ATP 1000: Indian Wells

the draw is out:

http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2017/404/mds.pdf

Federer, Nadal & Nishikori in Djokovic's half.
Federer and Nadal in the same quarter.

Personally, I am not interested in any of these American hard court tournaments any more.

They are so dull I can't wait for European clay season to start.
A bit of colour and character.

The draw is so one sided. All good players in the bottom half.

Murray has a virtual ticket to the finals. Wawrinka or Thiem may fall before facing Murray.

Yes, Nole's draw is incredible: Delpotro, Kurgios, Federer/Nadal, Dimitrov/Nishikori...

Fed is probably just going to turn up and collect the cheque...

Looks like the bad old days when draws were rigged for Nadal.

Well, at least Nadal brought millions of fans to tennis, so in a way he paid all those favours to The Business/Show, and what is Murray doing for tennis?

Most like turning people off...mind you, Scotland is proud!

Draws were rigged for Nadal? OK

the draw looks crazy one sided but im guessing that has to do with the players rankings 
@NITB draws were rigged for nadal? how so and what are you basing that on?

Andy out in his very first match. The imbalanced draw just got a little more imbalanced.

Yes I saw that. Well the score only.

Is IW fast(er) this year? I see Popisil as anither Misha Zverev....Murray struggling v big server. He used to be good against them....on slow courts at least.

I may not have a good eye for it, but to me the court felt quite slow (but I do not remember exactly how that feel would compare against prior years).

Andy looked more comfortable holding his serve than Pospisil did (at least throughout most of the second set - I did not see the whole match) so I expected him to win TB, but Pospisil played well in TB, and Andy not so much (had a DF too).

But Andy has never done too well at IW - it is one of his least successful Masters tournaments (perhaps the least successful one).

just further proof that andy isnt a legitimate world no1
his results has been abysmal ever since he became world no1

He just won Dubai, come on!!

As SB said, Andy has always been crap on US Masters.

Nitb, what happened to your name? You gone Anonymous now? 

Jahu wrote:He just won Dubai, come on!!

As SB said, Andy has always been crap on US Masters.

He is not allowed to be crap as WN 1.
Anywhere.

The sooner he moves down, the better.

summerblues wrote:Andy out in his very first match.  The imbalanced draw just got a little more imbalanced.

Better and more i teresting, my friend, better and more interesting...

Veejay wrote:the draw looks crazy one sided but im guessing that has to do with the players rankings 
@NITB draws were rigged for nadal? how so and what are you basing that on?

It's an old story...I suppose you weren't on v2 at the time:

http://www.606v2.com/t27820-draw-fixing-an-official-study

We got banned as a result.

I carried the thred over here:

https://ourtennisforum.forumotion.co.uk/t20-draw-fixing-an-official-study

Jahu wrote:Nitb, what happened to your name? You gone Anonymous now? 

Telling you saw "..." as "Anonymous"

Quite the opposite: It's poetic, elegant, fast and light.


Watch out!

Ok, I will sit down and watch out...

... wrote:

Jahu wrote:He just won Dubai, come on!!

As SB said, Andy has always been crap on US Masters.

He is not allowed to be crap as WN 1.
Anywhere.

The sooner he moves down, the better.

Well who is gonna move him down? You ex-guy is down to 50kg, and not doing much.

Other all far away.

Ninja beat Evans 6:3, 6:4.

Nadall-Pella just started, Edmunds-Djoko later, at 3am Fed-Roberts.

Jahu wrote:

... wrote:

Jahu wrote:He just won Dubai, come on!!
As SB said, Andy has always been crap on US Masters.

He is not allowed to be crap as WN 1.
Anywhere.
The sooner he moves down, the better.

Well who is gonna move him down? You ex-guy is down to 50kg, and not doing much.
Other all far away.

I don't fall for media brainwash and frankly, all I care these days is enjoying Federer play.

Right now, everything else in the world of tennis is irrelevant.

I saw a few games of Tsonga-Fognini and Kachanov-Goffin yesterday, and it's all pretty dull.

Tsonga and Fognini ate just playing for the money, no spark about them any more.

This Kachanov looks like some hybrid giant who doesn't know what to do with his power.

Goffin is good, though.

Maybe it's just American hard courts...they make everyone look dead.

So I guess, only GSlams this year will be fun and interesting.

Since AO finish, not much quality.

... wrote:

summerblues wrote:Andy out in his very first match.  The imbalanced draw just got a little more imbalanced.

Better and more i teresting, my friend, better and more interesting...

Indeed indeed. Better, more interesting and also more imbalanced.

If Novak managed to lose tonight, that would make it better, more interesting, and also more balanced. Let's root for that.

Fognini against Tsonga was one of the matches of the year so far. Terrific tennis with stunning winners all over the place. If you didn't enjoy that match, then watching tennis really isn't for you.

Slippy wrote:Fognini against Tsonga was one of the matches of the year so far. Terrific tennis with stunning winners all over the place. If you didn't enjoy that match, then watching tennis really isn't for you.

Well missed it. Good to see Fog can turn it on again!

Haven't posted in a while.

Crikey my interest has taken a nose dive. Haven't watched anything since the AO. Effectively that is the sporting story of the year.

I don't think any match they play beyond that is ever going to replicate the wide ranging emotions and the public eye that day.

Reading up on IW. What a crap draw! I more than anyone clambers for someone else to win and win the being the important word. Seems that the only way someone can break through is by the top players literally be taken out at the same tournament. Essentially winning by others losing. Sums up the successful style and sums up the mentality of the new field.

*Big big sigh*

legendkillar wrote:Haven't posted in a while.

Crikey my interest has taken a nose dive. Haven't watched anything since the AO. Effectively that is the sporting story of the year.

I don't think any match they play beyond that is ever going to replicate the wide ranging emotions and the public eye that day.

Same here.
Everything really looks dull after that final.

And I am actually still savouring it, enjoying different facets...it was fantastic.

legendkillar wrote:
Reading up on IW. What a crap draw! I more than anyone clambers for someone else to win and win the being the important word. Seems that the only way someone can break through is by the top players literally be taken out at the same tournament. Essentially winning by others losing. Sums up the successful style and sums up the mentality of the new field.

*Big big sigh*

Yes, but why not...

It's also telling that big names are being knocked out early. They are all 30 and over, so sparing their bodies from grind of 5 matches in a row.

They just don't care for these torunaments...it's all about slams.

I hope we have a new winner this year.

ps

as for the draw, I think Larry rigged it as he wanted to see a Fedal...Pathetic, but that's what happens when people have too much money and think they can buy everything with it.
I can't stand him.

Slippy wrote:Fognini against Tsonga was one of the matches of the year so far. Terrific tennis with stunning winners all over the place. If you didn't enjoy that match, then watching tennis really isn't for you.

ouch!

Can I at least play it?

... wrote:

Veejay wrote:the draw looks crazy one sided but im guessing that has to do with the players rankings 
@NITB draws were rigged for nadal? how so and what are you basing that on?

It's an old story...I suppose you weren't on v2 at the time:

http://www.606v2.com/t27820-draw-fixing-an-official-study

We got banned as a result.

I carried the thred over here:

https://ourtennisforum.forumotion.co.uk/t20-draw-fixing-an-official-study

So.. basically more conjecture and a ridiculous 'study'. You sure convinced me!

TMF wrote:

... wrote:

Veejay wrote:the draw looks crazy one sided but im guessing that has to do with the players rankings 
@NITB draws were rigged for nadal? how so and what are you basing that on?

It's an old story...I suppose you weren't on v2 at the time:

http://www.606v2.com/t27820-draw-fixing-an-official-study

We got banned as a result.

I carried the thred over here:

https://ourtennisforum.forumotion.co.uk/t20-draw-fixing-an-official-study

So.. basically more conjecture and a ridiculous 'study'. You sure convinced me!

there is roughly a chance in 4000 that the Djoko/Nadal 2008/11 draws were not rigged ....and nearly a chance in 3 millions that the USO did not rig the first rounds.

If you don;t think rigging is a possibility, then you must be the most gullible fan on the planet.

And one in 4000 is statistically VERY possible.   I'm afraid that isn't proof.  It actually wasn't one in 4000 either, because you discounted the French Open, which also means no mathematician will take your argument seriously.

Someone won the lotto almost every week when it was 14 million to 1.,  And you're here complaining that a "4000-1" occurrence means there is a grand conspiracy.  You have no leg to stand on here, I am afraid.   I also got 4 numbers on the old lotto on my 1st go at it.  You know what the odds of that are?  Over 1000-1.  Perhaps I got told the result.  CONSPIRACY!

The most you can say is that it's possible there was rigging.  But even then it's only weak speculation.  4000-1 is simply not an argument in your favour.  At all. I am so glad you are not on a jury... you'd be so dangerous to any innocent person when presented with circumstantial evidence.  Anything over 100-1 and you see it as infinite to 1.

I'd submit you and NITB as my argument for doing away with juries.

That's not to say those guys on 606v2 were intelligent either.  They just turned it into a personal battle, said that rigging was impossible, then banned you for your opinion. Pathetic.

Probability is very misunderstood. Black Swans do occur.

Daniel wrote:And one in 4000 is statistically VERY possible.

You see..all your logic fails in the first sentence. 1/4096 is possible.....but not VERY!

bogbrush wrote:Probability is very misunderstood. Black Swans do occur.

I understand it very well BB. In itself I agree that there is a very, very remote chance that it can happen...but backed up by the clear rigging of the USO draw....that 1/4096 becomes more than dubious to me.

Imagine we ask you to pick a number out of 200.....and guess what? you pick it right! Now that's amazing isn't it? Now we ask you to pick another number out of 200....and then again you guess it right!....twice and in a row! Isn't that absolutely amazing? Well having Nadal and Djoko in separate side of the draw for 4 years in slams outside Nadal's favourite slam, right after Nadal admits publicly that Djoko is his biggest rival...is more than a weird coincidence.

I understand that some want to give that amazing stat the benefit of the doubt but dismissing it without questioning is simply absurd.

Tenez wrote:

Daniel wrote:And one in 4000 is statistically VERY possible.

You see..all your logic fails in the first sentence. 1/4096 is possible.....but not VERY!

Yes, it is.  VERY.  Statistically it is very possible.  Things happen to you every week that are magnitudes more unlikely.  Every time you play a game of cards, million to one occurrences happen given any length of time.

You don't understand probability.

You cannot make a claim that fixing is going on when the evidence is a 4000-1 occurrence.  For that matter, you couldn't do it on the basis of a million to 1 occurrence, unless it kept happening. But this is one occurrence, largely cherry picked, and with fudging of the data. It's ridiculous. I know you are going to believe what you want, but I am here, yet again, to tell you plainly that you are wrong. And this time, mathematically wrong too. That isn't an opinion. You won't find a single professor of mathematics that will agree with you on this.  You may as well argue that molasses are a good fuel for rockets with a rocket engineer. 

I am a computer programmer. I work with math all the time.

You are not a good computer programmer then. If you cannot appreciate what a chance 1/4096 is then I cannot help you!

Oh and for you you it is also pure coincidence that the courts around the world started to slow down around 2007. Nothing to do with TDs wanting to see more of Fedal finals?

So you are not a very good programmer and clearly not too good a business man either!

Ha, Nishioka beat Banana Berd Brain from 61 52 down XD

Yep..Berdych must have dropped its level dramatically as he was so much better than Nishioka from what I saw. Probably hurt himself.

Nole-Delpo should be good, shame it's at two am 

I saw the first set of Nole- Edmund...very rusty, poor volleying, as a result not that confident...but...hungry!

Delpo playing beautifully, that FH!

Nadal-Nando...should tell us a bit more about where Nadal is atm.

Tenez wrote:You are not a good computer programmer then. If you cannot appreciate what a chance 1/4096 is then I cannot help you!

That's just the point.... you think 1 in 4096 is one in a billion.  When you learn why it isn't, give me a ring.  

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Probability is very misunderstood. Black Swans do occur.

I understand it very well BB. In itself I agree that there is a very, very remote chance that it can happen...but backed up by the clear rigging of the USO draw....that 1/4096 becomes more than dubious to me.

Imagine we ask you to pick a number out of 200.....and guess what? you pick it right! Now that's amazing isn't it? Now we ask you to pick another number out of 200....and then again you guess it right!....twice and in a row! Isn't that absolutely amazing? Well having Nadal and Djoko in separate side of the draw for 4 years in slams outside Nadal's favourite slam, right after Nadal admits publicly that Djoko is his biggest rival...is more than a weird coincidence.

I understand that some want to give that amazing stat the benefit of the doubt but dismissing it without questioning is simply absurd.

What's the logic of excluding RG though? Unless there's a compelling reason the hypothesis is based on selective data.

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Probability is very misunderstood. Black Swans do occur.

I understand it very well BB. In itself I agree that there is a very, very remote chance that it can happen...but backed up by the clear rigging of the USO draw....that 1/4096 becomes more than dubious to me.

Imagine we ask you to pick a number out of 200.....and guess what? you pick it right! Now that's amazing isn't it? Now we ask you to pick another number out of 200....and then again you guess it right!....twice and in a row! Isn't that absolutely amazing? Well having Nadal and Djoko in separate side of the draw for 4 years in slams outside Nadal's favourite slam, right after Nadal admits publicly that Djoko is his biggest rival...is more than a weird coincidence.

I understand that some want to give that amazing stat the benefit of the doubt but dismissing it without questioning is simply absurd.

What's the logic of excluding RG though? Unless there's a compelling reason the hypothesis is based on selective data.

The logic of excluding RG is simple: Nadal did not fear anyone on this surface and maybe the FO did not want to give in to fixing. I am not saying that all 3 other slams were rigging. Maybe only 2 or 1 out of the 3 and Nadal was just very lucky on 1 or 2 of them.....but I can't believe Nadal got that much luck when combining the 3 slams.

And again, add the fact there was clear rigging on the USO first round (ESPN study) clearly shows rigging was more common that we thought.
I also found dubious that after the epic Isner/Mahut match at Wimby....the following year they had them in the first round. Even though those things can happen...I just question them. We all should.

Watching Fed v Johnson...It's playing quite fast....

It's a really good match. fed is playing really well...yet he can't make an impact on Johnson's serve.

Doesn't matter.  Johnson, like most on tour, is a mental midget. As soon as it comes to the crunch points in the tie breaker, his serve vanishes haha.

Tenez wrote:It's a really good match. fed is playing really well...yet he can't make an impact on Johnson's serve.

I only saw the highlights...sublime!...was too tired from playing last night (and the spinning class before)

Saw a few games of Kyrgios-Zverev in which Kyrgios was repulsive.

He yelled out : Bullshit! as Zverev hit a winner, and caused him to double fault the next point.
He was previously arguing with the umpire.

I hope Nole decks his princess ego tonight!

Awful character.

... wrote:

Tenez wrote:It's a really good match. fed is playing really well...yet he can't make an impact on Johnson's serve.

I only  saw the highlights...sublime!...was too tired from playing last night (and the spinning class before)

Saw a few games of Kyrgios-Zverev in which Kyrgios was repulsive.

He yelled out : Bullshit! as Zverev hit a winner, and caused him to double fault the next point.
He was previously arguing with the umpire.

I hope Nole decks his princess ego tonight!

Awful character.

I only saw the MP.

So we have another Fed Nadal.

I woudl fancy Fed if he had a day rest but 2 matches in 2 days is going to be tough. Even if the rallies were short last night it's as many games as typical 3 setter.

Yes, Fedal!

I'll obviously watch it, it's best of 3 so Fed has a chance.
If he is tired from yesterday, which he may be, it's not a good sign.

Hopefully he serves well. And the confidence from their last match should keep his mind hungry and fresh.

He is in a win win position...as after AO he's got nothing to prove.

Nadal fans are blind to tennis anyway...they'll forever think Nadal is better because of their H2H...

So is Fed winning Nadal?

Korgi/Djoko? Korgi was ok last night, but Djoko was good too.

Great tennis this eve. However 5pm is late. Is that 12pm our time? If so I will watch it. Well the first set for sure.