been a while, great to see you too!
by ponchi101 Aussie Open has announced that there will be an independent panel to review the entry of players that are unvaccinated into the country.
Ah, just tweak those rules just a little, please. Just a little so that the #1 player can come and win again and the Aussie can be the place where the record for most slams will be set. Please, please, please, Government of wherever Melbourne is, please, just tweak those rules a little bit, integrity and decency be damned. Please!!!!
by ti-amie
by Deuce I am in favour of allowing non-vaccinated players to play the Aussie Open... Under the following condition...
When the player is not playing a match, he/she will be kept in a well-sealed box, the size of which will be approximately 10x10x10 feet. One window would be permitted per box so that the player may look out and see other unvaccinated players in their respective boxes (if any).
An adequate amount of oxygen is to be pumped in via an adequately sized hose - as long as the opening for said tube is properly sealed.
The player is to be transported in this box to the court upon which he/she will be playing, and permitted to exit the box for only the duration of the match. The unvaccinated player will wear a properly sealing mask for the duration of his/her time spent outside of the box, including while playing the match.
No bathroom or other types of break will be permitted for these unvaccinated players.
Immediately after the termination of the match, win or lose, the player shall be inserted back into the box and transported to the designated holding area, where he/she will remain - inside the box - until 20 minutes prior to their next match.
The player is permitted to remove the mask while inside the box.
No practice is permitted for these unvaccinated players, and they may play only in the Singles discipline.
As soon as the unvaccinated player loses a match, or if he/she wins the tournament, he/she will be immediately inserted back into the box, and immediately transported to the nearest international airport, where he/she will be placed on the first cargo flight available whose destination is a country other than Australia.
by ti-amie That'll learn em!
by ashkor87 Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
by patrick I would put Medvedev over Zverev, the 3- set king.
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
WTA
first-time winner, 50%... Sabalenka, Badosa, Kontaveit, and Fernandez are my top contenders, in that order.
Everyone else is a crapshoot. Don't know how Osaka is doing, if Barty will handle the pressure better than 2020, if Muguruza will get injured or continue her up-and-down pattern.
Wide open.
ATP
Djokovic 50% if he shows up
Medvedev 45% ditto, can't remember if he is vaccinated or not
The field 5%
by ponchi101
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
You and I will never agree on the WTA
Muguruza, Sabalenka, Osaka, Barty: 5% each
Krejcikova, Kontaveit, Sakkari, Jabeur, Badosa: 4% each.
Field: 60%.
In the last 15 slams, we have had 9 first time winners, and several first time finalists too.
If Djokovic plays, 35%
Medvedev, Zverev: 30% each
The rest, including Rafa if he plays: 5%
The ATP is the polar opposite of the WTA.
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
You and I will never agree on the WTA
Muguruza, Sabalenka, Osaka, Barty: 5% each
Krejcikova, Kontaveit, Sakkari, Jabeur, Badosa: 4% each.
Field: 60%.
In the last 15 slams, we have had 9 first time winners, and several first time finalists too.
If Djokovic plays, 35%
Medvedev, Zverev: 30% each
The rest, including Rafa if he plays: 5%
The ATP is the polar opposite of the WTA.
I think you are both giving Zverev a bit too much respect with more or equal chance as Medvedev. Where's this coming from? Just a sense that he's playing well and is due? I don't believe in the "due" concept. Djokovic and Medvedev consistently outperform him in best of 5 on hard court. Sascha's knocking on the door but I'd give him a 10% chance maybe if both Novak and Medvedev play.
by ponchi101 He gave Novak a good fight at the USO, which, I believe, was the reason Novak lost the final.
He beat Medvedev at the WTF, and could have beaten him twice with a little luck. So I really do not see, right now, too much difference between Zverev and Medvedev, in terms of possibilities. And he is getting his confidence back in his serve, which was his weakness in 2020.
I agree with you with the "due" concept. It has failed too many times. But he is playing well, so I don't mind giving him the same chance as Danill.
If Novak shows up, this will be one of those slams in which the draw will be very important. Wherever #3 lands will be huge for the finals.
Notice, too, how we are not even talking about Tsisipas, Berrettinni, Rublev or any other. It is telling, either of our myopia, or the separation between the top three and the rest.
by ashkor87
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 5:57 pm
He gave Novak a good fight at the USO, which, I believe, was the reason Novak lost the final.
He beat Medvedev at the WTF, and could have beaten him twice with a little luck. So I really do not see, right now, too much difference between Zverev and Medvedev, in terms of possibilities. And he is getting his confidence back in his serve, which was his weakness in 2020.
I agree with you with the "due" concept. It has failed too many times. But he is playing well, so I don't mind giving him the same chance as Danill.
If Novak shows up, this will be one of those slams in which the draw will be very important. Wherever #3 lands will be huge for the finals.
Notice, too, how we are not even talking about Tsisipas, Berrettinni, Rublev or any other. It is telling, either of our myopia, or the separation between the top three and the rest.
Generally agree with you there, on zverev..he is getting more confident, his serve will get him cheap points against anybody...Also, depends on how fast or slow the courts are (unknown factor for now): if they are slow, Medvedev will find it difficult to put the point away, except on serve..Zverev knows how to grind it out...I guess I am expecting courts much slower than the USO
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
You and I will never agree on the WTA
Muguruza, Sabalenka, Osaka, Barty: 5% each
Krejcikova, Kontaveit, Sakkari, Jabeur, Badosa: 4% each.
Field: 60%.
In the last 15 slams, we have had 9 first time winners, and several first time finalists too.
If Djokovic plays, 35%
Medvedev, Zverev: 30% each
The rest, including Rafa if he plays: 5%
The ATP is the polar opposite of the WTA.
Yes, true that we have had several first-timers but was any of them such a surprise? Even Kenin had beaten Serena at RG, Woz was always knocking at the door..if, say, Vondrousova or Mertens had won, i would have been surprised..Jen Brady, I am surprised but she didn't really challenge Osaka in the finals (as a Bruin, I cheered for her, of course, to no avail)
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
You and I will never agree on the WTA
Muguruza, Sabalenka, Osaka, Barty: 5% each
Krejcikova, Kontaveit, Sakkari, Jabeur, Badosa: 4% each.
Field: 60%.
In the last 15 slams, we have had 9 first time winners, and several first time finalists too.
If Djokovic plays, 35%
Medvedev, Zverev: 30% each
The rest, including Rafa if he plays: 5%
The ATP is the polar opposite of the WTA.
Yes, true that we have had several first-timers but was any of them such a surprise? Even Kenin had beaten Serena at RG, Woz was always knocking at the door..if, say, Vondrousova or Mertens had won, i would have been surprised..Jen Brady, I am surprised but she didn't really challenge Osaka in the finals (as a Bruin, I cheered for her, of course, to no avail)
by ashkor87 To be more specific:
2011 - Kim Clijsters
2012 - vika - she had already pushed Serena hard the previous year and shown her ability
2013 - vika
2014 -LiNa - runner up the previous year
2015-:Serena - no comment required
2016 - kerber
2017 - Serena
2018 - Wozniacki (had just won the YEC)
2019 - Osaka (already USO champion)
2020 - kenin, yes, a bit of a surprise
2021 - Osaka
It hasn't been as much of a free for all as we think .in hindsight, we should have seen them all coming, except Kenin, perhaps!
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 5:57 pm
He gave Novak a good fight at the USO, which, I believe, was the reason Novak lost the final.
He beat Medvedev at the WTF, and could have beaten him twice with a little luck. So I really do not see, right now, too much difference between Zverev and Medvedev, in terms of possibilities. And he is getting his confidence back in his serve, which was his weakness in 2020.
I agree with you with the "due" concept. It has failed too many times. But he is playing well, so I don't mind giving him the same chance as Danill.
If Novak shows up, this will be one of those slams in which the draw will be very important. Wherever #3 lands will be huge for the finals.
Notice, too, how we are not even talking about Tsisipas, Berrettinni, Rublev or any other. It is telling, either of our myopia, or the separation between the top three and the rest.
I think it's the separation. Novak and Medvedev have better results. They have proven they can come through. I believe Sascha can realistically beat either of those guys on hard court in B5, but I think the chances of it actually happening are fairly low. Lower than 50/50.
Agree about Sascha's serve. Just not sure about his nerve.
I don't think Rublev, Berrettini, or Tsitsipas can realistically do it in B5. It would be a pretty big upset. Tsitsipas only because he's coming back from a surgery, but it appears to have been pretty minor, so maybe he's okay. I give Hurkacz as good a chance as those guys since he beat Federer at Wimbledon and has a big upset under his belt. I feel like Berrettini should be able to win those quarters and semis, too. I don't know what it is about the matchup with Novak that tips the scale for him so much. Maybe his return but I also think it's a lack of Matteo's belief. At both Wimbledon and the US Open, Berrettini won the first set against Novak then lost 4, 4, and 3 and 2, 2, and 3. At the French, Novak got him in four also, 6-3, 6-2, 6-7, 7-5. If Berrettini can get through a draw without having to play Novak, I think he can win.
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
You and I will never agree on the WTA
Muguruza, Sabalenka, Osaka, Barty: 5% each
Krejcikova, Kontaveit, Sakkari, Jabeur, Badosa: 4% each.
Field: 60%.
In the last 15 slams, we have had 9 first time winners, and several first time finalists too.
If Djokovic plays, 35%
Medvedev, Zverev: 30% each
The rest, including Rafa if he plays: 5%
The ATP is the polar opposite of the WTA.
Yes, true that we have had several first-timers but was any of them such a surprise? Even Kenin had beaten Serena at RG, Woz was always knocking at the door..if, say, Vondrousova or Mertens had won, i would have been surprised..Jen Brady, I am surprised but she didn't really challenge Osaka in the finals (as a Bruin, I cheered for her, of course, to no avail)
I think a lot of the first-timers were a surprise (if not a shock, like Raducano and Swiatek) because they hadn't been knocking at the door in Slams - six of the nine first-time winners hasn't been past R16. Wozniacki and Halep had a lot of success, of course, and Barty had been to the previous Slam QF. But that's it. Also, those draws they came through were stacked with Slam winners. I was always expecting experience to win out, and I was so wrong.
We'll see if this trend continues. I think Sabalenka will get one soon.
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
WTA
first-time winner, 50%... Sabalenka, Badosa, Kontaveit, and Fernandez are my top contenders, in that order.
Everyone else is a crapshoot. Don't know how Osaka is doing, if Barty will handle the pressure better than 2020, if Muguruza will get injured or continue her up-and-down pattern.
Wide open.
ATP
Djokovic 50% if he shows up
Medvedev 45% ditto, can't remember if he is vaccinated or not
The field 5%
Yes, I agree Kontaveit in particular could be the surprise packet..
As usual, given my pet theme, I think the court will be too slow for Fernandes, probably suit Sabalenka best..except Sabalenka does not seem to have learned to stay calm when the finish line is near...she will get over it, though, some day..as for the rest, I think Badosa is a mite over-rated, like Svtolina..
by Deuce
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:01 am
Yes, I agree Kontaveit in particular could be the surprise packet..
As usual, given my pet theme, I think the court will be too slow for Fernandes, probably suit Sabalenka best..except Sabalenka does not seem to have learned to stay calm when the finish line is near...she will get over it, though, some day..as for the rest, I think Badosa is a mite over-rated, like Svtolina..
Leylah won the Junior Roland Garros. She generally is fine with slower courts.
That said, I don't see her making a noticeable run at the Aussie Open - mostly due to outside factors such as the amount of attention and media requests, etc. she'll get right away from the start still being new to her. That takes time to adapt to. At the U.S. Open, it was like a dream, with her just floating on a cloud. But now that she's come back down to Earth, it'll be interesting to see how she deals with all the attention at a big tournament from even before she steps onto a court for the first time.
Sabalenka... no. I wouldn't be surprised if she never breaks through to win a Major.
by ashkor87 Re Leylah, I don't think her game works well on slower courts..at the USO, she displayed incredible reflexes, agility and foot speed-- not the power and endurance it takes to win when you have to hit the ball ten times to win a point..but let us not rehash this metaphysical debate, we shall see how it pans out, and anyway we don't have any clue yet what the conditions will be like at Melbourne..
by Deuce The U.S. Open was one tournament - and probably the only time that many people have seen Leylah play. And that's fine. But she shouldn't be defined only by that one tournament.
I've watched her for a few years, and I know that she'll adapt and do what it takes on any surface. If there is a weakness in terms of surface, it would be grass - simply due to lack of experience on it. But she's certainly not the only one to whom that applies, as opportunities to play on grass are rare for almost everyone.
by ashkor87
Deuce wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:09 am
The U.S. Open was one tournament - and probably the only time that many people have seen Leylah play. And that's fine. But she shouldn't be defined only by that one tournament.
I've watched her for a few years, and I know that she'll adapt and do what it takes on any surface. If there is a weakness in terms of surface, it would be grass - simply due to lack of experience on it. But she's certainly not the only one to whom that applies, as opportunities to play on grass are rare for almost everyone.
Would be great to see..one can certainly adapt, on a slow surface she could come to the net more, that would neutralize her power deficit..and so on.
by ashkor87 I find it odd that nobody is picking Raducanu! My reason is the same ..she needs a fast court..if the Ausopen is fast ...I tend to discount all the psycho stuff about pressure because everyone handles pressure differently and she will have her support team to insulate her..
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
WTA
first-time winner, 50%... Sabalenka, Badosa, Kontaveit, and Fernandez are my top contenders, in that order.
Everyone else is a crapshoot. Don't know how Osaka is doing, if Barty will handle the pressure better than 2020, if Muguruza will get injured or continue her up-and-down pattern.
Wide open.
ATP
Djokovic 50% if he shows up
Medvedev 45% ditto, can't remember if he is vaccinated or not
The field 5%
Yes, I agree Kontaveit in particular could be the surprise packet..
As usual, given my pet theme, I think the court will be too slow for Fernandes, probably suit Sabalenka best..except Sabalenka does not seem to have learned to stay calm when the finish line is near...she will get over it, though, some day..as for the rest, I think Badosa is a mite over-rated, like Svtolina..
I always thought Svitolina's problem is her serve, particularly her second serve. Just can't get past the big hitters when they are in form at the end of a Slam. I thought the French 2020 was her big chance, but I guess no one was getting by Swiatek anyway. I also don't think Svitolia's chances are over. Just never know. I think she'll still be in the mix, and if the draw breaks right and she's confident, who knows. I feel like there are a lot of players with those circumstances.
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 1:24 pm
I find it odd that nobody is picking Raducanu! My reason is the same ..she needs a fast court..if the Ausopen is fast ...I tend to discount all the psycho stuff about pressure because everyone handles pressure differently and she will have her support team to insulate her..
is the Aussie court really that slow? It's slow-ish as hard courts go, but is it a SLOW surface? Or kind of neutral? Anyway, I wouldn't pick Raducanu but it also wouldn't surprise me if she has a nice tournament (or just wins a couple rounds). I also just can't pick any one player at this point! It's impossible! So many contenders, right? It will be interesting to see how the warm-ups go and who shows up healthy.
by ponchi101
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:01 am
...
Yes, I agree Kontaveit in particular could be the surprise packet..
As usual, given my pet theme, I think the court will be too slow for Fernandes, probably suit Sabalenka best..except Sabalenka does not seem to have learned to stay calm when the finish line is near...she will get over it, though, some day..as for the rest, I think Badosa is a mite over-rated, like Svtolina..
Anett went on a tear by the end of the year, as you know. As a matter of fact, it seemed that the sole player she could not beat was Mugu.
You see, the problem right now is that the winners have been so varied that if you mention somebody that CANNOT win, it is not that hard to find a counterexample. Badosa is overrated? Maybe, but she won IW. Ons? Maybe too, but she has been climbing steadily. All over the place, they all have a story of success recently. Fernandez reached the final at the USO, the hard court slam right before this one, and we know they are different surfaces but not so incredibly different than success in one cannot translate to the other (see Naomi, winning her slams as back-to-back USO-Aussies).
I still say: get ready for an unseeded player lifting that trophy. Or seeded below 16. Tauson breaks through, Muchova, Osorio-Serrano. Living with Gael finally taught Elina to go for it. Get ready for a wide open tournament, on the women's.
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:01 am
...
Yes, I agree Kontaveit in particular could be the surprise packet..
As usual, given my pet theme, I think the court will be too slow for Fernandes, probably suit Sabalenka best..except Sabalenka does not seem to have learned to stay calm when the finish line is near...she will get over it, though, some day..as for the rest, I think Badosa is a mite over-rated, like Svtolina..
Anett went on a tear by the end of the year, as you know. As a matter of fact, it seemed that the sole player she could not beat was Mugu.
You see, the problem right now is that the winners have been so varied that if you mention somebody that CANNOT win, it is not that hard to find a counterexample. Badosa is overrated? Maybe, but she won IW. Ons? Maybe too, but she has been climbing steadily. All over the place, they all have a story of success recently. Fernandez reached the final at the USO, the hard court slam right before this one, and we know they are different surfaces but not so incredibly different than success in one cannot translate to the other (see Naomi, winning her slams as back-to-back USO-Aussies).
I still say: get ready for an unseeded player lifting that trophy. Or seeded below 16. Tauson breaks through, Muchova, Osorio-Serrano. Living with Gael finally taught Elina to go for it. Get ready for a wide open tournament, on the women's.
FWIW, among the 11 first-time winners since the start of 2017, only four were ranked outside the top 20 when they won. Most were 15 or higher. So I still think the winner is likely a Top 20 seed. Muchova's not playing, fyi. Tauson, sure, one of the most dangerous unseeded players, but i'd still consider it a surprise. Her ranking is about where Ostapenko's was when she won. I'd give Gauff, the forgotten prospect, a better chance. Kvitova has done well there. What about Azarenka, if she's fit?
by ponchi101 I did not mention Coco because by now I believe she can be included in contender status. If she were to win it, my level of surprise would be not that big. I don't consider her a favorite but her progress continues.
Kvitova will remain to me the one that always could but something happened. And Vika I believe is past her prime. She is good enough to beat seeded players, but 7 matches in a row is a bit outside her realm right now. But again, if she wins, no surprise. She is a two time champion there.
by Liamvalid Just reading about Novak not being able to compete without a vaccine, unless he is medically exempt. Just wondered if anyone knows what likely exemptions there would be for one of the fittest men on the planet! Does he have any health issues that he could use as an excuse not to get vaccinated? Is it such a health issue that made him an anti-vaxer in the first place?
by ti-amie
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 7:36 pm
Just reading about Novak not being able to compete without a vaccine, unless he is medically exempt. Just wondered if anyone knows what likely exemptions there would be for one of the fittest men on the planet! Does he have any health issues that he could use as an excuse not to get vaccinated? Is it such a health issue that made him an anti-vaxer in the first place?
Preferential treatment for one player?
by ponchi101 I was about to write you a long reply and then realized how futile that would be. So the answers to your questions are: no. There are no valid reasons for him to refuse this vaccine. He is simply in that portion of the population that simply did not understand science a long time ago and went down this path, and because they are healthy believe they are right.
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 7:36 pm
Just reading about Novak not being able to compete without a vaccine, unless he is medically exempt. Just wondered if anyone knows what likely exemptions there would be for one of the fittest men on the planet! Does he have any health issues that he could use as an excuse not to get vaccinated? Is it such a health issue that made him an anti-vaxer in the first place?
Preferential treatment for one player?
doesn't he have asthma or a deviated septum or something? Anyway, it doesn't have to be REAL. Has to be legitimized enough for the review panel to give him an exemption. I have no idea if they are inclined/hoping to do so or not, just meaning that I'm sure he can conjure up any medical records he would need to make a case.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:52 pm
I did not mention Coco because by now I believe she can be included in contender status. If she were to win it, my level of surprise would be not that big. I don't consider her a favorite but her progress continues.
Kvitova will remain to me the one that always could but something happened. And Vika I believe is past her prime. She is good enough to beat seeded players, but 7 matches in a row is a bit outside her realm right now. But again, if she wins, no surprise. She is a two time champion there.
I think we're honing in on a shared definition of "surprise." For me, no one inside the Top 30 will be a surprise except Zidansk. Of the Top 30, I'd be most surprised by:
Rybakina (but we know what she's capable of, and she started 2020 as the hottest player on tour before the shutdown)
Kasatkina (ditto, she has the game, just doesn't produce very often)
Pegula (she'd have to raise her level from the top of what we've seen to win 7 in a row)
Jabeur (does she believe?)
Sakkari (has to work soooo hard to win matches... 7 is a tough ask)
by JazzNU
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:11 pm
doesn't he have asthma or a deviated septum or something? Anyway, it doesn't have to be REAL. Has to be legitimized enough for the review panel to give him an exemption. I have no idea if they are inclined/hoping to do so or not, just meaning that I'm sure he can conjure up any medical records he would need to make a case.
The deviated septum he had was corrected years ago. But I can't stress this strongly enough, neither of those is even remotely a reason for a valid medical vaccination exemption.
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:01 am
...
Yes, I agree Kontaveit in particular could be the surprise packet..
As usual, given my pet theme, I think the court will be too slow for Fernandes, probably suit Sabalenka best..except Sabalenka does not seem to have learned to stay calm when the finish line is near...she will get over it, though, some day..as for the rest, I think Badosa is a mite over-rated, like Svtolina..
Anett went on a tear by the end of the year, as you know. As a matter of fact, it seemed that the sole player she could not beat was Mugu.
You see, the problem right now is that the winners have been so varied that if you mention somebody that CANNOT win, it is not that hard to find a counterexample. Badosa is overrated? Maybe, but she won IW. Ons? Maybe too, but she has been climbing steadily. All over the place, they all have a story of success recently. Fernandez reached the final at the USO, the hard court slam right before this one, and we know they are different surfaces but not so incredibly different than success in one cannot translate to the other (see Naomi, winning her slams as back-to-back USO-Aussies).
I still say: get ready for an unseeded player lifting that trophy. Or seeded below 16. Tauson breaks through, Muchova, Osorio-Serrano. Living with Gael finally taught Elina to go for it. Get ready for a wide open tournament, on the women's.
FWIW, among the 11 first-time winners since the start of 2017, only four were ranked outside the top 20 when they won. Most were 15 or higher. So I still think the winner is likely a Top 20 seed. Muchova's not playing, fyi. Tauson, sure, one of the most dangerous unseeded players, but i'd still consider it a surprise. Her ranking is about where Ostapenko's was when she won. I'd give Gauff, the forgotten prospect, a better chance. Kvitova has done well there. What about Azarenka, if she's fit?
Yes, agree about vika, I had kind of forgotten n her..she has at least a 10% chance...
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 1:24 pm
I find it odd that nobody is picking Raducanu! My reason is the same ..she needs a fast court..if the Ausopen is fast ...I tend to discount all the psycho stuff about pressure because everyone handles pressure differently and she will have her support team to insulate her..
is the Aussie court really that slow? It's slow-ish as hard courts go, but is it a SLOW surface? Or kind of neutral? Anyway, I wouldn't pick Raducanu but it also wouldn't surprise me if she has a nice tournament (or just wins a couple rounds). I also just can't pick any one player at this point! It's impossible! So many contenders, right? It will be interesting to see how the warm-ups go and who shows up healthy.
Well, last year it was not slow, but we never really know .they change it every year without intending to perhaps..
by Deuce Contemplating Gauff, Raducanu, and Leylah...
I'd say that, of the three, Gauff's ascension is the 'healthiest', as hers has been a slow, steady rise. She got a lot of attention a few years ago at Wimbledon - but 95% of that was because she beat one of her idols, Venus. Since then, she has risen in the rankings slowly - two steps forward, one step back kind of thing. This way, she was never overwhelmed at a young age.
Leylah had been rising steadily, as well - if more slowly than Gauff... until last September. Her natural ascension was thus disturbed - suddenly thrust into the spotlight that she hadn't time to prepare for. I've been watching her closely for a few years, always believing in her - but I will be watching especially closely now, to see how she deals with her sudden, unnatural rise. I honestly expect her to have a rather mediocre year in 2022, with nothing anything like what she did at the U.S. Open. I don't believe that's her true level. Yet. I would have preferred that she continue her slow, steady rise, as I feel that would have been better for her long term development.
Raducanu's rise has been the most meteoric of the three. That's not a good thing in my opinion. No-one knew her when she suddenly and very surprisingly did well at Wimbledon. And it wasn't long before the attention and expectations affected her (negatively), causing her an anxiety which had her retire from a match there.
But then, even more surprisingly to me, she rebounded amazingly at the U.S. Open and won the thing. Given what had occurred at Wimbledon only a few months previous, winning the U.S. Open was truly an impressive accomplishment.
But was it 'too much too soon'? Everything that's happened with her on the court since then would certainly suggest that it was too much too soon. And, as with Leylah, I think it would have been better for her long term tennis career to have progressed much more slowly and steadily.
That said, both Leylah and Emma are so young that, even if they have a terrible 2022, they can still rebound from that and be top 20 players in the years which follow.
As long as they have patience and don't want too much too soon.
by oliver0001
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 7:36 pm
Just reading about Novak not being able to compete without a vaccine, unless he is medically exempt. Just wondered if anyone knows what likely exemptions there would be for one of the fittest men on the planet! Does he have any health issues that he could use as an excuse not to get vaccinated? Is it such a health issue that made him an anti-vaxer in the first place?
"The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) last month issued fresh guidelines on the acute major medical conditions that warrant a temporary medical exemption.
ATAGI said the valid reasons for a temporary exemption include:
• For an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine:
– inflammatory cardiac illness within the past three months, eg, myocarditis or pericarditis; acute rheumatic fever or acute rheumatic heart disease (i.e., with active myocardial inflammation); or acute decompensated heart failure.
• For all COVID-19 vaccines:
– Acute major medical condition (eg. undergoing major surgery or hospital admission for a serious illness). Typically, these are time-limited conditions (or the medical treatment for them is time limited).
– PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, where vaccination can be deferred until six months after the infection. Vaccination should be deferred for 90 days in people who have received anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody or convalescent plasma therapy.
– Any serious adverse event attributed to a previous dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, without another cause identified, and with no acceptable alternative vaccine available. For example, a person under 60, contraindicated to receive Pfizer vaccine and in whom the risks do not outweigh the benefits for receipt of AstraZeneca vaccine, is eligible for a temporary exemption.
– If the person is a risk to themselves or others during the vaccination process they may warrant a temporary vaccine exemption. This may include a range of individuals with underlying developmental or mental health disorders."
So there you have it, his exemption is clearly stated and there is no doubt about it that he is deserving of the exempt.
by the Moz Some wild cards have been announced:
Men's Singles
United States Stefan Kozlov
France Lucas Pouille
Chinese Taipei Tseng Chun-hsin
United Kingdom Andy Murray
Women's Singles
United States Robin Anderson
Australia Maddison Inglis
France Diane Parry
Australia Storm Sanders
Australia Daria Saville
Australia Samantha Stosur
by meganfernandez
oliver0001 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:17 pm
The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) last month issued fresh guidelines on the acute major medical conditions that warrant a temporary medical exemption.
ATAGI said the valid reasons for a temporary exemption include:
• For all COVID-19 vaccines:
– PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, where vaccination can be deferred until six months after the infection. Vaccination should be deferred for 90 days in people who have received anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody or convalescent plasma therapy.
So anyone who has had Covid in the last 6 months gets in based on their natural immunity?
oliver0001 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:17 pm
The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) last month issued fresh guidelines on the acute major medical conditions that warrant a temporary medical exemption.
ATAGI said the valid reasons for a temporary exemption include:
• For all COVID-19 vaccines:
– PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, where vaccination can be deferred until six months after the infection. Vaccination should be deferred for 90 days in people who have received anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody or convalescent plasma therapy.
So anyone who has had Covid in the last 6 months gets in based on their natural immunity?
That's correct.
by JazzNU That's an interesting (and also dangerous) marker to use.
by ti-amie Qualifying Entry List - ATP
Seed* Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
1 Carlos Taberner 111 111
2 Maxime Cressy 112 112
3 Egor Gerasimov 113 113
4 Andrej Martin 116 118
5 Kamil Majchrzak 117 116
6 Norbert Gombos 118 117
7 Dennis Novak 119 119
8 Daniel Elahi Galan 120 120
9 Gilles Simon 122 122
10 Radu Albot 123 123
11 Bernabe Zapata Miralles 124 124
12 Taro Daniel 125 125
13 Yannick Hanfmann 126 126
14 Francisco Cerundolo 127 127
15 Liam Broady 128 128
16 Juan Pablo Varillas 129 129
17 Tomas Martin Etcheverry 130 130
18 Thiago Seyboth Wild 131 131
19 Jurij Rodionov 136 136
20 Alex Bolt 137 137
21 Nikola Milojevic 138 138
22 Alejandro Tabilo 139 139
23 Joao Sousa 140 140
24 Jiri Lehecka 141 141
25 Zdenek Kolar 142 142
26 Tomas Machac 143 143
27 Cem Ilkel 144 144
28 Tomas Barrios Vera 147 147
29 Emilio Gomez 148 148
30 Jozef Kovalik 149 149
31 Hugo Grenier 150 150
32 Quentin Halys 151 151
Mats Moraing 152 152
Federico Gaio 153 153
Aleksandar Vukic 156 156
Salvatore Caruso 157 157
Damir Dzumhur 158 158
Christopher Eubanks 160 160
Altug Celikbilek 162 162
Illya Marchenko 163 163
Ernesto Escobedo 164 164
Bjorn Fratangelo 165 165
Gregoire Barrere 166 166
Roman Safiullin 167 167
Kacper Zuk 168 168
Mitchell Krueger 169 169
Elias Ymer 170 170
Thanasi Kokkinakis 171 171
Evgeny Donskoy 172 172
J.J. Wolf 174 174
Christopher O'Connell 175 175
Max Purcell 176 176
Mario Vilella Martinez 177 177
Jason Jung 178 178
Enzo Couacaud 179 179
Dmitry Popko 180 180
Blaz Rola 181 181
Mikhail Kukushkin 182 182
Daniel Masur 183 183
Ramkumar Ramanathan 184 185
Alessandro Giannessi 185 186
Marc-Andrea Huesler 186 187
Dimitar Kuzmanov 187 184
Renzo Olivo 189 189
Lukas Lacko 190 190
Zizou Bergs 191 188
Ernests Gulbis 192 191
Nuno Borges 194 210
Filip Horansky 195 193
Marc Polmans 196 194
Gian Marco Moroni 197 195
Vit Kopriva 198 196
Marco Trungelliti 199 197
Franco Agamenone 201 199
Roberto Marcora 202 200
Yasutaka Uchiyama 203 201
Thomas Fabbiano 204 202
Flavio Cobolli 205 203
Jason Kubler 206 204
Lorenzo Giustino 207 205
Kimmer Coppejans 208 206
Facundo Mena 209 207
Felipe Meligeni Rodrigues Alves 210 208
Mathias Bourgue 211 209
Ruben Bemelmans 212 211
Camilo Ugo Carabelli 213 212
Mohamed Safwat 214 213
Nicolas Kicker 216 233
Gastao Elias 217 219
Andrea Pellegrino 218 215
Prajnesh Gunneswaran 219 216
Sergiy Stakhovsky 220 217
Thai-Son Kwiatkowski 221 218
Maxime Janvier 223 221
Alexandre Muller 224 222
Jesper De Jong 226 224
Constant Lestienne 228 226
Maximilian Marterer 229 227
Robin Haase 230 228
Mikael Torpegaard 231 229
Mirza Basic 233 231
Matthias Bachinger 234 234
Geoffrey Blancaneaux 235 235
Juan Pablo Ficovich 236 236
Matthew Ebden 237 237
Brayden Schnur 238 238
Michael Mmoh 239 239
Frederico Ferreira Silva 240 240
Thiago Agustin Tirante 241 241
Nicola Kuhn 242 244
Manuel Guinard 243 242
Vitaliy Sachko 244 243
Pedro Cachin 245 245
Dominic Stricker 246 246
Go Soeda 247 247
Filippo Baldi 369 241 (PR)
Dudi Sela 381 224 (PR)
Andrew Harris 382 240 (PR)
(WC) Harold Mayot 419
Yuki Bhambri 1043 127 (PR)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
by ti-amieUPDATED Main Draw Singles Entry List - ATP
Seed* Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
1 Novak Djokovic 1 1
2 Daniil Medvedev 2 2
3 Alexander Zverev 3 3
4 Stefanos Tsitsipas 4 4
5 Andrey Rublev 5 5
6 Rafael Nadal 6 6
7 Matteo Berrettini 7 7
8 Casper Ruud 8 8
9 Hubert Hurkacz 9 9
10 Jannik Sinner 10 10
11 Felix Auger-Aliassime 11 11
12 Cameron Norrie 12 12
13 Diego Schwartzman 13 13
14 Denis Shapovalov 14 14
15 Dominic Thiem 15 15
16 Cristian Garin 17 17
17 Aslan Karatsev 18 18
18 Roberto Bautista Agut 19 19
19 Pablo Carreno Busta 20 20
20 Gael Monfils 21 21
21 Nikoloz Basilashvili 22 22
22 Taylor Fritz 23 23
23 John Isner 24 24
24 Daniel Evans 25 25
25 Reilly Opelka 26 26
26 Lorenzo Sonego 27 27
27 Grigor Dimitrov 28 28
28 Karen Khachanov 29 29
29 Marin Cilic 30 30
30 Lloyd Harris 31 31
31 Carlos Alcaraz 32 32
32 Dusan Lajovic 33 33
Alex de Minaur 34 34
Ugo Humbert 35 35
Alexander Bublik 36 36
Fabio Fognini 37 37
Frances Tiafoe 38 38
David Goffin 39 39
Marton Fucsovics 40 40
Sebastian Korda 41 41
Filip Krajinovic 42 42
Tommy Paul 43 43
Federico Delbonis 44 44
Albert Ramos-Vinolas 45 45
Benoit Paire 46 46
Kei Nishikori 47 47
Ilya Ivashka 48 48
James Duckworth 49 49
Alejandro Davidovich Fokina 50 50
Jan-Lennard Struff 51 51
Laslo Djere 52 52
Soonwoo Kwon 53 53
Dominik Koepfer 54 54
Mackenzie McDonald 55 55
Jenson Brooksby 56 56
Botic van de Zandschulp 57 57
Arthur Rinderknech 58 58
Lorenzo Musetti 59 59
Pedro Martinez 60 60
Alexei Popyrin 61 61
Gianluca Mager 62 62
Federico Coria 63 63
Benjamin Bonzi 64 64
Tallon Griekspoor 65 65
Marcos Giron 66 66
Hugo Gaston 67 67
Brandon Nakashima 68 68
Miomir Kecmanovic 69 69
Milos Raonic 70 70
Adrian Mannarino 71 71
John Millman 72 72
Borna Coric 73 73
Jordan Thompson 75 75
Facundo Bagnis 76 76
Jaume Munar 77 77
Stefano Travaglia 78 78
Roberto Carballes Baena 79 79
Kevin Anderson 80 80
Yoshihito Nishioka 81 81
Jiri Vesely 83 83
Daniel Altmaier 84 84
Steve Johnson 85 85
Peter Gojowczyk 86 86
Richard Gasquet 87 87
Alex Molcan 88 88
Thiago Monteiro 89 89
Juan Manuel Cerundolo 90 90
Pablo Andujar 91 91
Corentin Moutet 92 92
Nick Kyrgios 93 93
Mikael Ymer 94 94
Emil Ruusuvuori 95 95
Tennys Sandgren 96 96
Pablo Cuevas 97 98
Henri Laaksonen 98 97
Sebastian Baez 99 99
Marco Cecchinato 100 100
Oscar Otte 101 101
Andreas Seppi 102 102
Holger Rune 103 103
Ricardas Berankis 104 104
Denis Kudla 105 105
Feliciano Lopez 106 106
Sam Querrey 108 108
(WC) Andy Murray 134
(WC) Lucas Pouille 155
(WC) Stefan Kozlov 159
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(WC)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
(Q)
Alternates
Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
1 Carlos Taberner 111 111
2 Maxime Cressy 112 112
3 Egor Gerasimov 113 113
4 Philipp Kohlschreiber 114 114
5 Kamil Majchrzak 117 115
6 Norbert Gombos 118 116
7 Dennis Novak 119 117
8 Daniel Elahi Galan 120 118
9 Hugo Dellien 115 119
10 Andrej Martin 116 120
11 Gilles Simon 122 122
12 Radu Albot 123 123
13 Bernabe Zapata Miralles 124 124
14 Taro Daniel 125 125
15 Yannick Hanfmann 126 126
16 Francisco Cerundolo 127 127
17 J.J. Wolf 174 127 (PR)
18 Yuki Bhambri 1043 127 (PR)
19 Liam Broady 128 128
20 Juan Pablo Varillas 129 129
Withdrawals
Name Current Ranking Entry Ranking
Roger Federer 16 16
Guido Pella 74 74
Stan Wawrinka 82 82
by meganfernandez Hsieh isn’t entered in dubs.,, Mertens is playing with someone else. Wonder if she is unvaccinated.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by Deuce
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:20 pm
Hsieh isn’t entered in dubs.,, Mertens is playing with someone else. Wonder if she is unvaccinated.
They had broken up as a team, I believe.
I have seen absolutely nothing which indicates that Hsieh is unvaccinated.
by ashkor87 hard to imagine Hsieh wouldnt want to play doubles.. puzzling..
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote:hard to imagine Hsieh wouldnt want to play doubles.. puzzling..
Right, very strange. I want to know what’s up. Wonder why they broke up as a team, too. They like each other a lot and were doing so well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ponchi101 Yes. I could understand the split with Aryna as she wanted to concentrate more on singles. But Hsieh really can't claim that, so this is odd. They looked like they were having fun on court.
ashkor87 wrote:hard to imagine Hsieh wouldnt want to play doubles.. puzzling..
Right, very strange. I want to know what’s up. Wonder why they broke up as a team, too. They like each other a lot and were doing so well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just goes to show we know very little about players' personal lives, best not to even go there..
by ashkor87 Kudermetova was Vesnina's partner lately, this time Vesnina isn't playing..maybe it is just that Mertens prefers Kudermetova..who knows?!
by ashkor87 In a way Hsieh is the exact opposite of Mertens' previous partner, Sabakenka..in playing style..
Nice to see Gauff and McNally back together, McNally is really one of the best volleyers on the tour today...
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote:Kudermetova was Vesnina's partner lately, this time Vesnina isn't playing..maybe it is just that Mertens prefers Kudermetova..who knows?!
Exactly, who knows. Could be any number of circumstances. And I’d like to know the reason.
ashkor87 wrote:Kudermetova was Vesnina's partner lately, this time Vesnina isn't playing..maybe it is just that Mertens prefers Kudermetova..who knows?!
Exactly, who knows. Could be any number of circumstances. And I’d like to know the reason.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is just me speculating but it must be very unsettling to be Hsieh's partner, not having any clue what she is going to do.. unpredictable is good but ...
ashkor87 wrote:hard to imagine Hsieh wouldnt want to play doubles.. puzzling..
Right, very strange. I want to know what’s up. Wonder why they broke up as a team, too. They like each other a lot and were doing so well.
So I'll offer a counterpoint to this, though I agree Hsieh not being entered into Doubles is definitely strange. But the split with Mertens to me, not necessarily that odd.
What I've found truly strange over the last year was the adoration given to Mertens and Hsieh as a doubles team, over and above just their success on court. Elise essentially stole things that Aryna came up with for them as a team and was doing them with Hsieh and tennis media acted as if they were an original thing for Mertens and Hsieh and went wild for them, giving them more coverage than any other doubles team from what I saw. They seemed to want some darling Doubles story and these two became it. They've been acting as if Elise and Aryna were not a highly successful doubles team, and as if Hsieh was not coming off a long-term successful partnership with Strycova. The framing of the entire thing was very odd.
by ashkor87 Now Thiem is out of the AO..sad...not that he was a big threat but still..
ashkor87 wrote:hard to imagine Hsieh wouldnt want to play doubles.. puzzling..
Right, very strange. I want to know what’s up. Wonder why they broke up as a team, too. They like each other a lot and were doing so well.
So I'll off a counterpoint to this, though I agree Hsieh not being entered into Doubles is definitely strange. But the split with Mertens to me, not necessarily that odd.
What I've found truly strange over the last year was the adoration given to Mertens and Hsieh as a doubles team, over and above just their success on court. Elise essentially stole things that Aryna came up with for them as a team and was doing them with Hsieh and tennis media acted as if they were an original thing for Mertens and Hsieh and went wild for them, giving them more coverage than any other doubles team from what I saw. They seemed to want some darling Doubles story and these two became it. They've been acting as if Elise and Aryna were not a highly successful doubles team, and as if Hsieh was not coming off a long-term successful partnership with Strycova. The framing of the entire thing was very odd.
True, Mertens and Hsieh have just started playing together, so splitting is not that odd..I am surprised at Hsieh not being in the draw ar all, that is all .
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 1:33 pm
Right, very strange. I want to know what’s up. Wonder why they broke up as a team, too. They like each other a lot and were doing so well.
So I'll off a counterpoint to this, though I agree Hsieh not being entered into Doubles is definitely strange. But the split with Mertens to me, not necessarily that odd.
What I've found truly strange over the last year was the adoration given to Mertens and Hsieh as a doubles team, over and above just their success on court. Elise essentially stole things that Aryna came up with for them as a team and was doing them with Hsieh and tennis media acted as if they were an original thing for Mertens and Hsieh and went wild for them, giving them more coverage than any other doubles team from what I saw. They seemed to want some darling Doubles story and these two became it. They've been acting as if Elise and Aryna were not a highly successful doubles team, and as if Hsieh was not coming off a long-term successful partnership with Strycova. The framing of the entire thing was very odd.
True, Mertens and Hsieh have just started playing together, so splitting is not that odd..I am surprised at Hsieh not being in the draw ar all, that is all .
I don't think the split (if it's even permanent) is odd, necessarily, I just wonder why. I'm a bit surprised because they like each other and were really successful last year, but of course there are reasonable explanations for parting ways, if they have. I just brought it up because it's a notable aspect of the AO draw and I'd like to know what's going on with them, not because I think it's bizarre or anything.
by Deuce To me, it's rather obvious why the Hsieh/Mertens team received lots of attention - it's because they both came from very successful doubles teams where their respective partners decided to stop playing doubles.
When you have two successful teams that split up, and then two players from those two successful teams team up together, of course all eyes will be on them - to see if they have the right chemistry and can continue the success they had with their other teams.
Given the circumstance, I'd have found it much more odd if they hadn't received the attention they received.
by ashkor87
Deuce wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:02 am
To me, it's rather obvious why the Hsieh/Mertens team received lots of attention - it's because they both came from very successful doubles teams where their respective partners decided to stop playing doubles.
When you have two successful teams that split up, and then two players from those two successful teams team up together, of course all eyes will be on them - to see if they have the right chemistry and can continue the success they had with their other teams.
Given the circumstance, I'd have found it much more odd if they hadn't received the attention they received.
Also, we are all bored and there is no actual tennis to talk about!!
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 1:33 pm
Right, very strange. I want to know what’s up. Wonder why they broke up as a team, too. They like each other a lot and were doing so well.
So I'll off a counterpoint to this, though I agree Hsieh not being entered into Doubles is definitely strange. But the split with Mertens to me, not necessarily that odd.
What I've found truly strange over the last year was the adoration given to Mertens and Hsieh as a doubles team, over and above just their success on court. Elise essentially stole things that Aryna came up with for them as a team and was doing them with Hsieh and tennis media acted as if they were an original thing for Mertens and Hsieh and went wild for them, giving them more coverage than any other doubles team from what I saw. They seemed to want some darling Doubles story and these two became it. They've been acting as if Elise and Aryna were not a highly successful doubles team, and as if Hsieh was not coming off a long-term successful partnership with Strycova. The framing of the entire thing was very odd.
True, Mertens and Hsieh have just started playing together, so splitting is not that odd..I am surprised at Hsieh not being in the draw ar all, that is all .
Reportedly, the Belgian press said it was Mertens' choice to split up. (I guess I am going to see this curiosity through to the bitter end... hopefully will talk about something else soon!)
So I'll off a counterpoint to this, though I agree Hsieh not being entered into Doubles is definitely strange. But the split with Mertens to me, not necessarily that odd.
What I've found truly strange over the last year was the adoration given to Mertens and Hsieh as a doubles team, over and above just their success on court. Elise essentially stole things that Aryna came up with for them as a team and was doing them with Hsieh and tennis media acted as if they were an original thing for Mertens and Hsieh and went wild for them, giving them more coverage than any other doubles team from what I saw. They seemed to want some darling Doubles story and these two became it. They've been acting as if Elise and Aryna were not a highly successful doubles team, and as if Hsieh was not coming off a long-term successful partnership with Strycova. The framing of the entire thing was very odd.
True, Mertens and Hsieh have just started playing together, so splitting is not that odd..I am surprised at Hsieh not being in the draw ar all, that is all .
Reportedly, the Belgian press said it was Mertens' choice to split up. (I guess I am going to see this curiosity through to the bitter end... hopefully will talk about something else soon!)
Commendable tenacity!!
by ti-amie
by dmforever With the Omicron variant, even people who are double vaxxed and boosted and are careful are getting Covid. If they test during the tournament, there are going to be multiple players who test positive for sure. People who make the semis / finals might just turn out to be the lucky ones to don't test positive. Time for a total outlier in the men's field to win?
And dang, but Aslan is going to lose a ton of points.
Yeah, a ton of players have already landed in Australia. And the higher ranked, connected players have already begun practicing on the Melbourne show courts.
by meganfernandez
I'm thinking if he hasn't gotten the vaccine by now, he's not willing to get it.
by the Moz Novax for no AO22 already, please!
by ponchi101 We should know that a man that takes 27 bounces before proceeding to serve would "take his time".
Just come out and say it. "I am not vaccinated". But it will never happen.
by JazzNU
by ponchi101 No way he was going to NOT be there if Novak is not going. A good chance for #21.
(#3 behind Medvedev and Zverev, to me).
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 5:46 pm
No way he was going to NOT be there if Novak is not going. A good chance for #21.
(#3 behind Medvedev and Zverev, to me).
He had symptoms from covid. There was definitely a possibility he wouldn't be there, not to mention needing to test negative to travel.
by ponchi101 Oh, sure. He could have skipped this one, but I believe that the drive is there and he still believes he can beat the young ones at this slow hard court.
by ashkor87 nice to see Nadal and Murray playing AO - two of the big 4 at least, not bad..
by ashkor87 Oh oh! Muguruza has withdrawn from Adelaide..wonder what happened to her.. hope she is fit for the AO..
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:39 am
Oh oh! Muguruza has withdrawn from Adelaide..wonder what happened to her.. hope she is fit for the AO..
Holiday-itis.
Adelaide draw looks really good anyway. Azarenka-Badosa and Ferenandez-Alexandrova R1. Potential Barty-Gauff and Fernandez-Swiatek R2.
I have a feeling that he will play, just because it seems likely that the other slams will require vaccination and I can't see him throwing away all 4 Slams this year. We shall see.
Kevin
by oliver0001 Tennis Australia are clinging to hope Novak Djokovic will board one of the final charter flights to Melbourne at the end of the week.
As Djokovic moved his Australian Open preparations from Belgrade to Marbella in Spain, TA chief executive Craig Tiley revealed a handful of unvaccinated players had been granted exemptions and arrived in Australia.
“We know of athletes that have applied for an exemption and in cases, it’s been granted.
“Some of those [players] have indicated that they’re here, but that’s up to the athlete, to disclose and [decide] whether they want to share that information.”
Do we know of any players who have disclosed that they have an exemption?
by meganfernandez
oliver0001 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 10:33 am
Tennis Australia are clinging to hope Novak Djokovic will board one of the final charter flights to Melbourne at the end of the week.
As Djokovic moved his Australian Open preparations from Belgrade to Marbella in Spain, TA chief executive Craig Tiley revealed a handful of unvaccinated players had been granted exemptions and arrived in Australia.
“We know of athletes that have applied for an exemption and in cases, it’s been granted.
“Some of those [players] have indicated that they’re here, but that’s up to the athlete, to disclose and [decide] whether they want to share that information.”
ponchi101 wrote:Indeed, needed information. WHO got an exception, and WHY did they get it.
I think this would be private medical information.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, it's not a HIPAA violation. This was a talking point that got shot down early in the pandemic. To travel anywhere internationally your vaccine status has always been required. to enter school in the States your child has to be vaccinated. Tiley is being cute here.
ponchi101 wrote:Indeed, needed information. WHO got an exception, and WHY did they get it.
I think this would be private medical information.
No, it's not a HIPAA violation. This was a talking point that got shot down early in the pandemic. To travel anywhere internationally your vaccine status has always been required. to enter school in the States your child has to be vaccinated. Tiley is being cute here.
I think she meant that the reason for any exemption would be private.
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 6:08 pm
I think this would be private medical information.
No, it's not a HIPAA violation. This was a talking point that got shot down early in the pandemic. To travel anywhere internationally your vaccine status has always been required. to enter school in the States your child has to be vaccinated. Tiley is being cute here.
I think she meant that the reason for any exemption would be private.
I misread and misunderstood her point. Thanks for the clarification.
ponchi101 wrote:Indeed, needed information. WHO got an exception, and WHY did they get it.
I think this would be private medical information.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, it's not a HIPAA violation. This was a talking point that got shot down early in the pandemic. To travel anywhere internationally your vaccine status has always been required. to enter school in the States your child has to be vaccinated. Tiley is being cute here.
Right but the public doesn’t have a right to know. Relevant officials do.
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 6:08 pm
I think this would be private medical information.
No, it's not a HIPAA violation. This was a talking point that got shot down early in the pandemic. To travel anywhere internationally your vaccine status has always been required. to enter school in the States your child has to be vaccinated. Tiley is being cute here.
I think she meant that the reason for any exemption would be private.
Yes I meant more so the underlying reasons for an exemption.
No, it's not a HIPAA violation. This was a talking point that got shot down early in the pandemic. To travel anywhere internationally your vaccine status has always been required. to enter school in the States your child has to be vaccinated. Tiley is being cute here.
I think she meant that the reason for any exemption would be private.
I misread and misunderstood her point. Thanks for the clarification.
Indeed, that's what I meant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ponchi101 It can surely be seen that way, but the people of Victoria may have a different point of view. I would certainly frown if, after one year of being locked down, a tennis player is allowed to enter the territory unvaccinated and no explanations are given.
A fine line between privacy and transparency by the government.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 12:50 am
It can surely be seen that way, but the people of Victoria may have a different point of view. I would certainly frown if, after one year of being locked down, a tennis player is allowed to enter the territory unvaccinated and no explanations are given.
A fine line between privacy and transparency by the government.
Yes, there is. And I agree that Victorian or Australian citizens might make a case for knowing, so they can determine if their representatives are handling Covid to their satisfaction. But the rest of us, I don't think so.
by Deuce Does anyone know what the restrictions will be (if any) for players who get a medical exemption?
Will they only be allowed to commute between the hotel and the tournament, and go nowhere else?
Will they have to isolate in their hotel room when they're not playing?
Will they be allowed to book practice times just like vaccinated players?
Etc.
If, for some reason, players with a medical exemption have few restrictions, and they can be among the public, then the public definitely has a right to know who they are.
But, of course, those with the medical exemption should not be permitted such freedom.
by meganfernandez
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 3:04 am
Does anyone know what the restrictions will be (if any) for players who get a medical exemption?
Will they only be allowed to commute between the hotel and the tournament, and go nowhere else?
Will they have to isolate in their hotel room when they're not playing?
Will they be allowed to book practice times just like vaccinated players?
Etc.
If, for some reason, players with a medical exemption have few restrictions, and they can be among the public, then the public definitely has a right to know who they are.
But, of course, those with the medical exemption should not be permitted such freedom.
I don't know protocols, but I bet it includes daily testing, or maybe JUST daily testing.
What you're saying amounts to the public having the right to know who and who isn't vaccinated, ie whether any particular person is vaccinated. I'm not sure I believe that. I'd have to examine it. But I'm leaning toward no but not convinced, either. Some personal information is public and sometimes published for the common good.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 3:04 am
Does anyone know what the restrictions will be (if any) for players who get a medical exemption?
Will they only be allowed to commute between the hotel and the tournament, and go nowhere else?
Will they have to isolate in their hotel room when they're not playing?
Will they be allowed to book practice times just like vaccinated players?
Etc.
If, for some reason, players with a medical exemption have few restrictions, and they can be among the public, then the public definitely has a right to know who they are.
But, of course, those with the medical exemption should not be permitted such freedom.
I don't know protocols, but I bet it includes daily testing, or maybe JUST daily testing.
What you're saying amounts to the public having the right to know who and who isn't vaccinated, ie whether any particular person is vaccinated. I'm not sure I believe that. I'd have to examine it. But I'm leaning toward no but not convinced, either. Some personal information is public and sometimes published for the common good.
Yes, the public has a right to know. Hell, in many countries, there are 'vaccine passports' required to get into restaurants, movie theatres, basketball/hockey games - even tennis tournaments. People who go to these places are 'revealed' as being vaccinated.
I feel that the public has an absolute right to know if unvaccinated people are flying into the country/city as exceptions to the current laws, and are permitted to be among the citizens - and that right overrides the right of the unvaccinated people who are given these exceptions to keep their status a secret.
No-one has to know what the nature of the medical exemptions are - that's irrelevant to one's personal safety. But unvaccinated foreigners entering the country to mingle with citizens is relevant to everyone's safety, and so everyone who could potentially find themselves in the same indoor area as the unvaccinated player has the right to know.
by ponchi101 Being vaccinated is different than revealing a medical condition. You do not chose to have a medical condition. You chose to be vaccinated precisely to avoid having a medical condition.
By now, C19 has a separate condition: we now know that the vaccines do not protect you against the disease in the same fashion that other vaccines do, i.e., we know you can and most likely will get the disease even if vaccinated, but the vaccine simply reduces the level of symptoms you can expect. For example, the opponent of a player that is not vaccinated may want to skip the post match hand-shake, and rightly so.
In the most extreme example, this is not as revealing as being forced to say whether or not you are HIV+. This is simply: did you take a jab. As I said before, every time I fly into Africa the government of the landing country asks me if I took a jab for yellow fever. And if I say that that is personal, it is back on the plane for me. Simple.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 4:30 am
Being vaccinated is different than revealing a medical condition. You do not chose to have a medical condition. You chose to be vaccinated precisely to avoid having a medical condition.
By now, C19 has a separate condition: we now know that the vaccines do not protect you against the disease in the same fashion that other vaccines do, i.e., we know you can and most likely will get the disease even if vaccinated, but the vaccine simply reduces the level of symptoms you can expect. For example, the opponent of a player that is not vaccinated may want to skip the post match hand-shake, and rightly so.
In the most extreme example, this is not as revealing as being forced to say whether or not you are HIV+. This is simply: did you take a jab. As I said before, every time I fly into Africa the government of the landing country asks me if I took a jab for yellow fever. And if I say that that is personal, it is back on the plane for me. Simple.
Actually, the vaccine gives you about 70% protection against infection. It doesn't just mitigate symptoms. I've been curious about that from the beginning and reading about it. I haven't done a deep dive, but the mainstream reports are that it does provide a lot of protection from infection/contraction (of course, it wanes to some degree, but not immediately). I mention this for its own sake, not in relation to whether vaccination status is considered a private matter.
I agree that institutions involved in protecting the public should get to know. It's a public health issue. I just don't know if individuals have a right to know about every other individual, like through a registry or just publicly available records. Like marriage licenses. Maybe.
by ponchi101 I am not trying to convince you although I am trying to convince you
Let's try a hypothetical scenario.
Should you be forced to disclose any sort of STD to a potential partner? It is not a trivial condition, and such a partner may want to end a relationship if s/he believes the risk is not worth the relationship. I gather that most people would agree that such a disclosure should proceed.
Now, with STD, the obvious thing is that their is only one way to transmit the condition. So you DO NOT have to make it public to all people, only to those in which you can engage sexually with.
However, with C19, the path of transmission is through the air. You literally catch it by being exposed to a person close to you that carries the virus. So: in view that a player that has been infected can transmit it to anybody else, simply by standing next to that person, should that condition be known (the unvaccinated status) to ALL players in the tournament? For example, if Novak (because he is the crux of this conversation) has NOT been vaccinated, should other players have the right to know and then decide whether they want to have a mask less conversation with him, much less share a lunch table?
---0---
Txs for the bit about the vaccine giving you 70% protection about infection. I was not computing that one.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 4:25 pm
I am not trying to convince you although I am trying to convince you
Let's try a hypothetical scenario.
Should you be forced to disclose any sort of STD to a potential partner? It is not a trivial condition, and such a partner may want to end a relationship if s/he believes the risk is not worth the relationship. I gather that most people would agree that such a disclosure should proceed.
Now, with STD, the obvious thing is that their is only one way to transmit the condition. So you DO NOT have to make it public to all people, only to those in which you can engage sexually with.
However, with C19, the path of transmission is through the air. You literally catch it by being exposed to a person close to you that carries the virus. So: in view that a player that has been infected can transmit it to anybody else, simply by standing next to that person, should that condition be known (the unvaccinated status) to ALL players in the tournament? For example, if Novak (because he is the crux of this conversation) has NOT been vaccinated, should other players have the right to know and then decide whether they want to have a mask less conversation with him, much less share a lunch table?
---0---
Txs for the bit about the vaccine giving you 70% protection about infection. I was not computing that one.
Thanks! Gives me something to think about, but I feel bad about hijacking the AO thread. Not that there's much else to discuss right now.
by ti-amie How long did Ash Barty have to stay out of Australia? If I'm her, or any of the other regular Aussies who have been forced to stay away I'd be seething that someone got a "medical exemption" and is free to potentially spread the virus to everyone.
by Deuce
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 4:25 pm
I am not trying to convince you although I am trying to convince you
Let's try a hypothetical scenario.
Should you be forced to disclose any sort of STD to a potential partner? It is not a trivial condition, and such a partner may want to end a relationship if s/he believes the risk is not worth the relationship. I gather that most people would agree that such a disclosure should proceed.
Now, with STD, the obvious thing is that their is only one way to transmit the condition. So you DO NOT have to make it public to all people, only to those in which you can engage sexually with.
However, with C19, the path of transmission is through the air. You literally catch it by being exposed to a person close to you that carries the virus. So: in view that a player that has been infected can transmit it to anybody else, simply by standing next to that person, should that condition be known (the unvaccinated status) to ALL players in the tournament? For example, if Novak (because he is the crux of this conversation) has NOT been vaccinated, should other players have the right to know and then decide whether they want to have a mask less conversation with him, much less share a lunch table?
Not only other players should be made aware, but also anyone who may come within close physical proximity to them - tournament personnel, fans, members of the general public if they are allowed to roam around the city freely, etc.
by meganfernandez
ti-amie wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 6:53 pm
How long did Ash Barty have to stay out of Australia? If I'm her, or any of the other regular Aussies who have been forced to stay away I'd be seething that someone got a "medical exemption" and is free to potentially spread the virus to everyone.
I don't think she had to stay out for any particular period, but she chose to between Miami and and the US Open because it was unrealistic to go home and quarantine and then go back on the road. I assume she quarantined for 2 weeks when she returned in September, if Australia is still requiring that. She was probably vaccinated by then, so maybe vaccinated people don't have to quarantine once they have a negative PCR. I don't know.
by ponchi101 Early in the year she said that she would have to stay out because the quarantine measures, if she were to go back home, would make it impossible to go in and out and be able to train properly. That was the reason she did not compete in the fall; she would have had to stay out again for some considerable time.
by ti-amie
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 8:19 pm
Early in the year she said that she would have to stay out because the quarantine measures, if she were to go back home, would make it impossible to go in and out and be able to train properly. That was the reason she did not compete in the fall; she would have had to stay out again for some considerable time.
Thanks. I was just about to look this up. The virus restrictions. had everything to do with her staying away from her home country. She should be seething about these "medical exemptions".
by ti-amie
by meganfernandez Novak got his exemption
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by the Moz
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 12:58 pm
Novak got his exemption
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Disappointing. Not surprising. He's an entitled twat, but if the exemption is on offer then he'll take it. I just wish he was honest. This medical exemption is a lie and should be called out as such. Especially now that he's posted about his exemption on his socials including this keeper....'may you feel love and respect towards all beings on this wonderful planet.' As if Novax. There's no room for credibility in this sea of entitlement...
by ashkor87 I bet he is actually vaccinated but unwilling to say so, and AO is willing to give him cover..
by ashkor87
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:35 pm
I bet he is actually vaccinated but unwilling to say so, and AO is willing to give him cover..
Could be a 'non-recognized' one
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:35 pm
I bet he is actually vaccinated but unwilling to say so, and AO is willing to give him cover..
If so, then every other tournament will have to give him cover, too. It's hard to sustain that kind of lie. People are going to find out more. People talk.
by JazzNU He's not vaccinated. Get serious here. Making up narratives to make things better than the reality, this is getting to be Aaron Rodgers like. He didn't skip the ATP Cup and wait til the last possible charter flights he could take to Australia to play in the Open because he's already vaccinated.
by meganfernandez
JazzNU wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 3:23 pm
He's not vaccinated. Get serious here. Making up narratives to make things better than the reality, this is getting to be Aaron Rodgers like. He didn't skip the ATP Cup and wait til the last possible charter flights he could take to Australia to play in the Open because he's already vaccinated.
I don't think he is, either. I don't know who would believe that at this point.
by JazzNU I hope the fan capacity is at 100%. Can't wait to hear those boos raining down on his entitled ass.
by ponchi101 Simply look at the mentality of the people around you. We are representative.
Without exception, the people that believe in vaccines and have been vaccinated, say so proudly. I do not like to use myself as an example because that is not data, that is an anecdote, but on the few occasions in which I have been asked for my vaccine card, I show it with a smile. It is the unvaccinated that start with all the crap: "oh, that is personal", "oh, I am undecided", "oh, I am doing my research", "oh, I am waiting to see how effective it is".
He is not vaccinated. 100% sure of that. And you all beat me to the comments about his entitled ass.
by meganfernandez I hope Novak loses early so we aren't talking about this until the end of January. It could happen! If there are tennis gods, he will draw Kyrgios in the first round. Nothing would make Kyrgios play his one inspired match of the decade like the chance to knock out Djokovic in Australia under these circumstances.
by MJ2004
by Deuce The official statement from Tennis Australia should have been: “Ladies and gentlemen, today we have made history. The participation of Mr. Djokovic has ensured that this will be the first professional tennis tournament ever played with no balls.”
JazzNU wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 3:23 pm
He's not vaccinated. Get serious here. Making up narratives to make things better than the reality, this is getting to be Aaron Rodgers like. He didn't skip the ATP Cup and wait til the last possible charter flights he could take to Australia to play in the Open because he's already vaccinated.
I don't think he is, either. I don't know who would believe that at this point.
Of course, it is difficult to follow the reasoning of a twisted mind..but if he were not vaccinated, he would simply say so, with a flourish, in fact, as that would play well with his base, whoever that is..the only reason to create ambiguity like this is to avoid losing face by admitting he
Is vaccinated..therefore I still believe..
But enough of this, no need to boost his ego further
by ashkor87 saw a clip of Osaka - Cornet at Melbourne.. court looks sort of medium paced... neither fast nor slow.. seemed to suit Osaka well..but even she had her biggest serve returned towards the end, couldnt just blast it past Cornet..
by meganfernandez Wait, Djokovic has been stuck at the border for several hours? The border patrol isn't letting him in because of a technicality - whoever filled out his visa application chose the wrong one, not the type for entering on a medical exemption. This is wild.
by Liamvalid
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 3:39 pm
Wait, Djokovic has been stuck at the border for several hours? The border patrol isn't letting him in because of a technicality - whoever filled out his visa application chose the wrong one, not the type meant for people entering on a medical exemption. This is wild.
That meme though
by the Moz Keep him out
by Liamvalid I read it as “Fedal officials” at first!
by dmforever So either the official who said that Novax's petition followed the rules is lying or he tested positive for Covid in the last 6 months. Maybe he tested positive after the year end championships.
And this border thing is kind of funny. I can just see him fuming on his private jet.
Kevin
by ti-amie
by ti-amie I listened to this press conference earlier today. One of the government officials seems to say that the documents they got had all the right stamps but that no effort was made to contact the actual doctors. I'm not sure if the documents were translated either.
dmforever wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:39 pm
So either the official who said that Novax's petition followed the rules is lying or he tested positive for Covid in the last 6 months. Maybe he tested positive after the year end championships.
And this border thing is kind of funny. I can just see him fuming on his private jet.
Kevin
H played Davis Cup after the year-end championships. He was playing until early December. he had a 6-week break between the US Open and his next tournament. So unless he conveniently got Covid during one of those two windows (Sept or Dec) or was playing with Covid, he probably doesn't have it. An antibody test would set the record straight.
If he doesn't get in, his Slam days could well be over. It's either get the shot or stop playing tennis. So dramatic. Maybe he will invent a fifth Slam in Serbia.
by JazzNU If I see one more thing about the medical exemption process being anonymous. Give me a damn break. Craig Tiley's been telling everyone for weeks that this application was coming, so unless the panel has been sequestered and cut off from all media this entire time, they knew it was on the horizon. Nothing about it has been hidden.
And I'm sure his name wasn't listed. But when they see a 32 year old that's 6' 2" from Serbia needing access to the Aussie Open, only those born yesterday would think this likely highly educated panel would struggle to unpack that mystery and know which person to rubber stamp.
by dryrunguy Aw, shucks... I seem to have misplaced my violin.
by ti-amie Latest update
I've got Michael McDonald's "Taking It to the Streets" stuck in my head...
by meganfernandez
ti-amie wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 7:43 pm
Latest update
I've got Michael McDonald's "Taking It to the Streets" stuck in my head...
Probably still a Top 10 hit in Eastern Europe.
Pops is in Serbia, so he's suggesting a rally there, I guess. Maybe also hoping to inspire the large Serbian community in Melbourne.
by JazzNU
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:58 pm
H played Davis Cup after the year-end championships. He was playing until early December. he had a 6-week break between the US Open and his next tournament. So unless he conveniently got Covid during one of those two windows (Sept or Dec) or was playing with Covid, he probably doesn't have it. An antibody test would set the record straight.
If he doesn't get in, his Slam days could well be over. It's either get the shot or stop playing tennis. So dramatic. Maybe he will invent a fifth Slam in Serbia.
This is a good point. Also, he was seen in public cheering on a Belgrade basketball team in mid-December and then he got honored with that stamp a few days later. And was practicing in Spain by the end of December. So his December window is really very slim for when he could have legitimately gotten covid, assuming he isolated for the required time. And Jelena's activities also cast doubt on that September window as good timing too, assuming she'd be a close contact since she was definitely in NY with him.
by ponchi101 Oh, I don't have a doubt people in Serbia will back him, whatever it is. He is god down there. If he comes down with Covid and says so, and of course nothing will happen to him (he had it before), people in Serbia will catch C19 just to "be like Novak".
I said it before. He will be president of Serbia one day. He is ambitious enough and people will vote for the charismatic candidate over the prepared one always.
by mick1303 "Not a right type of visa"? And this is from government officials? This is kindergarten-level excuse. Not that I had any particular respect for these clowns to begin with, but they outdone the expectations.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ashkor87 Nobody is going to come out of this Djokovic saga looking good...what a PR disaster for everyone!! I certainly seem to have been wrong about his vaccination status..although he still could have taken one of the non-recognized ones like the Chinese version..
dmforever wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:39 pm
So either the official who said that Novax's petition followed the rules is lying or he tested positive for Covid in the last 6 months. Maybe he tested positive after the year end championships.
And this border thing is kind of funny. I can just see him fuming on his private jet.
Kevin
H played Davis Cup after the year-end championships. He was playing until early December. he had a 6-week break between the US Open and his next tournament. So unless he conveniently got Covid during one of those two windows (Sept or Dec) or was playing with Covid, he probably doesn't have it. An antibody test would set the record straight.
If he doesn't get in, his Slam days could well be over. It's either get the shot or stop playing tennis. So dramatic. Maybe he will invent a fifth Slam in Serbia.
Yes, would not be surprised if he retires now and goes into politics of some kind...
by dmforever
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 1:09 am
Nobody is going to come out of this Djokovic saga looking good...what a PR disaster for everyone!! I certainly seem to have been wrong about his vaccination status..although he still could have taken one of the non-recognized ones like the Chinese version..
I think the Australian government will actually come out looking just fine. Public opinion is almost all against Novax, and for good reason. Most people are happy that no exception was made for him.
Kevin
by Deuce It remains to be explained, however, why he was granted the medical exemption, and then denied it (if that is indeed what happened).
Isn't it the same department which grants and denies the medical exemptions?
by ashkor87
ti-amie wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:22 pm
I listened to this press conference earlier today. One of the government officials seems to say that the documents they got had all the right stamps but that no effort was made to contact the actual doctors. I'm not sure if the documents were translated either.
Then it would be fraud...a very serious matter..let us hope not
by Deuce I'm hearing that he is now in a "quarantine detention hotel", and is scheduled to leave Australia at some point today.
And that he can possibly re-apply for entry into Australia.
by meganfernandez
Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 2:51 am
I'm hearing that he is now in a "quarantine detention hotel", and is scheduled to leave Australia at some point today.
And that he can possibly re-apply for entry into Australia.
I wonder if he can choose a 2-week quarantine in lieu of a medical exemption.
by JTContinental Reading between the lines of several articles/tweets/etc (but nothing official), it seems they may have been examining the "integrity" of his documentation to support an exemption
Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 2:51 am
I'm hearing that he is now in a "quarantine detention hotel", and is scheduled to leave Australia at some point today.
And that he can possibly re-apply for entry into Australia.
I wonder if he can choose a 2-week quarantine in lieu of a medical exemption.
I doubt it very much. If that were possible, we would have heard that by now - and other unvaccinated players likely would have tried that route.
I think they're just holding him in the 'quarantine detention hotel' because there's nowhere else to put him. They're certainly not going to allow him to roam free... they're not going to let him hang out in the airport - even supervised - because of A) the threat of virus transmission, and B) the possibility that 'fans' (both for and against Djokovic) would gather and create a chaotic situation.
So they just need a secure place to hold him until everything is officially settled in detail, and then they will escort him out of the country.
I still say that it reeks of amateurism that certain official entities apparently told him that he was good to enter the country (or the state of Victoria), and that he could play in the Aussie Open. Before telling someone this, you should be 100% sure that it is indeed the case - which obviously means checking with the people who ACTUALLY DECIDE whether people can enter the country/state or not.
At best, there seems to have been a serious lack of communication between various Australian parties here.
ti-amie wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:22 pm
I listened to this press conference earlier today. One of the government officials seems to say that the documents they got had all the right stamps but that no effort was made to contact the actual doctors. I'm not sure if the documents were translated either.
Then it would be fraud...a very serious matter..let us hope not
The official did say that the medical panel was not an investigative one, they were doctors reviewing records, so no, they didn't make any calls. Not sure it would have mattered if they were calling doctors who had falsified documents.
Anyway, the same official said something pretty weird. Saying she hopes Djokovic will do the Victorian people the courtesy of providing clarification (which no one else can, because of privacy), she told the press, "You'll all have the opportunity to attend press conferences with Novak over coming weeks, when he arrives and then when he's training and then when he hits the courts." Is she talking about future tournaments later in the year, outside of Australia? It would be weird to say "when he arrives" about other places, given how hyper-local the whole conversation was. I wonder if this isn't over, and she/the govt expects him to leave, reapply, and still play.
by Deuce ... and, somewhat predictably, it gets more bizarre...
Some are saying that protesters have gathered outside the hotel he is being kept in (did not state if the protesters were pro-Djokovic, or anti-Djokovic).
And...
"Novak Djokovic has launched a last minute bid in the Federal Circuit Court to stop the federal government from deporting him ahead of the Australian Open."
A Court of a Different Sort...
(Stop the page from loading before it loads completely to avoid having to create an account to read it.)
.
by oliver0001 Federal health authorities told Tennis Australia boss Craig Tiley on two occasions in writing that people who were not vaccinated and had contracted COVID-19 in the past six months would not be granted quarantine-free travel to Australia. …
In a letter sent to Mr Tiley on November 18, Department of Health First Assistant Secretary Lisa Schofield said that “people who have previously had COVID-19 and not received a vaccine dose are not considered fully vaccinated”.
Ms Schofield said such people would “not be approved for quarantine-free entry, regardless of whether they have received foreign vaccination exemptions”.
(I refuse to read the artcile myself because this is such BS…)
by Deuce This is an interesting article... It includes Nadal's and Sandgren's perspectives on the Djokovic situation, as well as more detailed crazy rantings from the father of 'Spartacus' himself...
Various Perspectives on the Djokovic Situation...
(If you get a notice to create an account which prevents the entire article from being seen, simply reload the page and stop it from loading before loading is complete - that way you'll see the entire article.)
Meanwhile, reports are saying that police presence is increasing outside the hotel where he's being detained because the number of protesters is increasing (again - not sure if the protesters are pro-Djokovic or anti-Djokovic or a mix of both).
by mick1303 These anti-Djokovic protesters are in fact cowards who put up with draconian measures their authorities inflict on them and vent their frustration in the "safe" direction.
by the Moz If the state of Victoria granted Novax a medical exemption on the basis of something that violated federal law then he should be kicked out. Novax and his team clearly did their work at the state level, but perhaps not so much at the federal level.
by Owendonovan
oliver0001 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 5:41 am
‘Leader of the free world’: Father’s impassioned support for Djokovic
(I refuse to read the artcile myself because this is such BS…)
“My son Novak Djokovic has shown that a small, but heroic country like Serbia, can have the best tennis player and sportsman of all time and that truth can no longer be hidden,”
Genocide is not heroic.
No one but a Serbian considers Novax the best sportsman of all time.
These anti-vaxxer types read more like mentally ill than anything.
by meganfernandez I would not rule out that he could quarantine for 2 weeks and play - if he is allowed to remain in the country and not have to leave and return, since it would be too late after Monday's court hearing (and honestly that would be silly). Question is, would he do it? I think he would.
Very curious if it's true than anyone who wanted an exemption for having had Covid recently still had to have one shot already. If the Australian Open/Tiley knew that (and reports are he was told twice), then wtf? Why was Djokovic's exemption approved? Surely the medical review boards knew this.
by atlpam
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 3:22 pm
I would not rule out that he could quarantine for 2 weeks and play - if he is allowed to remain in the country and not have to leave and return, since it would be too late after Monday's court hearing (and honestly that would be silly). Question is, would he do it? I think he would.
Very curious if it's true than anyone who wanted an exemption for having had Covid recently still had to have one shot already. If the Australian Open/Tiley knew that (and reports are he was told twice), then wtf? Why was Djokovic's exemption approved? Surely the medical review boards knew this.
Really puts the whole medical review board process in question (does that surprise anyone here?). Were they just taking the info provided on good faith or actually making an attempt to verify it? From what I read, it sounds like they were applying an exemption policy for Australian residents that does not apply for others trying to enter the country.
by ponchi101 But he will not only be a hero in Serbia. He will become the face of the anti-vax movement, and for some people like Sandgren, a "hero" for his strong stance. He will become the poster boy for anti-science (he has made many other ridiculous statements) and since these kind of people are so bad at analysis, they will truly believe that Australis is at fault here.
This entire morality play is larger than what it seems. It is truly an analysis of a world where truth and misinformation co-exist, and people like Novax or Aaron Rodgers can live in bubbles of verifiable ignorance (for us the rest) and be extremely successful.
by ponchi101 Novax's dad is truly unique. When he gets named, by Novax, Minister of the Interior in Serbia, there will be some real, unsavory changes.
(I am still banking on Novax becoming president of Serbia by age 45, with no prior experience on anything other than hitting a fluffy yellow ball).
by dmforever
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 4:51 pm
Novax's dad is truly unique. When he gets named, by Novax, Minister of the Interior in Serbia, there will be some real, unsavory changes.
(I am still banking on Novax becoming president of Serbia by age 45, with no prior experience on anything other than hitting a fluffy yellow ball).
He will join an illustrious list of people with zero governing experience becoming high=level politicians. Arnold was governor of California, and I think California's economy is bigger than Serbia's. Then there was Reagan. And Trump. (insert barf emoji here). In the 80's Italy had a porn actor in their parliament. I'm sure there are others. It's bizarre, isn't it, that people conflate a very specific skill set and fame with ability to work in a government.
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 4:51 pm
Novax's dad is truly unique. When he gets named, by Novax, Minister of the Interior in Serbia, there will be some real, unsavory changes.
(I am still banking on Novax becoming president of Serbia by age 45, with no prior experience on anything other than hitting a fluffy yellow ball).
He will join an illustrious list of people with zero governing experience becoming high=level politicians. Arnold was governor of California, and I think California's economy is bigger than Serbia's. Then there was Reagan. And Trump. (insert barf emoji here). In the 80's Italy had a porn actor in their parliament. I'm sure there are others. It's bizarre, isn't it, that people conflate a very specific skill set and fame with ability to work in a government.
Kevin
La Cicciolina. And she was actually very good at her job (I mean in parliament). I seem to recall that one time, when some heated debate took place, and she stood firm, she was asked why she was so calm, and replied along the lines of "What can they do to me? Call me a whore?". And she laughed.
But she is the exception.
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 4:51 pm
Novax's dad is truly unique. When he gets named, by Novax, Minister of the Interior in Serbia, there will be some real, unsavory changes.
(I am still banking on Novax becoming president of Serbia by age 45, with no prior experience on anything other than hitting a fluffy yellow ball).
He will join an illustrious list of people with zero governing experience becoming high=level politicians. Arnold was governor of California, and I think California's economy is bigger than Serbia's. Then there was Reagan. And Trump. (insert barf emoji here). In the 80's Italy had a porn actor in their parliament. I'm sure there are others. It's bizarre, isn't it, that people conflate a very specific skill set and fame with ability to work in a government.
Kevin
La Cicciolina. And she was actually very good at her job (I mean in parliament). I seem to recall that one time, when some heated debate took place, and she stood firm, she was asked why she was so calm, and replied along the lines of "What can they do to me? Call me a whore?". And she laughed.
But she is the exception.
You nailed it. Well done! She was also Jeffrey Koons's wife for a while. I don't remember her being thought of as doing a good job, but I'll take your word for it.
Now that I think about about it, there is at least one US Congressperson now who was in the NFL. I don't remember who he is though. I still think it's weird. I guess people don't have the time or inclination to really figure out who to vote for, so they go with someone whose name they recognize.
Kevin
by dmforever I'm still trying to understand the details of what happened in Australia. So Novax applied for a visa, and the state government gave him the visa. Is that right? How does that even happen? I've never heard of anything abut a national government being in charge of visas. Or did people in the state government erroneously tell him that he would get it? Is it even known exactly what happened?
Thanks for your help.
Kevin
by meganfernandez
dmforever wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 5:27 pm
I'm still trying to understand the details of what happened in Australia. So Novax applied for a visa, and the state government gave him the visa. Is that right? How does that even happen? I've never heard of anything abut a national government being in charge of visas. Or did people in the state government erroneously tell him that he would get it? Is it even known exactly what happened?
Thanks for your help.
Kevin
I think the state govt gave him the medical exemption. I assume all visas are federally issued. But here's what my friend said about working for the State Department in foreign countries:
"A visa is never a guarantee to enter a country. When i was an FSO, plenty of people we gave visas to got turned around at the border. Happens when they sense a traveler is shady in one way or another. ... I got to spend two days watching the Customs/Border Patrol people question/interrogate people at Dulles airport, both in the primary booth and the secondary inspection room, where they interrogate people who are suspect. It was super interesting. At least in the U.S., they have a pretty high degree of autonomy with ordinary travelers but not with a super VIP like Djokovic. No way was that just one person's decision at the airport, or one person plus their supervisor. He was detained for more than 8 hours. During that time, the decision was obviously floated up the food chain. Who knows how high."
by ti-amie It seems that the letter was written by Tennis Australia itself, on its own letterhead, and signed by the Chief Medical Officer of - you guessed it - Tennis Australia.
Border Force investigating other Australian Open players after Djokovic ban
By Anthony Galloway, Paul Sakkal and Adam Cooper
Updated January 6, 2022 — 9.34pm first published at 5.48pm
Australian Border Force is investigating at least one unvaccinated tennis player and one official who have already been allowed into the country after world No.1 Novak Djokovic was sent to immigration detention and had his visa cancelled.
Federal authorities have also not ruled out banning Djokovic from entering the country for three years, as the Serbian star’s father declared his son was being held in “Australian captivity” and had become the “the symbol and the leader of the free world”.
Djokovic, who is being held at the immigration detention at the Park Hotel in Carlton, on Thursday launched a challenge in the Federal Circuit Court to Border Force’s decision, but he is facing a race against time with the Australian Open beginning on January 17.
The tennis star tried to enter Australia on Wednesday night on the basis that he had contracted COVID-19 in the past six months and therefore had a valid exemption for being unvaccinated, but this was rejected by Border Force.
The court late on Thursday ruled to grant Djokovic an interim injunction that will prevent him being deported until at least Monday while he prepares to challenge the decision to deny his entry to the country.
Barrister Christopher Tran, acting for Immigration Minister Alex Hawke, said the government did not oppose the injunction. Judge Anthony Kelly adjourned the case to be heard from 10am on Monday.
Tennis Australia claimed on Thursday that other Australian Open participants have been allowed into the country after contracting COVID in the past six months, using the same exemption that Djokovic applied for.
This prompted Border Force to launch investigations into the other player and official. Federal government sources said the two others might also fall foul of the rules, but said every case was different, and they may have other valid medical reasons for not being vaccinated.
Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews on Thursday confirmed Border Force was now investigating the allegations and didn’t rule out more players being sent back home.
“I’m aware of those allegations, and I can assure you that the Australian Border Force is investigating that now,” Ms Andrews told 2GB. “ABF needs the opportunity to be able to conduct its investigation. But if the evidence is not there, then they will take the appropriate action.”
Three sources familiar with Djokovic’s paperwork on arrival, speaking anonymously to detail confidential documentation, said evidence to support the player’s exemption was “minimal” and was only supported by one doctor. They said it was far less substantive than that of the other player and official who entered the country with the same vaccine exemption.
The other player and the official had more than one doctor supporting their claims of prior COVID infection, while one source said most of Djokovic’s paperwork was on a Tennis Australia letterhead. When border officials asked him and the Victorian government to supply more documentation, none was produced.
“It was totally insufficient and he couldn’t produce anything new. What else were we meant to do in the situation?” one senior Commonwealth source said.
Tennis Australia officials were privately fuming about the federal government’s decision on Thursday. One source said the move appeared to be motivated by politics and a desire to target a high-profile vaccine sceptic to boost the government’s popularity. They said Djokovic’s Instagram post and subsequent media interest sparked the federal government’s motivation to take a hard line.
“I don’t know how the feds will [address the fact that] several tennis players are already in the country with the same exemption granted to Novak,” the source said. “This looks to us like the feds are responding to the media by letting some players in but not the world No.1.”
The 20-time grand slam winner faces the prospect of being banned from Australia as a result of the visa bungle. Federal law dictates anyone whose visa is cancelled can face a ban on re-entering Australia of up to three years, though Border Force has discretion on when to apply these bans and it is unlikely to be slapped on a person who may have made unintentional errors.
The ban can be imposed if the person’s visa was cancelled because they were “considered to be a risk to the health, safety or good order of the Australian community”.
Sources confirmed that the government had not ruled out imposing the ban on Djokovic, but cautioned this would depend on how the process plays out in court and Djokovic’s next moves.
Federal health authorities told Tennis Australia boss Craig Tiley on two occasions in writing that people who were not vaccinated and had contracted COVID-19 in the past six months would not be granted quarantine-free travel to Australia.
“In relation to your specific questions, I can confirm that people who contracted COVID-19 within six months and seek to enter Australia from overseas, and have not received two doses of a Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)-approved or TGA-recognised vaccine ... are not considered fully vaccinated,” Health Minister Greg Hunt wrote to Mr Tiley on November 29.
Tennis Australia wrote to players after receiving that advice but did not warn them about the vaccine requirement.
Djokovic’s father Srdjan Djokovic told Serbian newspaper Telegraf that his son is “tonight in Australian captivity, but he has never been more free”.
“From this moment, Novak has become the symbol and the leader of the free world, the world of the poor and disadvantaged nations and peoples,” he said.
“Tonight they can imprison him, tomorrow they can chain him, but the truth is like water and it will always find its way. ”
Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic on Thursday night Australian time said at a press conference in Belgrade he had talked to Djokovic a second time.
Mr Vucic said Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic was pleading with Australian authorities to move the champion from “this infamous hotel to the house he has rented, so he can move around”, Serbian media reported.
“That’s what Novak has requested from his country and it is our duty to safeguard our citizens,” President Vucic said.
“It’s not fair that a political chase is happening headed by the Prime Minister of Australia. They have allowed in similar players, but not Novak Djokovic. It is clear to everyone what is happening. I am not one to mince words, I am not afraid of speaking the truth. My job is to shield the citizens of Serbia and the truth.“
Djokovic’s visa was approved in November as part of an automated process.
Former deputy secretary of the Department of Immigration, Abul Rizvi, on Thursday said immigration authorities should have asked Djokovic questions about his vaccination status, and any exemptions he might have been seeking, when he initially applied for a visa.
But Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the visa approval process was separate from other requirements for entry at the border such as proving vaccination status.
“People try to run the border all the time, by the way,” Mr Morrison said.
“You know, people come with a visa but may not satisfy other requirements for entry, and people are put on planes and turned back all the time. Anybody who’s watched the Border Patrol shows will understand that.”
By about 9.15pm a group of about 20 people remained at a park close to the Park Hotel in Carlton, where Djokovic is being detained, to show their support for the tennis great, with some wearing traditional Serbian dress, waving Serbian flags and lighting up candles and singing to celebrate Orthodox Christmas Eve.
The hotel, in Melbourne’s inner north, is being used to detain refugees and people seeking asylum. A small group of about a dozen protesters staged a demonstration at the hotel on Thursday afternoon in an attempt to bring attention to the plight of the detainees.
The area of Swanston Street close to the hotel remained closed to traffic in both directions on Thursday evening as supporters waited to catch a glimpse of the tennis star through the hotel windows.
by Suliso The other two were smarter and kept a low profile about it on social media.
by ti-amie And from the Daily Fail...
Huge twist as Scott Morrison accuses Novak Djokovic of trying to 'run the border' and reveals he did NOT have a vax exemption - but Alan Jones slams the 'police state' deportation
Scott Morrison has accused the Serbian world No.1 of trying to 'run the border'
Said tennis star had only himself to blame as he did not have a valid exemption
'People try to run the border all the time... they are put back on planes, he said...
'
By CHARLIE COË FOR DAILY MAIL AUSTRALIA
PUBLISHED: 19:37 EST, 5 January 2022 | UPDATED: 22:10 EST, 5 January 2022
Scott Morrison has dramatically accused Novak Djokovic of trying to 'run the border' in an epic serve against the tennis star who has been refused entry into Australia.
The prime minister said the world No.1 only had himself to blame for his predicament because he didn't have a valid vaccine exemption to enter the country.
'I want to thank the Border Force officers for doing their job implementing the Government's policies, they have done their job, entry with a visa requires double vaccination, or a medical exemption,' Mr Morrison said.
'I am advised that such an exemption was not in place, and as a result he is subject to the same rule as anyone else.
'People try to run the border all the time. People come with a visa that may not satisfy other requirements for entry - and they are put back on planes and turned back all the time.'
'I also want to stress, that ultimately, this is the responsibility of the traveller. It is for the traveller to be able to assert and backup their ability to come into the country consistent with our laws.
(...)
Djokovic's team are understood to have applied for a type of visa that does not allow medical exemptions for the unvaccinated.
There are also believed to be issues with the controversial exemption itself, with questions about whether he has adequate proof to support it.
He is believed to have been issued an exemption on the grounds that he was infected with coronavirus in the past six months.
However, though this may satisfy his entry into the tournament and Victoria, the federal government controls the international border and his exemption appears to not hold up under federal rules.
Health Minister Greg Hunt on Thursday morning said the federal government was not involved in the decision to approve Djokovic's medical exemption.
The world No.1 and prominent Covid vaccine sceptic now faces a difficult legal fight to stay in the country and keep his Australian Open title fight alive.
Djokovic's lawyers are gearing up to fight the visa cancellation in court, though it is not clear if the star player will stay in Australia during the case.
'The ABF can confirm that Mr Djokovic failed to provide appropriate evidence to meet the entry requirements to Australia, and his visa has been subsequently cancelled.
'Non-citizens who do not hold a valid visa on entry or who have had their visa cancelled will be detained and removed from Australia.
'The ABF can confirm Mr Djokovic had access to his phone.'
The world number one touched down on an Emirates flight from Dubai about 11.30pm Wednesday AEST, just 24 hours after he confirmed he would play in the Australian Open.
Two weeks out from the Grand Slam, it remains uncertain if Djokovic will lose the chance to defend his Australian Open Crown entirely.
A source familiar with the situation said the player's lawyers are in the process of contesting the decision made by Australian Border Force officials.
The Serbian star was not allowed through passport control, and endured several hours of discussions with Border Force officials.
(...)
Djokovic's declaration to the world that he was on his way to Australia sparked an outpouring of anger on a day the nation recorded a record 64,770 new Covid cases.
Border Force officials learned while Djokovic was in the air that he would be trying to enter the country on a visa that doesn't permit medical exemptions for being unvaccinated, sources said.
As a result, the federal government contacted Victorian officials late on Wednesday night to ask it to formally help facilitate his entry into the country - but this was rejected.
Acting sports minister Jaala Pulford confirmed the state government would not support the application.
'The Federal Government has asked if we will support Novak Djokovic's visa application to enter Australia,' Ms Pulford tweeted at 11.14pm.
'We will not be providing Novak Djokovic with individual visa application support to participate in the 2022 Australian Open Grand Slam.
'We've always been clear on two points: visa approvals are a matter for the Federal Government, and medical exemptions a matter for doctors.'
The Victorian Government was asked to support his application because the state government works with Tennis Australia to run the Open, the event that his visa would allow him to work at.
The federal government therefore wanted Victoria to formally back his entry, something the state government quickly claimed was not in their jurisdiction.
It was revealed hours earlier the Acting Australian Border Force Commissioner was examining an 'issue' with Djokovic's Australian Travel Declaration as the prime minister warned the tennis star will receive no special treatment.
'If that evidence is insufficient, then he will be treated no different to anyone else and he'll be on the next plane home,' Mr Morrison said.
Later it emerged there were also issues with the exemption itself, and not just that he had arrived on the wrong visa.
Tennis great Rod Laver, after whom centre court at the Australian Open is named, called on Djokovic to 'own up' to the reason for his exemption or face hostility from spectators.
'If he's got a reason for (the exemption) then... we should know it,' the 11-time grand slam winner told News Corp.
'Yes, you're a great player and you've performed and won so many tournaments, so, it can't be physical. So what is the problem?'
If he doesn't, Djokovic should expect hostility from fans every time he walks onto the court in a city which has spent than 260 days in lockdown since early 2020.
'I think it might get ugly,' Laver said.
'I would think the Victorian people would be thinking ''yes I would love to see him play and compete but at the same time, there's a right way and a wrong way'.'
Everyone entering Australia - even its own citizens - must be fully-vaccinated against Covid or face two weeks in hotel quarantine.
My view is that any individual seeking to enter Australia must comply with our border requirements,' Mr Morrison said on Wednesday afternoon.
'Now Novak Djokovic, when he arrives in Australia, he has to if he's not vaccinated, must provide acceptable proof that he cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons to be able to access the same travel arrangements as fully-vaccinated travellers.
'So we await his presentation and what evidence he provides us to support that.
'If that evidence is insufficient, then he will be treated no different to anyone else and he'll be on the next plane home.
'There should be no special rules for Novak Djokovic at all. None whatsoever.'
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 4:51 pm
Novax's dad is truly unique. When he gets named, by Novax, Minister of the Interior in Serbia, there will be some real, unsavory changes.
(I am still banking on Novax becoming president of Serbia by age 45, with no prior experience on anything other than hitting a fluffy yellow ball).
He will join an illustrious list of people with zero governing experience becoming high=level politicians. Arnold was governor of California, and I think California's economy is bigger than Serbia's. Then there was Reagan. And Trump. (insert barf emoji here). In the 80's Italy had a porn actor in their parliament. I'm sure there are others. It's bizarre, isn't it, that people conflate a very specific skill set and fame with ability to work in a government.
Kevin
Nikolay Valuev is in a Russian parliament. Vitaliy Klichko is a mayor of Ukrainian capital city of Kiev. Manny Pacquiao is a senator in his homecountry - Phillippines. All these people were professional boxers and therefore were repeatedly hit in the head. Comparing to this Novak would do just fine ))
dmforever wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 5:27 pm
I'm still trying to understand the details of what happened in Australia. So Novax applied for a visa, and the state government gave him the visa. Is that right? How does that even happen? I've never heard of anything abut a national government being in charge of visas. Or did people in the state government erroneously tell him that he would get it? Is it even known exactly what happened?
Thanks for your help.
Kevin
I think the state govt gave him the medical exemption. I assume all visas are federally issued. But here's what my friend said about working for the State Department in foreign countries:
"A visa is never a guarantee to enter a country. When i was an FSO, plenty of people we gave visas to got turned around at the border. Happens when they sense a traveler is shady in one way or another. ... I got to spend two days watching the Customs/Border Patrol people question/interrogate people at Dulles airport, both in the primary booth and the secondary inspection room, where they interrogate people who are suspect. It was super interesting. At least in the U.S., they have a pretty high degree of autonomy with ordinary travelers but not with a super VIP like Djokovic. No way was that just one person's decision at the airport, or one person plus their supervisor. He was detained for more than 8 hours. During that time, the decision was obviously floated up the food chain. Who knows how high."
That autonomy is both a good thing and a very bad thing. People with visas are who are not "shady" get turned away all the time because immigration officials overstep their power. And the port of entry matters. Immigration attorneys often advise their non shady, totally legitimate clients which US cities to fly in and out of. If you have never had to consider this, be thankful. It's very very stressful even in the best of cases.
In this case, Novak was obviously not a risk to stay in Australia. I am/was a huge Nole fan. HIs vaccination stance, as well as other idiotic scientific ideas, is the reason for that "'/was". He probably never should have been issued the visa in the first place. But I do wonder, even though I'm fine with the outcome, how fairly he was treated, or if they just wanted to make an example of him. He should definitely not have posted anything on social media. He might be playing if he hadn't.
Kevin
by ponchi101 I worked at the US embassy for 5 years, and had friends in the visa area. A visa for the USA IS NEVER FINAL. As a matter of fact, CBP officers in the USA have the discretionary absolute power to stop you at your port of entry and reject entry, FOR NO REASON AT ALL. It is discretionary, in the real sense of the word.
Just an example. And rest assured that almost all countries work in the same way. Totally senseless and not fair, but that is the way it works.
by Suliso It doesn't happen very often, though. I bet they do have internal rules about this kind of stuff.
by dmforever
Suliso wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 8:33 pm
It doesn't happen very often, though. I bet they do have internal rules about this kind of stuff.
If "it" means people with valid visas being denied entrance to the US, then I guess we'd have to define "very often" to know if we agree or not. I'm guessing that it happens way more than most people think it does.
As Ponchi says, it's up to each officer's discretion. It's a lot of power in one person's hands. Talk to an immigration attorney and you will hear stories. People with a multiple entry visa who never overstay or come more frequently than their visa allows are often denied entrance just because the officer thinks that may overstay at some point.
Suliso wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 8:33 pm
It doesn't happen very often, though. I bet they do have internal rules about this kind of stuff.
If "it" means people with valid visas being denied entrance to the US, then I guess we'd have to define "very often" to know if we agree or not. I'm guessing that it happens way more than most people think it does.
As Ponchi says, it's up to each officer's discretion. It's a lot of power in one person's hands. Talk to an immigration attorney and you will hear stories. People with a multiple entry visa who never overstay or come more frequently than their visa allows are often denied entrance just because the officer thinks that may overstay at some point.
Kevin
Story. My friend Adriana went for a visa RENEWAL. Around 1992, when I was working for USDA. Adriana was loaded with money, traveled to Miami as I would go to the beach, had never any intentions to overstay her visas (had never done so) but the problem was that she was absolutely beautiful. She reached the window for consular services, the guy took one look at her and voided her application, not one single question asked.
I gather he figured she could find a husband in Miami in less than a week.
Some were saying this was an old picture but here's a better picture of the facility where he's being held. The picture on the left is the one the Daily Fail used.
Suliso wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 8:33 pm
It doesn't happen very often, though. I bet they do have internal rules about this kind of stuff.
If "it" means people with valid visas being denied entrance to the US, then I guess we'd have to define "very often" to know if we agree or not. I'm guessing that it happens way more than most people think it does.
As Ponchi says, it's up to each officer's discretion. It's a lot of power in one person's hands. Talk to an immigration attorney and you will hear stories. People with a multiple entry visa who never overstay or come more frequently than their visa allows are often denied entrance just because the officer thinks that may overstay at some point.
Kevin
Story. My friend Adriana went for a visa RENEWAL. Around 1992, when I was working for USDA. Adriana was loaded with money, traveled to Miami as I would go to the beach, had never any intentions to overstay her visas (had never done so) but the problem was that she was absolutely beautiful. She reached the window for consular services, the guy took one look at her and voided her application, not one single question asked.
I gather he figured she could find a husband in Miami in less than a week.
Yes, I was only talking about US Border officers. Consular officers are much worse. When I was living in Colombia, I knew a ton of people who applied for tourist or student visas for the US. Their visas would be approved, or not, seemingly haphazardly, just like what happened to Adriana.
Kevin
by mick1303 Clive James ... "the problem with Australians is not that so many of them are descend from convicts, but that so many of them are descended from prison officers".
by ponchi101
mick1303 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 11:15 pm
Clive James ... "the problem with Australians is not that so many of them are descend from convicts, but that so many of them are descended from prison officers".
Suliso wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 7:01 pm
The other two were smarter and kept a low profile about it on social media.
Yes but now they can possibly be kicked out.
...and blame Novak.
by ti-amie
by Deuce At this point, maybe the Australian government will cancel the Aussie Open as punishment for the tennis officials trying to get Djokovic (and maybe others) into the tournament via less than proper means (if that's indeed accurate).
He will join an illustrious list of people with zero governing experience becoming high=level politicians. Arnold was governor of California, and I think California's economy is bigger than Serbia's. Then there was Reagan. And Trump. (insert barf emoji here). In the 80's Italy had a porn actor in their parliament. I'm sure there are others. It's bizarre, isn't it, that people conflate a very specific skill set and fame with ability to work in a government.
Kevin
^ Jesse Ventura - wrestler and governor of Minnesota.
Britney Spears will be president of the USA one day - just watch. Don't believe me? Well, people didn't think it was possible for Trump to be president, either.
In the U.S., the most important thing is celebrity and fame. That's why this happens.
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 3:22 pm
I would not rule out that he could quarantine for 2 weeks and play - if he is allowed to remain in the country and not have to leave and return, since it would be too late after Monday's court hearing (and honestly that would be silly). Question is, would he do it? I think he would.
I don't see how that can happen.
As I said previously - how could they allow Djokovic to simply quarantine for 2 weeks but not offer that same option to other unvaccinated players?
He will join an illustrious list of people with zero governing experience becoming high=level politicians. Arnold was governor of California, and I think California's economy is bigger than Serbia's. Then there was Reagan. And Trump. (insert barf emoji here). In the 80's Italy had a porn actor in their parliament. I'm sure there are others. It's bizarre, isn't it, that people conflate a very specific skill set and fame with ability to work in a government.
Kevin
^ Jesse Ventura - wrestler and governor of Minnesota.
Britney Spears will be president of the USA one day - just watch. Don't believe me? Well, people didn't think it was possible for Trump to be president, either.
In the U.S., the most important thing is celebrity and fame. That's why this happens.
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 3:22 pm
I would not rule out that he could quarantine for 2 weeks and play - if he is allowed to remain in the country and not have to leave and return, since it would be too late after Monday's court hearing (and honestly that would be silly). Question is, would he do it? I think he would.
I don't see how that can happen.
As I said previously - how could they allow Djokovic to simply quarantine for 2 weeks but not offer that same option to other unvaccinated players?
We’ll they would have to offer it to anyone else, too. But I was mistaken on the timing - there isn’t time to quarantine for 2 weeks before the main draw starts. I was thinking it started two weeks from Monday, but it’s a week from Monday. Too late even for Djokovic with his 2 days already banked.
by dmforever Apparently Novax's attorney(s) said that they think that he will prevail on appeal. The saga continues.
Kevin
by meganfernandez
dmforever wrote:Apparently Novax's attorney(s) said that they think that he will prevail on appeal. The saga continues.
Kevin
Well of course they do. I’m guessing no. Wonder if the judge is the same political party as the PM.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ashkor87
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:04 am
Now that the 2021 is over...
Predictions for AO 22-
Women:
Muguruza 30%
Sabalenka 20%
Osaka 20%
Barty 10%
The field 20%
Men, will wait for Djokovic !
If he plays,
Djokovic 40%
Zverev 30%
Medvedev 20%
Nadal 5%
The field 5%
Updated after the first week's experience..
Osaka 40%
Barty 30%
Muguruza 20%
Sabalenka 5%
The field 5%
Zverev 40%
Medvedev 30%
Tsiptsipas 10%
Nadal 10%
The field 10%
by Liamvalid Osaka 30%
Barty 20%
Muguruza 20%
The field 30%
Djokovic 50%
Medvedev 20%
Zverev 20%
The field 10%
I’m still convinced Djokovic plays, and feeds off the crowds boos to play his best tennis. I don’t really give much of a chance to anyone outside of the these winning, and I would bet my house on Nadal not winning it.
Despite the WTA parity, I’m still more confident in one of my 3 picks winning here than any other woman, but I’d be happy to see the likes of Swiatek or Azarenka win the title, or maybe Gauff breaking through. Would love to see Fernandez and Raducanu repeat their US heroics but can’t see that happening here
by Deuce
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 6:11 am
Updated after the first week's experience..
Osaka 40%
Barty 30%
Muguruza 20%
Sabalenka 5%
The field 5%
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:34 am
Osaka 30%
Barty 20%
Muguruza 20%
The field 30%
^ ^ Were you guys aware when you made those predictions that Osaka withdrew from the Melbourne tournament today citing injury?
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 6:11 am
Updated after the first week's experience..
Osaka 40%
Barty 30%
Muguruza 20%
Sabalenka 5%
The field 5%
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:34 am
Osaka 30%
Barty 20%
Muguruza 20%
The field 30%
^ ^ Were you guys aware when you made those predictions that Osaka withdrew from the Melbourne tournament today citing injury?
Ah. no I’ve not checked the latest scores. I hope it’s nothing serious, and I have no confidence in my current knowledge of the WTA to change my predictions!
by ashkor87 Yes, aware of Osaka's withdrawal but hopefully only precautionary...
by ashkor87
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:34 am
Osaka 30%
Barty 20%
Muguruza 20%
The field 30%
Djokovic 50%
Medvedev 20%
Zverev 20%
The field 10%
I’m still convinced Djokovic plays, and feeds off the crowds boos to play his best tennis. I don’t really give much of a chance to anyone outside of the these winning, and I would bet my house on Nadal not winning it.
Despite the WTA parity, I’m still more confident in one of my 3 picks winning here than any other woman, but I’d be happy to see the likes of Swiatek or Azarenka win the title, or maybe Gauff breaking through. Would love to see Fernandez and Raducanu repeat their US heroics but can’t see that happening here
Even if Djoko plays, which I doubt, he will be out of condition/practice..agree noone outside 2 or 3 players have much chance...we seem to be in agreement on the wta side- only difference is 'field'..someone other than the Named ones, j guess..
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:34 am
Osaka 30%
Barty 20%
Muguruza 20%
The field 30%
Djokovic 50%
Medvedev 20%
Zverev 20%
The field 10%
I’m still convinced Djokovic plays, and feeds off the crowds boos to play his best tennis. I don’t really give much of a chance to anyone outside of the these winning, and I would bet my house on Nadal not winning it.
Despite the WTA parity, I’m still more confident in one of my 3 picks winning here than any other woman, but I’d be happy to see the likes of Swiatek or Azarenka win the title, or maybe Gauff breaking through. Would love to see Fernandez and Raducanu repeat their US heroics but can’t see that happening here
Even if Djoko plays, which I doubt, he will be out of condition/practice..agree noone outside 2 or 3 players have much chance...we seem to be in agreement on the wta side- only difference is 'field'..someone other than the Named ones, j guess..
That’s true about the lack of practice and match fitness, but I’ve written him off in the past only to see him breeze through the draw (with the usual match thrown in where he comes back from 2 sets down).
I barely watched any matches after the French last year due to a massive workload, so I’m the last person to be predicting anything at the minute. I only know what I’ve been reading on here tbh
by ponchi101 Osaka withdrew due to fatigue. She said she was just tired because of lack of play since last year. That gives her this full week to regain conditioning and at the Aussie she gets break days in between matches so no need, for those that are picking her to win it, to recalibrate that much.
I still say: The Field > 55%
Edit. Just found an article saying she withdrew due to an abdominal injury. So, disregard what I said above, and monitor this week and see how she is doing.
by JazzNU Cami Osorio is on her way to Australia. She's thrilled.
Also if it wasn't posted before, Nastia is in Melbourne and starting to practice.
by ti-amie
by JazzNU Nick Kyrgios tested positive for covid but isn't experiencing any symptoms, and despite being pretty late in the game, still expects to be able to play the Aussie Open. The advantages of being an Aussie in this situation if it happens.
In contrast, Jensen Brooksby tested positive for covid ahead of his flight to Melbourne, and has to withdraw from the tournament.
by ti-amieThe ATP and WTA seeds have been announced.
1. Novak Djokovic (SRB)
2. Daniil Medvedev (RUS)
3. Alexander Zverev (GER)
4. Stefanos Tsitsipas (GRE)
5. Andrey Rublev (RUS)
6. Rafael Nadal (ESP)
7. Matteo Berrettini (ITA)
8. Casper Ruud (NOR)
9. Felix Auger-Aliassime (CAN)
10. Hubert Hurkacz (POL)
11. Jannik Sinner (ITA)
12. Cameron Norrie (GBR)
13. Diego Schwartzman (ARG)
14. Denis Shapovalov (CAN)
15. Roberto Bautista Agut (ESP)
16. Cristian Garin (CHI)
17. Gael Monfils (FRA)
18. Aslan Karatsev (RUS)
19. Pablo Carreno Busta (ESP)
20. Taylor Fritz (USA)
21. Nikoloz Basilashvili (GEO)
22. John Isner (USA)
23. Reilly Opelka (USA)
24. Daniel Evans (GBR)
25. Lorenzo Sonego (ITA)
26. Grigor Dimitrov (BUL)
27. Marin Cilic (CRO)
28. Karen Khachanov (RUS)
29. Ugo Humbert (FRA)
30. Lloyd Harris (RSA)
31. Carlos Alcaraz (ESP)
32. Alex de Minaur (AUS)
by dryrunguy So, if the seeds hold up, Osaka, Halep, Svitolina, and Kerber will be the R16 opponents for Barty, Sabalenka, Muguruza, and Krejcikova... Ouch.
by ponchi101 No way Aryna will make the R16, so no issue there.
Krejcikova could be worried about Osaka, Halep and Kerber, not Svitolina.
Barty/Osaka, if that happens, is the kind of match that is exhibit A in "why tournament directors should have veto power over some matches". That could be a huge final.
Do we get good Mugu (2021 Guadalajara) or do we get bad Mugu, the one that loses 4&4 to a player ranked outside the top 50? We won't know.
by Togtdyalttai
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 8:37 pm
No way Aryna will make the R16, so no issue there.
Krejcikova could be worried about Osaka, Halep and Kerber, not Svitolina.
Barty/Osaka, if that happens, is the kind of match that is exhibit A in "why tournament directors should have veto power over some matches". That could be a huge final.
Do we get good Mugu (2021 Guadalajara) or do we get bad Mugu, the one that loses 4&4 to a player ranked outside the top 50? We won't know.
At this point, I don't even want Craig Tiley to have veto power over what's served in the AO cafeteria, much less the draw.
by ponchi101 , well, certainly not Tiley but... you get my point.
by ti-amie Long live Twitter.
Some on Tennis Twitter are already moving the ATP seeds around. There's a huge discussion about Felix becoming the #8 seed...
Don't count your chickens before they hatch
by ti-amie
by JazzNU Disappointing, but I guess it could be worse.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie Some clarification
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by shmrck14 If it wasn't already, it is now officially a farce. All this for one guy
by ti-amie
by ti-amie Why can't we get the WTA draw while this is going on? And shouldn't they have prepared the back up draw just in case?
by ti-amie The PM's presser will start at 11:45 Eastern in the US.
by ti-amie
I think this would be 12:15a Eastern in the US?
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie Live stream.
by JazzNU Prime Minister is on live now. They are delaying for any announcement.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie Stuart Fraser
@stu_fraser
·
1m
Replying to
@stu_fraser
Journalists have now been permitted entry to the room. Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley among the officials on stage preparing for the start of the draw shortly.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by JazzNU
ti-amie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:15 am
Stuart Fraser
@stu_fraser
·
1m
Replying to
@stu_fraser
Journalists have now been permitted entry to the room. Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley among the officials on stage preparing for the start of the draw shortly.
That man must know where actual bodies are buried and a tape of the murder. No signs of even getting reprimanded for how he handled all of this.
by ti-amie I'm waiting for the draw to be posted on the AO site. What a s**t show tonight has been.
I read the AP article about this and it seems like it's not a real 50% attendance. It's 50% of what hasn't already sold up to that level, so the crowds may not seem that small and the atmosphere may not be greatly affected. There's no plans to cancel tickets that have already been sold.
by JazzNU
by jazzyg There are a lot of serious issues going on about Djokovic, but the outrage at the draw being delayed for a couple of hours is farcical in itself.
I mean, who cares? Can anyone explain in a credible manner why that detracts from anything in the least?
by ponchi101 Maybe the optics that it looked as if the PM may say something about Novax, and TA was waiting to take evasive action? It seems right now, to me, that they really care more about Novax than the other 255 players in the singles draws. The mission objective is just to get him to play, all else be damned.
So holding this for a while may look to some as more favoritism towards him.
by ti-amie
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 7:23 pmMaybe the optics that it looked as if the PM may say something about Novax, and TA was waiting to take evasive action? It seems right now, to me, that they really care more about Novax than the other 255 players in the singles draws. The mission objective is just to get him to play, all else be damned.
So holding this for a while may look to some as more favoritism towards him.
It was the optics of the situation. The press was thrown out of the room AFTER the news got to tennis twitter about the PM's presser. Of course there would be drama.
It was asked why, if the hold up was the ATP draw why not release the women's draw during the wait. Of course nothing of the sort happened and which draw came out first? The WTA draw.
As was said here I wouldn't want Craig Tiley flipping burgers for me.
by Deuce This is an interesting article in that it mentions that the tournament is in chaos and also tells what will happen with the draw if (hopefully when) Djokovic is removed from it permanently.
It indicates that a Lucky Loser will simply be inserted into Djokovic's spot. (I guess he could tell his grandchildren one day that he was once the 'top seed' at the Australian Open!)
by ashkor87 By citing the risk of unrest as the reason to ban Djokovic, the Australian government appears to have missed the implications..if they can ban players because other people may agree with them, where does it end? They would have no right to host a Grand Slam event if that is really their position!
by ponchi101 Yes. They keep missing the simplest point: You are NOT vaccinated, you do not come in.
And I would side with Novax in that defense. What people decide to do because of his actions/inactions is not his responsibility. He is not, after all, the sole anti-vaxxer in the world.
by Deuce
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:18 am
By citing the risk of unrest as the reason to ban Djokovic, the Australian government appears to have missed the implications..if they can ban players because other people may agree with them, where does it end? They would have no right to host a Grand Slam event if that is really their position!
Yes - this strikes me as being odd, as well...
You would think it would simply be black and white: Foreign travelers must be fully vaccinated in order to be permitted entry to Australia. And if that's the case, Djokovic is not permitted entry - end of saga (actually, the saga never would have occurred).
What the Australian government seems to be saying is that by allowing Djokovic to enter the country, that could influence people into believing that the unvaccinated have more rights than they actually have, and that it could influence people to not get vaccinated, which would then put a strain on the health system.
This seems to be an odd approach, as it may set a precedent - such as if a famous singer who smokes enters the country, it could influence people - particularly teenagers - to start smoking, which would then lead to more people in hospitals with lung cancer, etc.
Who knows? The way this idiocy is going, maybe this is a deliberately weak case. Perhaps they're trying to have their cake and eat it, too (which is typical of politicians)... maybe it's a calculated move by the Australian government to deceive the people into thinking that they're actually trying to kick Djokovic out, but they don't really want to kick him out... So they bring a weak case, hoping to lose, but also hope they are able to convince the Australian people that they tried.
Anything's possible with this circus.
.
by oliver0001 Do we know when the schedule for day 1 was originally supposed to be released? Have they said when they will release the OOP? (Have the organizers indicated that they will wait for the ruling of the federal court?)
by martini4me
Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 3:56 am
This is an interesting article in that it mentions that the tournament is in chaos and also tells what will happen with the draw if (hopefully when) Djokovic is removed from it permanently.
It indicates that a Lucky Loser will simply be inserted into Djokovic's spot. (I guess he could tell his grandchildren one day that he was once the 'top seed' at the Australian Open!)
No, that's only true if Djokovic (or any seed) is out after the first day's match schedule is released. If there's a "withdrawal" before then, there's a shuffling of seeds up the draw (number five into Djokovic's spot, number nine into five's spot, etc.).
by martini4me
oliver0001 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 2:35 pm
Do we know when the schedule for day 1 was originally supposed to be released? Have they said when they will release the OOP? (Have the organizers indicated that they will wait for the ruling of the federal court?)
I assume they're trying to wait as long as possible, so that they can adjust the draw if Djokovic gets banned.
By the way, does anyone know a place to get a GOOD printable draw. The draws at the AO tournament site, aside from being hard to read, is mis-formatted so that the top half of each draw prints on two pages instead of one, as usual.
by shmrck14
by martini4me Jon Wertheim
@jon_wertheim
·
1h
FWiw, some players/team hearing schedule would be out by 4pm at the latest , even if they aren’t done adjudicating the case...
Jeff Donaldson
@jdd_tennis
·
35m
(As someone who has worked several years at a tournament, I can almost guarantee the players already know when they’re playing tomorrow even if the public doesn’t yet.)
Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 3:56 am
This is an interesting article in that it mentions that the tournament is in chaos and also tells what will happen with the draw if (hopefully when) Djokovic is removed from it permanently.
It indicates that a Lucky Loser will simply be inserted into Djokovic's spot. (I guess he could tell his grandchildren one day that he was once the 'top seed' at the Australian Open!)
No, that's only true if Djokovic (or any seed) is out after the first day's match schedule is released. If there's a "withdrawal" before then, there's a shuffling of seeds up the draw (number five into Djokovic's spot, number nine into five's spot, etc.).
Because this is a very unique circumstance, they seem to have decided to do things differently (and more simply) than the regulation states - i.e. to just insert the Lucky Loser into Djokovic's spot so as to disturb the draw as little as possible.
That's what the article states.
But who really knows what's happening with any of this at this point? Things seem to change by the hour...
by ti-amie He's the last match up on Laver. I don't think they could've done anything else at this point.
by ti-amie
by oliver0001 So another unforced error/serious mistake from the AO organizers. Instead of waiting for two more hours, they release the OOP and now cannot reshuffle the draw. At least if they stick the rules, but that seems far from certain considering everything they have done the last couple of weeks/months...
by ti-amie
by Deuce To me, this is the most simple and logical way to replace Djokovic in the draw.
While it does seem strange to put a Lucky Loser in the spot for the top seed, doing so ensures that the rest of the draw is not disturbed at all.
Overall, it's the best they can do in my view.
Now let's hope that Lucky Loser takes advantage of the position and wins the tournament!
by ti-amie I found this on TennisTwitter already. Nothing on the official site has changed.
by ashkor87 answer to a trivia question!
by Deuce It's good that Salvatore has a beard.
I don't think Novak has the time to grow one that good in only about 27 hours...
I hope the Aussie crowd cheer wildly for Caruso and provide him with a positive experience he'll remember forever.
GO GET 'EM, SALVATORE!!!!
.
by oliver0001 Djokovic confirms he is out of Australian Open
A statement from Novak Djokovic:
I would like to make a brief statement to address the outcomes of today’s Court hearing.
I will now be taking some time to rest and to recuperate, before making any further comments beyond this.
I am extremely disappointed with the Court ruling to dismiss my application for judicial review of the Minister’s decision to cancel my visa, which means I cannot stay in Australia and participate in the Australian Open.
I respect the Court’s ruling and I will cooperate with the relevant authorities in relation to my departure from the country.
I am uncomfortable that the focus of the past weeks has been on me and I hope that we can all now focus on the game and tournament I love.
I would like to wish the players, tournament officials, staff, volunteers and fans all the best for the tournament.
Finally, I would like to thank my family, friends, team, supporters, fans and my fellow Serbians for your continued support. You have all been a great source of strength to me.
by Liamvalid I watched Caruso play a couple of times, he’s one of those players that has the game to be a top 50 regular, but not the mentality. Maybe this is just the lucky break he needs
by nelslus Caruso is also a bit of a babe. And, his name being Caruso doesn't hurt, either. Nor the fact that he isn't Novak.
by Liamvalid
nelslus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:10 am
Caruso is also a bit of a babe. And, his name being Caruso doesn't hurt, either. Nor the fact that he isn't Novak.
Yeah he wouldn’t look out of place on a catwalk that’s for sure. He’s a bit of a hot head too, maybe a lesser version of Fognini
by JTContinental Sam Stosur is retiring from singles after this tournament
by MJ2004 How long does the real culprit of this mess, Craig Tiley, keep his job? He needs to be gone, yesterday.
by ptmcmahon
nelslus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:10 am
Caruso is also a bit of a babe. And, his name being Caruso doesn't hurt, either. Nor the fact that he isn't Novak.
Someone needs to make a gif of Ross saying “She isn’t Rachel” and replace it with He isn’t Novak
by jazzyg Caruso and Fognini played a memorable match the Aussie Open last year. Fognini won something like 13-11 in the fifth-set tiebreak and when they shook hands, he told Caruso that Caruso had hit a lot of lucky shots, and Caruso went after him. They had to be separated, and Caruso was screaming at him. It was high entertainment.
by MJ2004 My reaction while watching: Be the bigger person Fognini!
by JTContinental
jazzyg wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:48 pm
Caruso and Fognini played a memorable match the Aussie Open last year. Fognini won something like 13-11 in the fifth-set tiebreak and when they shook hands, he told Caruso that Caruso had hit a lot of lucky shots, and Caruso went after him. They had to be separated, and Caruso was screaming at him. It was high entertainment.
I remember it well
by ti-amie Kid has bulked up.
by ponchi101 But the kit is ghastly...
by ti-amie It's the male version of the one Svitolina modeled.
by skatingfan
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 1:55 am
But the kit is ghastly...
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 1:55 am
But the kit is ghastly...
I'm sorry - he's wearing clothes?
by Deuce Sadly, ONS JABEUR has withdrawn from the tournament at the last minute (almost literally) due to the back injury she suffered recently in a match vs. Kontaveit.
by Fastbackss
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 5:51 am
Sadly, ONS JABEUR has withdrawn from the tournament at the last minute (almost literally) due to the back injury she suffered recently in a match vs. Kontaveit.
Ugh, this is a bummer
by ti-amie
by Deuce That's a legitimate response.
by ponchi101 The one thing that always puzzled me about her situation last year. She is VERY good at handling questions, and she understands that she does not have to answer every question. So the fact that it got to her...
Well, as I say, I never understood. But sure, saying "I don't want to answer that" is valid.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by JTContinental
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 1:55 am
But the kit is ghastly...
I thought it looked good on Madison Keys, but no one else so far.
by JazzNU How the hell does Craig Tiley still have a job? He's done so much egregiously wrong you'd think he was pulling a George Costanza and trying to get fired to go to a better offer. How dumb are they to believe whatever bull he's feeding them about how this happened? You can't convince me this fool doesn't have evidence under lock and key of a capital crime of someone on that board to still have his job after this cluster****.
by the Moz George is Tiley, Novax is the cleaning lady and the bogus medical exemption is obviously the cashmere sweater with the dot. End of.
The chair umpire should NOT be doing this. Maybe in this case there was no way for Tan to get back into the match, but that might not be the case in other matches. Did no one learn anything from Mohamed Lahyani?
Kevin
by dmforeverThis made me chuckle.
by JazzNU Adidas dress on Garbine is the first Adidas kit I've liked this Aussie Open. A shame she's out because she gets specialized designs, so doubtful anyone else has it. The rest have been a combo of trainwrecks to the point where I think someone should be getting fired (Ostapenko's day-glo being a clear firable offense).
Nike - I've figured out that the two piece kits are better than the full tennis dresses to me, more flattering cut on the women. The only tennis dress I like is the one Maddie had on in her second round match, it was a different combo than most of the others, which I think I said before, look awkward.
Very funny. He's not in good enough shape to win B5 even when he's serving lights out. He also walked away from a serve return - I think in Daniil's last service game. Was down 40-love and didn't even try. That effort won't cut it against the Top 50. And even if he's right, so what? He doesn't actually do it. He's all talk.
He might win his annual fiesta title in Acapulco, but whatever. He's irrelevant to the ATP.
by JazzNU
JazzNU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:47 am
Adidas dress on Garbine is the first Adidas kit I've liked this Aussie Open. A shame she's out because she gets specialized designs, so doubtful anyone else has it. The rest have been a combo of trainwrecks to the point where I think someone should be getting fired (Ostapenko's day-glo being a clear firable offense).
Nike - I've figured out that the two piece kits are better than the full tennis dresses to me, more flattering cut on the women. The only tennis dress I like is the one Maddie had on in her second round match, it was a different combo than most of the others, which I think I said before, look awkward.
Okay, no one at Adidas needs to be fired, looks like Adidas dropped her, so this is a different company's mistake.
JazzNU wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:47 am
Adidas dress on Garbine is the first Adidas kit I've liked this Aussie Open. A shame she's out because she gets specialized designs, so doubtful anyone else has it. The rest have been a combo of trainwrecks to the point where I think someone should be getting fired (Ostapenko's day-glo being a clear firable offense).
Nike - I've figured out that the two piece kits are better than the full tennis dresses to me, more flattering cut on the women. The only tennis dress I like is the one Maddie had on in her second round match, it was a different combo than most of the others, which I think I said before, look awkward.
Okay, no one at Adidas needs to be fired, looks like Adidas dropped her, so this is a different company's mistake.
John and I were commenting on how hideous this look is. SO unflattering, and makes her look really, REALLY!!!! out of shape
by ti-amie
by ponchi101 That is an awesome sports shot. Truly impressive.
by ashkor87 i guess we will now find out how good Badosa really is..
by ashkor87 i think Kenin's outfit looksed so odd only because she is hitching the skirt too high...kids do that, so it makes her look sooo kiddish..
by meganfernandez
ashkor87 wrote:i think Kenin's outfit looksed so odd only because she is hitching the skirt too high...kids do that, so it makes her look sooo kiddish..
High-waisted shorts and jeans have been in style for a few years. My guess is this is why she’s wearing a high-waisted skirt. She has worn one the last couple of years - so much that her booty peeked out a bit - but it was a straight skirt, not a flouncy one. I actually liked the peekaboo on her. It fit her body type. This year’s outfit… did not. But if she liked it and was comfortable, all that matters.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ponchi101
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 7:21 am
i guess we will now find out how good Badosa really is..
Keys highest ranking is 7, so they are not far apart on that department. And Maddie is not a test to gauge how good you are. She can melt, remember that.
by ashkor87 It is just that Badosa is new to the top echelon, Keys has been there many years..If Badosa wins, it may mean she belongs at the top..if she loses, it may not mean much - Keys has beaten good players like Halep and Ivanovic in big tournaments...
ashkor87 wrote:i think Kenin's outfit looksed so odd only because she is hitching the skirt too high...kids do that, so it makes her look sooo kiddish..
High-waisted shorts and jeans have been in style for a few years. My guess is this is why she’s wearing a high-waisted skirt. She has worn one the last couple of years - so much that her booty peeked out a bit - but it was a straight skirt, not a flouncy one. I actually liked the peekaboo on her. It fit her body type. This year’s outfit… did not. But if she liked it and was comfortable, all that matters.
Kenin is not with Fila anymore. I'd attribute the difference in fit and style to that and not much else. The new company she signed with, Free People or FP Movement, they are not known for tennis gear (understatement). Based on their brand, they will likely be trying to go trendier I'm guessing it's going to take a few tries to get it right, though high-waist stuff is really an expired trend (high rise is not though). I personally think this was a miss based on fit, what they were going for was fine, the execution was just off as it was not as flattering as it should've been on her, it bunched awkwardly and the cut of the torso appeared to be a bit off. But the style was consistent with their brand, so they might have been thrilled with it.
by ti-amie
by JazzNU Was this mentioned already? Didn't see it, sorry if it was posted elsewhere.
by ponchi101 If that is true, it is sickening. That is straight out of a third world dictatorship manual.
by MJ2004 TA, the shining beacon of integrity this tournament.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 4:44 am
If that is true, it is sickening. That is straight out of a third world dictatorship manual.
There's a story about it in The Age and a Tennis Channel tweet references an incident. So not sure about this particular person, but it overall appears to be truthful, wouldn't have posted otherwise.
There's a story about it in The Age and a Tennis Channel tweet references an incident. So not sure about this particular person, but it overall appears to be truthful, wouldn't have posted otherwise.
It was a rhetorical "if that is true". Sorry if I was misconstrued, but I doubt the story in no way whatsoever.
It is just that when I see things like that, the personal feeling is sickening. Reminds me too much of the tactics back home. And it reminds me of how I feel when people talk poorly about the press.
Go ahead. Go live in a country without free press. See how it feels.
(Mixing politics with sports, but I hope I am clear on what I mean).
In the Juniors, Canada has Jaden Weeks playing in the Boys... Jaden's a really nice kid - a lefty. He's got the comportment of a pro already - he would fit right in.
He won his first round match today.
In the Girls, Canada has 4 playing, I believe - Xu, Kupres, Cross, and Mboko. All won their 1st round matches today.
Victoria Mboko is 15 years old, is the 14th seed here, and is, to me, Canada's best hope at an eventual pro career.
by ti-amie She won.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by Suliso Have you all noticed that in four matches Barty has been broken only once? That's amazing for WTA no matter who you're facing.
by Liamvalid
Suliso wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:48 am
Have you all noticed that in four matches Barty has been broken only once? That's amazing for WTA no matter who you're facing.
She was actually in her 63rd or 64th consecutive service hold when Anisimova broke her in set 2!!
I just went through Barty’s H2H to investigate, it seems Gauff was the last player to break the Barty serve in the second round of Adelaide (she broke 3 times in that match too, good for Cori!)
Suliso wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:48 am
Have you all noticed that in four matches Barty has been broken only once? That's amazing for WTA no matter who you're facing.
Have we noticed? They won't shut up about it so hard not to notice.
by JazzNU
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
The little boy's name is Fin (one "n") and someone posted a picture of him holding the racquet Kyrgios gave him.
by ti-amie For those who think Monfils doesn't know what he's done in the past. He is (will be?) 36 this year. I would love to see this happen for him but I don't know.
by meganfernandez
ti-amie wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 7:19 pm
For those who think Monfils doesn't know what he's done in the past. He is (will be?) 36 this year. I would love to see this happen for him but I don't know.
Oh, the ennui! It's heartbreaking. He's the biggest sentimental favorite on tour right now.
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:53 am
Dehydration? Only way that can be true, I guess.
Take it with a grain of salt, but in the comments there are people who said he was showing classic signs of dehydration in the after match press conference. Other comments said he lost a greater amount in one of his matches in previous years against Novax, I believe it was 6 kg that was mentioned.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by Liamvalid 9 straight doubles slams now for Hewitt and Reid
Edit: I know wheelchair is a different discipline, but surely 9 in a row is a record. How many did Martina and Pam win straight?
by skatingfan
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 6:48 pm
9 straight doubles slams now for Hewitt and Reid
Edit: I know wheelchair is a different discipline, but surely 9 in a row is a record. How many did Martina and Pam win straight?
Liamvalid wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 6:48 pm
9 straight doubles slams now for Hewitt and Reid
Edit: I know wheelchair is a different discipline, but surely 9 in a row is a record. How many did Martina and Pam win straight?
Looks like 8 - Wimbledon '83 to French Open '85.
Yes, and 20 overall as a duo. Interestingly - Navratolova won 11 slams partnering other player (this is only in women's doubles, not counting mixed). Shriver won just one w/o Martina. Coincidentally it was with Zvereva, who herself won 18 double slams.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by JazzNU Not sure this was posted before. Just in case thought I'd post, from a day ago basically. This is up from 50% notwithstanding tickets that had been pre-sold (on one of the ESPN broadcasts, Darren said the finals had been 80% pre-sold)
When she drops the snarl and the scowl from the court, she is very pretty.
I wonder if somebody has the smarts to sign her up TONIGHT, for the final. She will be the top American, after all.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:52 pm
When she drops the snarl and the scowl from the court, she is very pretty.
I wonder if somebody has the smarts to sign her up TONIGHT, for the final. She will be the top American, after all.
She does herself zero favors where sponsors are concerned, she is straight up awful at managing her social media. She should be more amenable, not less, given how she can be on court. I have a very hard time believing she has an experienced agent and manager steering her career because she's awful at marketing herself. I hope she thinks about getting them.
And yes, she's pretty. I've posted several off-court photos of her in the past in the Players thread and most have been surprised that's she's pretty. I kind of think that's even clear on court, a bit of a departure actually. I think it's hard to tell on many others, but not on Danielle.
by JTContinental After seeing her on-court interview yesterday, I think she's pretty socially awkward
by Deuce I'm quite happy that she makes no attempt to be a media darling, and is bad at marketing herself.
We have far too many sell-outs already. Anyone who refuses to sell themselves to the highest bidder is more than ok in my book.
I dislike when people view players who have no sponsors as if they're not 'successful' unless they are sponsored. I love players who have no sponsorships. It tells me that maybe they're not playing for the glory or the fame or to get as financially rich as possible, but are maybe playing for the love of the game. And they might even possess too much integrity to enter into that artificial world.
There are more important things in life than to be a walking billboard.
by ti-amie
Deuce wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:37 am
I'm quite happy that she makes no attempt to be a media darling, and is bad at marketing herself.
We have far too many sell-outs already. Anyone who refuses to sell themselves to the highest bidder is more than ok in my book.
I dislike when people view players who have no sponsors as if they're not 'successful' unless they are sponsored. I love players who have no sponsorships. It tells me that maybe they're not playing for the glory or the fame or to get as financially rich as possible, but are maybe playing for the love of the game. And they might even possess too much integrity to enter into that artificial world.
There are more important things in life than to be a walking billboard.
Wanna bet that by IW she'll have a clothing company? And be proud about it?
Deuce wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:37 am
I'm quite happy that she makes no attempt to be a media darling, and is bad at marketing herself.
We have far too many sell-outs already. Anyone who refuses to sell themselves to the highest bidder is more than ok in my book.
I dislike when people view players who have no sponsors as if they're not 'successful' unless they are sponsored. I love players who have no sponsorships. It tells me that maybe they're not playing for the glory or the fame or to get as financially rich as possible, but are maybe playing for the love of the game. And they might even possess too much integrity to enter into that artificial world.
There are more important things in life than to be a walking billboard.
Wanna bet that by IW she'll have a clothing company? And be proud about it?
No, I don't want to bet - because I don't know her well enough to know what her plans or priorities are. I can only hope.
I maintain, however, that viewing sponsorships as a measure of 'success' is the product of a culture that is so obsessed with 'celebrity' and so accustomed to greed and excess that whenever it encounters one who has an opportunity to be a human billboard and refuses that opportunity, that individual, rather than being viewed as a person of integrity, is instead deemed 'strange', or even 'stupid', and that there must be 'something wrong with them' for not selling themselves to the highest bidder and obediently jumping through the hoops they're told to jump through and reciting whatever marketing words the sponsor writes for them just for the money "I love XXXXX clothing. It's so stylish and comfortable. I only wear XXXXX on and off the court..." ... It makes me ill.
And they'll change racquets or clothing as soon as another company offers them more money - so much for their 'belief' in the product. It's all so incredibly phony.
And when no sponsorship is offered to a player, that player is viewed as being either 'unsuccessful' or as 'not good enough', or 'must be undesirable'...
That's a large part of how 'success' is measured today.
I think it's sad and pathetic, really.
I love seeing players with an all black racquet and no sponsors on the strings... and no logos on the clothing, or a mix of clothing from different companies. It's such a refreshing damned change from the usual artifice.
by meganfernandez I imagine Collins will have a sponsor by Indian Wells, as long as she gets an offer she likes. Wasn't she with New Balance for a while? It's possible that up until now, she just hasn't been offered enough money and is holding out. Good for her, it worked. But I wonder if her on-court personality will be an issue. Really a shame if it is - I know plenty of people who love her, specifically all the women I play tennis with, 20s through 70s. Cressy is holding out because he believes he'll be top 10 and doesn't want to spend time on sponsors until he has more leverage.
by ponchi101 She was with New Balance indeed.
I say by IW is kind of a long time. If she wins on Saturday, her leverage is automatic, tennis wise. She is a former NCAA player, which makes it a very nice story, and has a lot of appeals for many companies. Clothing is the initial step, but for some of the smaller companies (Lacoste, for example) she would be a great addition.
I mean, #1 American. If you are the #1 player in France, the check is guaranteed, and at least 7 figures. She deserves it completely.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 3:49 pm
She was with New Balance indeed.
I say by IW is kind of a long time. If she wins on Saturday, her leverage is automatic, tennis wise. She is a former NCAA player, which makes it a very nice story, and has a lot of appeals for many companies. Clothing is the initial step, but for some of the smaller companies (Lacoste, for example) she would be a great addition.
I mean, #1 American. If you are the #1 player in France, the check is guaranteed, and at least 7 figures. She deserves it completely.
Oh, yeah, could be sooner than IW, that's just the next big milestone on the tennis calendar. And only 7 weeks away, really. Pretty soon.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by JazzNU I don't think Danielle's on-court personality is the biggest of issues, enough people liked her before despite the intensity and poor sportsmanship, they'll like her even more now that she's winning and climbing the ranks, but her approach overall might be a problem. New Balance was still seemingly behind her after the incident where she broke covid protocols in 2020, but she was still with them last year and was used in their ads and stuff, so them dropping her is a surprise. Now, she was never a marquee to them like Coco is, didn't make it into any commercials that I saw, but she was one of the players they were promoting for sure. So either she wanted more and they wouldn't give it, she wanted to move on to try for a bigger contract with a different name (well done if so), or they didn't think she was a good enough ambassador for their brand. If it's the latter, that's completely justified, she's terrible at promoting the brands she represents.
Her being the #1 American will get something, but not a ton on it's own. Kenin was the #1 American and that hardly opened up the floodgates for her. Super duper quiet really, certainly not helped by the pandemic, but there was a month to gain traction with sponsors after winning, typically an active time as you saw with Emma, and it didn't really happen for her. Danielle is prettier, but Sonya's been much more open off court than Danielle has in many ways. And there is no way all those stories of her as a cute little tennis player meeting some of the tennis greats wasn't the doing of her management team or her agent. And it worked wonders for how people viewed Sonya.
Danielle is marketable, but she needs to get 1000% better at social media. For instance, she has deactivated her account during the Aussie Open. That's not what any brand is interested in, this is their highest traction time. She says she took a page from the USWNT in doing this to stay focused, but that's a misinterpretation or misunderstanding on her part if she thinks this is what they did. No one took down their social media accounts, they just stopped checking it, big difference. Her account likely would've gained 100,000+ subscribers on the low side in the last two weeks if it had been activated. But it's not. She thinks Rose Lavelle grew her IG subscribers by hundreds of thousands waiting until the World Cup was off everyone's mind? Come now. Coco Gauff's numbers skyrocketed that one Wimbledon from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. Amanda Anisimova's followers have increased in the neighborhood of 50,000 since the Aussie Open began. It happens in real time, waiting until later is a mistake. And for sponsors, they aren't getting their money's worth if you aren't showcasing their products that well in the time when the most people would look at what you're about, and social media is key to just about any of their strategies.
Danielle's gotten a very late start because of her college career, so it seems to me she shouldn't waste time getting this right. I hope she has hired or will be hiring a team to make the most out of her success. She's been leaving money on the table.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie AANNNNDDDD I'mma leave this right here.
by meganfernandez You mean... there is often context that others aren't aware of, which makes their judgment as ill-conceived as the action they criticize? You don't say.
Just a brain fart. It happens. And everyone ought to remember it when they are slinging arrows at the media.
ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 7:38 pm
The response
by JazzNU
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 2:39 am
You mean... there is often context that others aren't aware of, which makes their judgment as ill-conceived as the action they criticize? You don't say.
Just a brain fart. It happens. And everyone ought to remember it when they are slinging arrows at the media.
Why should they? Because sports media is so good at it? People will remember about as much as the media does anytime a player says something questionable or has an incident and the media lets it go, ignores it and moves on quickly, which is never. Ben in particular isn't known for that even a little bit.
by MJ2004 Great statement from Roger:
by Deuce
MJ2004 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:41 pm
Great statement from Roger:
Indeed, very classy.
Nothing from the other guy yet, huh?
by JazzNU
MJ2004 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:41 pm
Great statement from Roger:
I was coming here to say to check his IG stories. Novak posted a a congratulations to his social media accounts as well.
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie
by ti-amie More on Medvedev's monologue
by ponchi101 So:
First, he plays the NATIONALITY card. "I am Russian, people don't like me"
Second, he plays the "Crowd never roots for me" card.
When does somebody tell him: "You have behaved like a total ass on several occasions. This is what happens".
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:21 pm
So:
First, he plays the NATIONALITY card. "I am Russian, people don't like me"
Second, he plays the "Crowd never roots for me" card.
When does somebody tell him: "You have behaved like a total ass on several occasions. This is what happens".
SEVERAL occasions. What goes around comes around. I have no idea why he's suddenly acting like he's got amnesia about his actions and why people aren't rooting loudly for him, he's been doing this for a handful of years now and typically apologizing soon after saying he'll do better, but never actually doing anything different. It's not this Aussie Open, he's had stuff for several years now, at the very least dating back to when he was cursing loudly at Tsitsipas and trying to start a fight at the Miami Open.
And Rublev, also Russian last I checked, has no problem with fans, everyone is just waiting for him to take the next step. But he's had very few occasions of acting like a complete ass on court to my knowledge.
And taking frustrations out on ball kids is never a good idea, people are barely going to want to tolerate you after BS like that, can take years of good behavior to make up for that.
by ponchi101 I was thinking about who of the "bad guys" ever really made it unscathed from their attitude. The sole one I can come up with is Connors, and that was because he was beloved in NYC and at the USO, because he really gave it all there.
But: Rios eventually got burned. So did Mac. We know how the Kyrgios routine has worked out to make him, at a minimum, controversial. We can see how the less gifted players like Moutet can't gain traction.
Roger and Rafa simply understood that from the beginning and know that, when serving for the match at 6-5 in the fifth, that little extra that the crowd gives you can be the defining fact. Let's even, for a moment, call them hypocrites: it does not matter. They play knowing that it is always good to be the crowd favorite.
About being Russian. Go tell that to Sharapova.
by MJ2004 My reaction to Medvedev's comment about not being loved because he's Russian: Safin
by ponchi101
MJ2004 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:21 am
My reaction to Medvedev's comment about not being loved because he's Russian: Safin
I was thinking about that, and Marat was not the holiest of all players on court. Plus, his two Slams were against Sampras at the USO and Hewitt at the Aussie. Talk about being a villain. Yet, he was not seen that way by the fans.
by Deuce Also, pretty much any player (except Federer) playing Nadal in the Final today would have had the crowd against them - both because of the occasion of #21 and because Nadal was behind the entire match, and the crowd will always encourage the one who's behind because they want to see more tennis.
And because he's Nadal, with his history.
So there are several reasons that the crowd was not on Medvedev's side. For him to expect them to be (if he truly expected anything different than what happened) is foolish.
As for Sharapova, she was obviously more American than she was Russian (just as Osaka is more American than Japanese). I'm sure that most casual tennis fans (as well as non tennis fans) thought Sharapova was American.
by MJ2004
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:29 am
As for Sharapova, she was obviously more American than she was Russian (just as Osaka is more American than Japanese).
As another first-generation immigrant who sounds "American", I can see Osaka and Sharapova both disagreeing with this statement and even taking offense at it. Let's please just leave it at that.
And yes, I get that you said this in the context of how a player is perceived by the general public, but possibly inadvertently you worded it rather differently.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:29 am
As for Sharapova, she was obviously more American than she was Russian (just as Osaka is more American than Japanese).
As another first-generation immigrant who sounds "American", I can see Osaka and Sharapova both disagreeing with this statement and even taking offense at it. Let's please just leave it at that.
And yes, I get that you said this in the context of how a player is perceived by the general public, but possibly inadvertently you worded it rather differently.
No – I meant it the way I wrote it.
Osaka doesn’t even speak Japanese.
They've both lived in the U.S. for a long time, and have very much taken on the American lifestyle.
Of course, they have roots in Russia and Japan respectively, and are familiar with the culture. And they respect that, of course - and that's fine. But their daily lives are much more American than they are Russian or Japanese.
People 'take offense' to everything today, anyway, no matter what anyone says...
by skatingfan
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:13 am
People 'take offense' to everything today, anyway, no matter what anyone says...
People have generally always taken offense to having their identity questioned.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:13 am
People 'take offense' to everything today, anyway, no matter what anyone says...
People have generally always taken offense to having their identity questioned.
No... people twist things to suit their own 'politically correct' agenda, desperately trying to twist benign matters into something 'offensive'.
I make a basic observation on a matter which seems very obvious to me, and you two twist it into me 'questioning their identity'. Incredible.
As I said - people will 'take offense' to anything today in order to 'support' whatever their agenda is. And these same people - these same intolerant people - are the ones who preach tolerance the most.
The contradiction is as evident as it is mind boggling. It doesn't require 20/20 vision to see that such people who preach tolerance the most are only 'tolerant' of others who share their view, and are completely intolerant of all others.
If you wish to believe that Sharapova and Osaka's lifestyles and behaviours are more in tune with Russian and Japanese cultures respectively, you are certainly free to believe that.
I believe that the facts very clearly demonstrate that their comportments are significantly more consistent with American culture than they are with the Russian or Japanese cultures. And I am as free to believe that as you are to believe whatever it is that you believe.
by ti-amie Visibly limping should've been added. And sitting down to sign a ball for someone.
by JazzNU I didn't vote in the poll. It's hard for me to rank this one in a Best Match context, I'd have to really think about it. Although I haven't watched it in a very long time, I'm pretty sure my favorite (and best) Aussie Open match (not a final) remains in tact despite being thrilled with this result.
Had the poll been the about the Best Comeback Win, I'd feel very comfortable putting this in the Top 5 right now without thinking about it much.
by JTContinental
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:21 pm
So:
First, he plays the NATIONALITY card. "I am Russian, people don't like me"
Second, he plays the "Crowd never roots for me" card.
When does somebody tell him: "You have behaved like a total ass on several occasions. This is what happens".
Lol, what a crab. If he got rid of that ever-present sneer on his face that looks like he is continuously belching, I think that would go a long way toward people warming to him.
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:21 pm
So:
First, he plays the NATIONALITY card. "I am Russian, people don't like me"
Second, he plays the "Crowd never roots for me" card.
When does somebody tell him: "You have behaved like a total ass on several occasions. This is what happens".
Lol, what a crab. If he got rid of that ever-present sneer on his face that looks like he is continuously belching, I think that would go a long way toward people warming to him.
The thing is, he won over the NY crowd throughly in 2019. That runner-up speech was fantastic and he looked so comfortable in that role. I wonder why this was so different. Maybe the loss was harder and he couldn't take away the positives as quickly as the trophy ceremony (where he mouthed "so boring" when the presenter was talking about him) and press conference.
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:21 pm
So:
First, he plays the NATIONALITY card. "I am Russian, people don't like me"
Second, he plays the "Crowd never roots for me" card.
When does somebody tell him: "You have behaved like a total ass on several occasions. This is what happens".
Lol, what a crab. If he got rid of that ever-present sneer on his face that looks like he is continuously belching, I think that would go a long way toward people warming to him.
The thing is, he won over the NY crowd throughly in 2019. That runner-up speech was fantastic and he looked so comfortable in that role. I wonder why this was so different. Maybe the loss was harder and he couldn't take away the positives as quickly as the trophy ceremony (where he mouthed "so boring" when the presenter was talking about him) and press conference.
Your lip reading skills are better than mine. I was trying to figure out what he was saying while they were complementing his play/competitiveness, etc. The look on his face was like a kid tired of his parents reminding him to clean up his room (yeah, yeah, I've heard it all before...)
JTContinental wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 8:20 pm
Lol, what a crab. If he got rid of that ever-present sneer on his face that looks like he is continuously belching, I think that would go a long way toward people warming to him.
The thing is, he won over the NY crowd throughly in 2019. That runner-up speech was fantastic and he looked so comfortable in that role. I wonder why this was so different. Maybe the loss was harder and he couldn't take away the positives as quickly as the trophy ceremony (where he mouthed "so boring" when the presenter was talking about him) and press conference.
Your lip reading skills are better than mine. I was trying to figure out what he was saying while they were complementing his play/competitiveness, etc. The look on his face was like a kid tired of his parents reminding him to clean up his room (yeah, yeah, I've heard it all before...)
I had to look it up online when it happened. I don’t know what else he said. There was more.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by meganfernandez over 24 hours later and I am still thinking about that match. Rewatching pivotal parts in the background while I work/do online errands. It was just thrilling. I was on the edge of my seat. Me, a Federer fan! Or retired Federer fan. I stopped watching him a couple years ago.
by MJ2004 We're so in our tennis bubble that it always catches me off guard when a match gets so much mainstream attention. One of my husband's co-workers stayed up all night to watch the match live. A co-worker of mine randomly started talking about it on a call today. This entire tournament, starting with the very very bad and and ending with the very very good, has certainly not gone under the radar.
by meganfernandez
MJ2004 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 12:57 am
We're so in our tennis bubble that it always catches me off guard when a match gets so much mainstream attention. One of my husband's co-workers stayed up all night to watch the match live. A co-worker of mine randomly started talking about it on a call today. This entire tournament, starting with the very very bad and and ending with the very very good, has certainly not gone under the radar.
crazy for a non-mainstream sport halfway around the world... It definitely ended in a radically different place than where it started.
by ponchi101 That should put it in top 5 best matches ever, IN THE SENSE OF THE COVERAGE. I remember the talk after some matches: Borg/Mac W 1980, Fed/Rafa W 2008, Sampras/Agassi QF USO 2000 (the no breaks match). As far as media coverage is concerned, this is right there.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 3:06 am
That should put it in top 5 best matches ever, IN THE SENSE OF THE COVERAGE. I remember the talk after some matches: Borg/Mac W 1980, Fed/Rafa W 2008, Sampras/Agassi QF USO 2000 (the no breaks match). As far as media coverage is concerned, this is right there.
It's getting coverage, but I wouldn't say it's getting over the top coverage here. Not at all. Many of Serena's and Venus' GS wins got more. The Wimbledon match that Roddick lost was very big. Sampras farewell GS win vs. Agassi was big. Nadal vs. Fed Wimbledon was as well.
I think many people did watch some of it though, which is different than coverage. It was lasting so long that people who wouldn't necessarily tune in saw it trending on social media and were able to tune in for the second half for sure.
But I also don't live in a tennis bubble. I'm an all around sports watcher, though tennis is my favorite. I can easily say that Serena not winning the US Open in 2015, 2017, and 2019 (I think those are the right years) got much more coverage than this has on both regular sports and mainstream news, so imagine how much coverage some of her wins got, especially a few of her matches against Venus. This is getting a mention, a few highlights, etc, it is not getting a full segment on sports shows in large part that I've seen, especially not today after NFL Conference Championship games. It got a bit more attention earlier in the day yesterday, less as the day progressed and very little carry over to today.
by ponchi101 Only thing I will say is that my three skiing partners today mentioned it. They then detoured to the NFL, but they were aware. Which I found surprising.
by skatingfan
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
No... people twist things to suit their own 'politically correct' agenda, desperately trying to twist benign matters into something 'offensive'.
I make a basic observation on a matter which seems very obvious to me, and you two twist it into me 'questioning their identity'. Incredible.
There's no such thing as a politically correct agenda, and I certainly don't have agenda other than trying to point out that you're thinking on this issue is misguided. You said that Sharapova & Osaka were Americans, and not Russian & Japanese respectively, which they both identify as respectively, so whether you realize it or not you were questioning their identity.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
As I said - people will 'take offense' to anything today in order to 'support' whatever their agenda is. And these same people - these same intolerant people - are the ones who preach tolerance the most.
The contradiction is as evident as it is mind boggling. It doesn't require 20/20 vision to see that such people who preach tolerance the most are only 'tolerant' of others who share their view, and are completely intolerant of all others.
Being tolerant does not mean that you have tolerate everything, and anything. There are limits to tolerance.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
If you wish to believe that Sharapova and Osaka's lifestyles and behaviours are more in tune with Russian and Japanese cultures respectively, you are certainly free to believe that.
I believe that the facts very clearly demonstrate that their comportments are significantly more consistent with American culture than they are with the Russian or Japanese cultures. And I am as free to believe that as you are to believe whatever it is that you believe.
What I believe about Sharapova or Osaka isn't the issue, nor is your belief. They identify as Russian, and Japanese, respectively, and it's rude, condescending, and offensive to say they aren't because they don't fit your definition of what it means to be Russian, or Japanese.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
No... people twist things to suit their own 'politically correct' agenda, desperately trying to twist benign matters into something 'offensive'.
I make a basic observation on a matter which seems very obvious to me, and you two twist it into me 'questioning their identity'. Incredible.
As I said - people will 'take offense' to anything today in order to 'support' whatever their agenda is. And these same people - these same intolerant people - are the ones who preach tolerance the most.
The contradiction is as evident as it is mind boggling. It doesn't require 20/20 vision to see that such people who preach tolerance the most are only 'tolerant' of others who share their view, and are completely intolerant of all others.
If you wish to believe that Sharapova and Osaka's lifestyles and behaviours are more in tune with Russian and Japanese cultures respectively, you are certainly free to believe that.
I believe that the facts very clearly demonstrate that their comportments are significantly more consistent with American culture than they are with the Russian or Japanese cultures. And I am as free to believe that as you are to believe whatever it is that you believe.
And now you're offended that I critized your post.
No - you're once again assigning thoughts, feelings, and motivation to me and trying to make me the subject in order to suit your agenda. All without having a clue as to my true feelings or motivation - you simply make it up conveniently.
I never get offended - by anything. Because there is no practical or progressive purpose to it.
But when I believe that someone is wrong about a subject which interests me - I point it out.
Same with hypocrisy.
This discussion was about Medvedev - which you've dismissed entirely. It could have then evolved into a discussion about Sharapova and Osaka - but you insisted that it be about me instead. Perhaps that's due to your being unable to support your apparent belief that Sharapova's behaviour is more in tune with Russian culture than with American, and Osaka's comportment is more in tune with Japanese culture than with American.
If you're going to disagree with my assessment, that's perfectly fine - but at least provide an argument to support your position - I'd be happy to discuss the subject with you or anyone else. Instead, though, you're clearly more interested in deliberately misinterpreting my expression and motivation, and in making this about me.
When one's argument is weak, one shifts the focus.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
No... people twist things to suit their own 'politically correct' agenda, desperately trying to twist benign matters into something 'offensive'.
I make a basic observation on a matter which seems very obvious to me, and you two twist it into me 'questioning their identity'. Incredible.
There's no such thing as a politically correct agenda, and I certainly don't have agenda other than trying to point out that you're thinking on this issue is misguided. You said that Sharapova & Osaka were Americans, and not Russian & Japanese respectively, which they both identify as respectively, so whether you realize it or not you were questioning their identity.
You're telling me that you know what I'm doing, what I'm thinking, and what I'm feeling better than I do. How incredibly arrogant.
And you're once again twisting my words. Why else would you do this other than to suit an agenda?
I never said that Sharapova and Osaka are American. I said that their comportment is much more American than it is Russian or Japanese. That their comportment is more in tune with American culture than with Russian or Japanese culture is extremely evident in my opinion. I see absolutely nothing 'offensive' or troublesome with that basic and benign observation.
I suggest you study some basic sociology.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
As I said - people will 'take offense' to anything today in order to 'support' whatever their agenda is. And these same people - these same intolerant people - are the ones who preach tolerance the most.
The contradiction is as evident as it is mind boggling. It doesn't require 20/20 vision to see that such people who preach tolerance the most are only 'tolerant' of others who share their view, and are completely intolerant of all others.
skatingfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 5:45 amBeing tolerant does not mean that you have tolerate everything, and anything. There are limits to tolerance.
And within this extremely limited 'tolerance', there is obviously a great deal of allowance for blatant hypocrisy.
Deuce wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
If you wish to believe that Sharapova and Osaka's lifestyles and behaviours are more in tune with Russian and Japanese cultures respectively, you are certainly free to believe that.
I believe that the facts very clearly demonstrate that their comportments are significantly more consistent with American culture than they are with the Russian or Japanese cultures. And I am as free to believe that as you are to believe whatever it is that you believe.
skatingfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 5:45 amWhat I believe about Sharapova or Osaka isn't the issue, nor is your belief. They identify as Russian, and Japanese, respectively, and it's rude, condescending, and offensive to say they aren't because they don't fit your definition of what it means to be Russian, or Japanese.
You're again telling me what I'm thinking. And your words are straight out of the 'political correctness' promotional pamphlet.
You're reacting as if I've accused them of being child molesters or something. Get real, please!
I'm stating what I observe. And in discussion with people I know, they've observed the same thing regarding Osaka and Sharapova, as those two have spent a very large portion of their lives in the U.S., and so it's only natural that their comportment is more in line with American culture than with Japanese or Russian culture. If you find that benign statement to be 'rude' and/or 'offensive', then you have a major problem with interpretation in my opinion, and are looking to create problems where none exist (which is, of course, the entire foundation of 'political correctness').
If you find my observations to be "rude, condescending, and offensive", I'm fine with that. I could 'identify' as the Pope. It doesn't make me the Pope.
I personally doubt that either Maria or Naomi would have a problem with my observation. So who are you to object? Do you have a stake in the matter? It occurs frequently within 'political correctness' where someone is 'offended' by a statement/observation about a third party, and then the third party states that he/she has no problem at all with the statement/observation. This is pure agenda at work...
As a friend said to me yesterday "Osaka and Sharapova would very likely agree that their behaviour is more consistent with American culture than with Russian or Japanese culture." And, yes - they are the issue - or, at least, they were before you decided to take aim at me and criticize my postings and conveniently insisted on switching the focus to be about me.
As I said - because of the plague of 'political correctness', which encourages people to be overly sensitive to absolutely everything and to be offended at least 7 times per day by benign matters, people are 'offended' by and find a problem with everything today. This has lead, among other negative elements, to the majority being terrified to say what they truly think and feel - for fear of someone complaining that they're 'offended'. And so people have taken to lying outright about their thoughts and feelings - which, quite naturally, leads to a terrible level of communication between and amongst human beings. When there is no honesty, and there is instead fear of stating honest thoughts and opinions, everyone suffers.
Sociology 101.
by skatingfan
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
No - you're once again assigning thoughts, feelings, and motivation to me and trying to make me the subject in order to suit your agenda. All without having a clue as to my true feelings or motivation - you simply make it up conveniently.
I never get offended - by anything. Because there is no practical or progressive purpose to it.
But when I believe that someone is wrong about a subject which interests me - I point it out.
Same with hypocrisy.
You've done the exact same thing in your post, and that was what I was pointing out with that sentence.
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
This discussion was about Medvedev - which you've dismissed entirely.
You brought up Sharapova, and Osaka, and that's what I was responding to.
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
It could have then evolved into a discussion about Sharapova and Osaka - but you insisted that it be about me instead. Perhaps that's due to your being unable to support your apparent belief that Sharapova's behaviour is more in tune with Russian culture than with American, and Osaka's comportment is more in tune with Japanese culture than with American.
That's not my opinion.
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
If you're going to disagree with my assessment, that's perfectly fine - but at least provide an argument to support your position - I'd be happy to discuss the subject with you or anyone else. Instead, though, you're clearly more interested in deliberately misinterpreting my expression and motivation, and in making this about me.
When one's argument is weak, one shifts the focus.
My positions is that neither you, nor I, is qualified to determine whether someone's self-professed identity is valid. Both Sharapova, and Osaka have talked about these respective identities, and the importance of these identities, and it's inappropriate to dismiss that based on personal definitions of what those identities should mean.
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
No - you're once again assigning thoughts, feelings, and motivation to me and trying to make me the subject in order to suit your agenda. All without having a clue as to my true feelings or motivation - you simply make it up conveniently.
I never get offended - by anything. Because there is no practical or progressive purpose to it.
But when I believe that someone is wrong about a subject which interests me - I point it out.
Same with hypocrisy.
You've done the exact same thing in your post, and that was what I was pointing out with that sentence.
No - you stated that I was offended - which I was not. You were thus assigning to me specific thoughts and feelings without any foundation whatsoever.
You're doing exactly the same thing in telling me that I'm 'questioning their identity'. No - I'm stating my honest observation - which I obviously have every right to state. I did not accuse them of anything; I used no vulgarity; I felt no disrespect toward them... Yet you're telling me that I am disrespectful, condescending, etc. - and that is incredibly arrogant of you.
Somehow I think I know when I feel disrespect or condescension toward an individual better than you do.
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
This discussion was about Medvedev - which you've dismissed entirely.
skatingfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 7:03 amYou brought up Sharapova, and Osaka, and that's what I was responding to.
I brought them up merely flippantly, very much within the context of the discussion about Medvedev, in response to another poster comparing Medvedev to Sharapova, which I felt was not a good comparison, and I stated why.
You then veered completely off the rails in making the discussion about me.
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
It could have then evolved into a discussion about Sharapova and Osaka - but you insisted that it be about me instead. Perhaps that's due to your being unable to support your apparent belief that Sharapova's behaviour is more in tune with Russian culture than with American, and Osaka's comportment is more in tune with Japanese culture than with American.
skatingfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 7:03 amThat's not my opinion.
Heh... But whether the comportment of Sharapova and Osaka is more in tune with American culture than with Russian or Japanese culture is the entire crux of the issue you seem to have with me!! So how can you not state your opinion or argument on the issue?! Is it just that your only goal is to come after me?
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:10 am
If you're going to disagree with my assessment, that's perfectly fine - but at least provide an argument to support your position - I'd be happy to discuss the subject with you or anyone else. Instead, though, you're clearly more interested in deliberately misinterpreting my expression and motivation, and in making this about me.
When one's argument is weak, one shifts the focus.
skatingfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 7:03 amMy positions is that neither you, nor I, is qualified to determine whether someone's self-professed identity is valid. Both Sharapova, and Osaka have talked about these respective identities, and the importance of these identities, and it's inappropriate to dismiss that based on personal definitions of what those identities should mean.
I don't recall having 'dismissed' anything or anyone. I stated my observation - which I don't feel in any way disrespects or devalues - or even contradicts - whatever either of them have stated about themselves.
In terms of 'self-professed identity' (how many catch phrases can one use out of the 'political correctness' doctrine?)... if what you say is true, then if I call myself the Pope, you must then refer to me as "Your Holiness" - because, after all, you must respect my 'self-professed identity', right? Under your P.C. rules, you'd have no right to question whatever identity I choose to wear.
Uh huh...
Again, this is all pure 'political correctness'... We MUST NOT, under any circumstances, have any opinion about anything at all - and if we do have the misfortune of actually forming an opinion, or assessment, on an issue, we MUST, at all costs, withhold it, and never, ever express it, for fear that someone, somewhere, will jump out of the peanut gallery and pronounce that they are offended!
Sigh...
Opinions are not 'inappropriate' - they are a very natural part of being a human being. And to supress them for the sake of some twisted 'politically correct' agenda is harmful to everyone.
Where do you think the term 'political correctness' came from? It came from the outright lies and manipulations which politicians have been spewing for decades, if not centuries, to further their own self-interests and personal agendas. Now it's not only politicians doing it, but it has infected a large portion of the populace.
Look - it's absolute human nature to form opinions and to assess matters and people. To not do so is to not be human. We very naturally form dozens of opinions and make dozens upon dozens of assessments every single day. And so to pretend that we have no opinion helps absolutely no-one - it simply perpetuates a lack of honest communication among people.
Please study some sociology. (And allow yourself to form opinions and to make assessments about it.)
by skatingfan
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 7:28 am
Please study some sociology. (And allow yourself to form opinions and to make assessments about it.)
Thanks Deuce. I've studied sociology, and I have opinions and assessments of the thing that I've learned, and I expressed my opinion.
Also, political correctness doesn't have anything to do with politicians.
The modern use & definition of the word comes starts from the book The Black Woman, by Traci Cade Bambara. The term was used by left in the late 1970's, early '80's to poke fun of themselves, and then the term died out. Then it was picked up by conservatives in the '90's, who didn't get the joke, and used the term as a weapon to impede any effort to make society more inclusive. Then it became the punch line of jokes again. Now it's used by the right to shut down any discussion, or topic they don't like, and to dismiss their critics.
The modern use & definition of the word comes starts from the book The Black Woman, by Traci Cade Bambara. The term was used by left in the late 1970's, early '80's to poke fun of themselves, and then the term died out. Then it was picked up by conservatives in the '90's, who didn't get the joke, and used the term as a weapon to impede any effort to make society more inclusive. Then it became the punch line of jokes again. Now it's used by the right to shut down any discussion, or topic they don't like, and to dismiss their critics.
It doesn't surprise me at all that you are quite particular in picking and choosing the definition and origin of 'political correctness' which best suits your agenda, rather than the true origin.
Keep paddling...
by skatingfan
Deuce wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 8:33 am
It doesn't surprise me at all that you are quite particular in picking and choosing the definition and origin of 'political correctness' which best suits your agenda, rather than the true origin.
Keep paddling...
What I wrote it overlaps quite a bit with the Encyclopedia Britannica article you cited. I focused on the modern use, and definition because it seems more relevant to a discussion of now, rather than noting that the term was originally coined by Marxist-Leninist's.
by JazzNU
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:14 am
Only thing I will say is that my three skiing partners today mentioned it. They then detoured to the NFL, but they were aware. Which I found surprising.
I'm not saying this didn't register, but in terms of getting top coverage, I'm saying it didn't rise to the level of what some other tennis wins/losses have gotten, especially Venus and Serena's, which obviously just hit differently and bigger here. This was not something I saw, for instance, getting almost any sports coverage or mentions from non-ESPN and non-Tennis Channel people. For example, FOX Sports has grown their channels and sports coverage to be a decent competitor for ESPN, and I saw next to nothing from any FOX Sports people related to this. Could it be because they don't have much live tennis coverage? Definitely, but for Serena? It'll still get mentioned, they'll do a segment talking about her greatness or something or how remarkable it is that her and her sister have been doing it this long, whatever, but it'll get coverage. Got bigger segments on the morning shows and regular news than it did on the other sports channels really after Sunday morning, which is fine, but it didn't penetrate the general sports fan as much as it could've had they switched their coverage. The interest was there from what I could tell from social media, the POTB just didn't take the time to carve out more time for it.
And the other thing is that, kinda to my surprise, didn't see a lot of big name American athletes talking about this or sending out a congrats, saw it with international ones. It's not at all unusual especially for other same company (Nike) sponsored athletes to in particular take time to congraulate someone on an accomplishment such as this, but very quiet for this. Not a big deal, but it does increase the visibility and that was missing a bit. I think Nike didn't reach out. When Serena, Venus, and now, even Naomi have major accomplishment, sometimes a major defeat, it definitely catches the attention of the big names and their send a congrats or encouragement for next time, something like that.
I hope you enjoyed your day skiing. And hope your old bones held up well on the slopes.
by JazzNU @ponchi, I know you're not big on social media, but if you were to look today at the congrats going out to Brady on social media, that's kind of more what I would've expected to see for Rafa winning his 21st given the magnitude of the accomplishment. A ton of football players sure, but also a lot of other famous athletes. I did see that for Nadal, but it was from famous European athletes, very few non-tennis related American athletes.
by ponchi101
JazzNU wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 6:25 pm
@ponchi, I know you're not big on social media, but if you were to look today at the congrats going out to Brady on social media, that's kind of more what I would've expected to see for Rafa winning his 21st given the magnitude of the accomplishment. A ton of football players sure, but also a lot of other famous athletes. I did see that for Nadal, but it was from famous European athletes, very few non-tennis related American athletes.
Well, you have me completely there about Social Media. The sole exposure I get is actually here at TAT2.0. The Brady retirement is certainly big news, and it is in every feed that you can think of, so, gauging your interaction with Social Media you will certainly be better informed than I would.
My comment about my skiing buddies was only because I was really surprised they had even heard about the quality of the final.
by ponchi101 Dumb thought that just went by my head:
How appropriate that a man known to patrol the baseline and receive serve from so far back he can't be seen on the TV frame, won his 21st slam with his last stroke at the net.
I gather it shows how much he has improved over the years.
by ti-amie
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:04 am
Dumb thought that just went by my head:
How appropriate that a man known to patrol the baseline and receive serve from so far back he can't be seen on the TV frame, won his 21st slam with his last stroke at the net. I gather it shows how much he has improved over the years.
He's been working on it...
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote:Dumb thought that just went by my head:
How appropriate that a man known to patrol the baseline and receive serve from so far back he can't be seen on the TV frame, won his 21st slam with his last stroke at the net.
I gather it shows how much he has improved over the years.
Anyone playing Medvedev should be looking to come in until he adjusts his position back to the baseline. I think Rafa came in off his first or second shot in that last point. It was also an important part of Rafa’s strategy to keep the points short. I was hoping he would come in more, sooner.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ponchi101 Seriously speaking, he is a totally underrated volleyer for people that do not follow tennis like we do. His touch is superb and his crosscourt drop volley dies when it touches the court. I would say it is up there with Mac's and Martina's.
by meganfernandez
ponchi101 wrote:Seriously speaking, he is a totally underrated volleyer for people that do not follow tennis like we do. His touch is superb and his crosscourt drop volley dies when it touches the court. I would say it is up there with Mac's and Martina's.
Absolutely. Experts said that’s how he won Wimbledon a couple times.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
by ptmcmahon So Sunday night I watched football. Last night started the men’s final and watched first three sets but had a few works calls so had to stop (was past 3 am here.)
Picked it up tonight… and my recording ran out in fifth set. Sigh. Saw it in demand but it was the full thing and wouldn’t let me skip ahead so just gave up and checked the result.
by meganfernandez
ptmcmahon wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 4:40 am
So Sunday night I watched football. Last night started the men’s final and watched first three sets but had a few works calls so had to stop (was past 3 am here.)
Picked it up tonight… and my recording ran out in fifth set. Sigh. Saw it in demand but it was the full thing and wouldn’t let me skip ahead so just gave up and checked the result.
Might be worth the $5 ESPN+ subscription to watch the whole thing sometime. But I guess part of the thrill was the suspense. The tennis was spectacular, too, but for me it was the suspense and how Nadal hung on by his fingernails for so long and then found another level and kept it up. His BH down the line in the last half of the match was incredible - and that's supposed to be Medvedev's shot.
by ponchi101 I purposely did not start my laptop while I was watching it, simply to avoid the chance of seeing the result by mistake. The thrill was superb: the first set to Medvedev was great quality by him, then Rafa about to win the second and losing it, and then watching him keep trying over and over and always thinking (me, not him) "he can't make it, he is gassed". And over and over coming up with one more shot, one more get, one more long game. Then he serves for the match and can't get it, and he still keeps trying.
It was a perfect lesson, to any and all young players, that it is never over. That in tennis, you are only out of the match when the umpire says "Game, set and match, your opponent".
Should be mandatory view at any tennis academy. And I don't know how many young players should be forced to watch it and be told "you see? But no, you tank the match. And that is why you are you, and he is Rafa Nadal".
Problem is, I don't think this can be taught. You are either Rafa* and have it in your blood, or you are Marcelo Rios and decide to tank when it gets tough.
Off Topic
Or Ferrer, or Connors, or Hewitt. On the women's side, Evert, Steffi, Monica, Martina I. He is amazing but we have had great examples in the past too.
by meganfernandez It's a good question, whether that kind of competitiveness can be taught. Good question for Rafa or Uncle Toni. I think so, to an extent, but for the ones who rise to the very top, like Rafa and other top 100 players, it has to be inborn, right? Nature or nurture?
ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 4:01 pm
I purposely did not start my laptop while I was watching it, simply to avoid the chance of seeing the result by mistake. The thrill was superb: the first set to Medvedev was great quality by him, then Rafa about to win the second and losing it, and then watching him keep trying over and over and always thinking (me, not him) "he can't make it, he is gassed". And over and over coming up with one more shot, one more get, one more long game. Then he serves for the match and can't get it, and he still keeps trying.
It was a perfect lesson, to any and all young players, that it is never over. That in tennis, you are only out of the match when the umpire says "Game, set and match, your opponent".
Should be mandatory view at any tennis academy. And I don't know how many young players should be forced to watch it and be told "you see? But no, you tank the match. And that is why you are you, and he is Rafa Nadal".
Problem is, I don't think this can be taught. You are either Rafa* and have it in your blood, or you are Marcelo Rios and decide to tank when it gets tough.
Off Topic
Or Ferrer, or Connors, or Hewitt. On the women's side, Evert, Steffi, Monica, Martina I. He is amazing but we have had great examples in the past too.
by ptmcmahon
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 2:14 pm
Might be worth the $5 ESPN+ subscription to watch the whole thing sometime. But I guess part of the thrill was the suspense. The tennis was spectacular, too, but for me it was the suspense and how Nadal hung on by his fingernails for so long and then found another level and kept it up. His BH down the line in the last half of the match was incredible - and that's supposed to be Medvedev's shot.
Well I did make it into early in the fifth set But I would have had to start the on demand this AM since I couldn't skip to the fifth set so would have had to let it sit laying on tv for four hours. And I was tired of avoiding seeing who won so I just gave up.
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 2:14 pm
Might be worth the $5 ESPN+ subscription to watch the whole thing sometime. But I guess part of the thrill was the suspense. The tennis was spectacular, too, but for me it was the suspense and how Nadal hung on by his fingernails for so long and then found another level and kept it up. His BH down the line in the last half of the match was incredible - and that's supposed to be Medvedev's shot.
Well I did make it into early in the fifth set But I would have had to start the on demand this AM since I couldn't skip to the fifth set so would have had to let it sit laying on tv for four hours. And I was tired of avoiding seeing who won so I just gave up.
Been there. I usually cave by noon of the day I plan to watch it, if I haven't gotten around to it. I pulled off the incredible, though - watched half in the the morning, went to brunch with a group of tennis friends who all knew the result, and avoided the topic. Had one close call when I mindlessly opened Instagram on my phone, but caught it before I saw any spoilers. Watched the rest when i got home with someone who knew the result. Also, the program was still recording when I started it that morning (over 5 hours into it) so my husband started it, on mute, while I was in the other room just in case it didn't play from the beginning. After a decade of spoiled results, I finally have it figured out. The 2008 Wimbledon final was ruined for me because of DVR technology and the rain delays. Never saw the full thing.
Or Ferrer, or Connors, or Hewitt. On the women's side, Evert, Steffi, Monica, Martina I. He is amazing but we have had great examples in the past too.
Is your off topic referencing comeback wins?
Not necessarily. More about players with huge mental strength. Remember that in TAT1.0 I made a small series of "best strokes" and I included the mental aspect. This would be more along that line.
Wanna start a topic about GREAT COMEBACK/GUTSY wins? We are not doing much this week
Or Ferrer, or Connors, or Hewitt. On the women's side, Evert, Steffi, Monica, Martina I. He is amazing but we have had great examples in the past too.
Is your off topic referencing comeback wins?
Not necessarily. More about players with huge mental strength. Remember that in TAT1.0 I made a small series of "best strokes" and I included the mental aspect. This would be more along that line.
Wanna start a topic about GREAT COMEBACK/GUTSY wins? We are not doing much this week
No. I was just trying to think of reasons why Serena was left off your list and was thinking I may not have understood what your list was for.
by ptmcmahon
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 7:10 pm
Been there. I usually cave by noon of the day I plan to watch it, if I haven't gotten around to it. I pulled off the incredible, though - watched half in the the morning, went to brunch with a group of tennis friends who all knew the result, and avoided the topic. Had one close call when I mindlessly opened Instagram on my phone, but caught it before I saw any spoilers. Watched the rest when i got home with someone who knew the result. Also, the program was still recording when I started it that morning (over 5 hours into it) so my husband started it, on mute, while I was in the other room just in case it didn't play from the beginning. After a decade of spoiled results, I finally have it figured out. The 2008 Wimbledon final was ruined for me because of DVR technology and the rain delays. Never saw the full thing.
It's mostly just internet where I have to avoid tennis results, and fortunately no friends/family are also tennis fans. But for some other sports, especially the NFL, it's very bad. But most family/friends just lead off with "are you watching live" at least. But often based on who's asking I can get an idea what's going on For example this week I didn't watch the Cincinnati NFL game live but around the time it would be done multiple siblings and a friend asked if we were watching at our house (wife and as many as 3/4 of the kids are Cincinnati fans) so I had a good guess.
My dad was the worst though, when he was living in a different city. He'd call Sunday/Monday night (big sport days) and ask what I still had to watch and then say he wasn't going to spoil it, and then spoil most of it. For example if he had called Sunday he probably would have said "Ok, I won't tell you who wins... but you might as well start watching with Nadal leading in the fifth set"
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 7:10 pm
Been there. I usually cave by noon of the day I plan to watch it, if I haven't gotten around to it. I pulled off the incredible, though - watched half in the the morning, went to brunch with a group of tennis friends who all knew the result, and avoided the topic. Had one close call when I mindlessly opened Instagram on my phone, but caught it before I saw any spoilers. Watched the rest when i got home with someone who knew the result. Also, the program was still recording when I started it that morning (over 5 hours into it) so my husband started it, on mute, while I was in the other room just in case it didn't play from the beginning. After a decade of spoiled results, I finally have it figured out. The 2008 Wimbledon final was ruined for me because of DVR technology and the rain delays. Never saw the full thing.
It's mostly just internet where I have to avoid tennis results, and fortunately no friends/family are also tennis fans. But for some other sports, especially the NFL, it's very bad. But most family/friends just lead off with "are you watching live" at least. But often based on who's asking I can get an idea what's going on For example this week I didn't watch the Cincinnati NFL game live but around the time it would be done multiple siblings and a friend asked if we were watching at our house (wife and as many as 3/4 of the kids are Cincinnati fans) so I had a good guess.
My dad was the worst though, when he was living in a different city. He'd call Sunday/Monday night (big sport days) and ask what I still had to watch and then say he wasn't going to spoil it, and then spoil most of it. For example if he had called Sunday he probably would have said "Ok, I won't tell you who wins... but you might as well start watching with Nadal leading in the fifth set"
Haha! Did you dad know what he was doing?
by ptmcmahon Like me he was a sports nut and liked pretty much every sport he could possibly watch and I think just desperately wanted to talk about it (he was working in Ottawa at time with all of us here in Nova Scotia.) I think the funniest was one time I told him I was going to watch final round of the Masters golf tournament and he said "I won't tell you about it, but these 3 golfers don't win by the way"
by meganfernandez
ptmcmahon wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:42 am
Like me he was a sports nut and liked pretty much every sport he could possibly watch and I think just desperately wanted to talk about it (he was working in Ottawa at time with all of us here in Nova Scotia.) I think the funniest was one time I told him I was going to watch final round of the Masters golf tournament and he said "I won't tell you about it, but these 3 golfers don't win by the way"
Not EVERYONE saw him losing this match - even after 2 sets... I didn't.
I never count him out.
He simply has an extra gear - or two - that others don't have - with the possible exception of Djokovic.
That extra gear is called Extraordinary Will to Win.
Not EVERYONE saw him losing this match - even after 2 sets... I didn't.
I never count him out.
He simply has an extra gear - or two - that others don't have - with the possible exception of Djokovic.
That extra gear is called Extraordinary Will to Win.
Same. I knew he was in the match as long as he was out there. Didn’t think it was likely after he went down 2 sets to love, but I knew it wasn’t over. It was one of the best competitive performances I have ever seen. Absolute joy to watch - and I’m a Fed fan!! Never thought I’d say that about a Rafa match, but I was so happy for him.
He was also my pick to win the tournament from the start.
