This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.


edited July 2013 in Everything Else
I thought I'd make a thread about tennis. Wimbledon has been crazy this year, and the current match is one of the best of tournament so far. I still think Djokovic will take it, but Del Potro is putting up a hell of a fight. After Murray's come back from two sets down a few days ago, we're finally getting some long, very physical matches that are really challenging the top guys.

Stupidly I booked a table at a dinner show for tonight, and due to the long game before it means the Murray/Janowicz will overlap it. Except it's in an English food restaurant, so they might be showing the game during dinner. It's the kind of thing they should do.

Anyone else follow tennis or enjoy watching the Grand Slams?


  • Best match of the tournament so far! Probably the best match I've seen this year. Hopefully Murray isn't put through the ringer like that now.
  • I do like the Tennises, but I've been too busy to watch Wimbledon beyond checking the news. The final is Sunday morning, right? I hope I can watch it before I have to leave for the Netrunner tournament.
  • It'll be Sunday morning for you, yeah. I'm not sure if it will live up to the djokovic/del potro semi final though. Or maybe it will. Andy Murray winning on home turf might make the whole of the UK shit themselves all at once. Him losing will pretty much do the same. Either way it should be another classic Murray Djokovic final.
  • It's almost time. Come on, Andy!
  • Really? It's only on ESPN? WTF. This used to be on network tv.
  • Only on Sky in Germany too, for the entire tournament. And there was a German player in the women's final! Thank the tennis gods for dodgy Russian streaming sites.
  • edited July 2013
    Only on Sky in Germany too, for the entire tournament. And there was a German player in the women's final! Thank the tennis gods for dodgy Russian streaming sites.
    Thank the tennis gods my parents pay for cable. I can use their name and password to stream "legally" from

    Sadly, I can't see the whole thing because I have to leave for a Netrunner tournament in an hour.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • And Murray wins, bringing an end to a 77 year wait for a British man to win Wimbledon. Kept us waiting with that last game though.
  • Yup yup! Not the most amazing match, but certainly historic. My entire life I've been hearing, every year, no British man has won Wimbledon since 1936... Now what will the media do to hype up tournaments in coming years?

    Last year's US Open final went to five sets, and everyone wants to see an epic battle like that. Then again strait set victories have a certain finality or certainty to them. I didn't see this one coming, but Murray was by far the more composed player today. And the level of tennis was just immense. After seeing the other matches, it's clear these two are way ahead of anyone else at the moment, except for Nadal on clay.

  • Missed it because Netrunner. Don't regret my decision really. Anyone got videos of British people going crazy?
  • Yeah, the match wasn't a classic. Not all finals will be, and in fact this year the semi finals have been where the real action happened.
  • So, apparently, some people think the new woman's champ looks fat or something?

    Whatever. From what I heard, she played pretty damn well. Good on her.
  • Also some of the British media forgot about 4 women champions that we have had since Fred Perry by declaring Andy Murray the first Brit to win in 77 years. Thankfully the paper I read didn't make that mistake.
  • US Open final is on now. And full of crazy good tennis. Number one vs number two in the world? Five sets, please!
  • Today I watched the end of the match in Rome where Federer was knocked out by Jeremy Chardy. Federer had match point in the final set tie break, but Chardy did an amazing get and save.

    Now I'm watching as Nadal is getting himself into a similar situation with Gilles Simon.

    The amazing things is that even when Feder was behind, he still had 99% of the crowd with him, all hoping and praying and cheering for him to win.

    Nadal, in the same position, has only half of the crowd with him, if that. Half the people seem to be hoping he loses, just to witness a second round exit on clay, which is super rare for Nadal. The difference in attitude and respect and love for the two players is night and day.
  • Oh shit, Nadal vs Murray for the first time in 2.5 years!
  • Oh shit, Nadal vs Murray for the first time in 2.5 years!

    And it was, by my reckoning (and, it seems, by most of twitter), the first or second best match of the season, maybe slightly edging out Djokovic vs Wawrinka at the Australian Open. I'd love to see Nadal and Murray go at it again at Roland Garros, in a best of 5 sets match.
  • Guys! Turn on Wimbledon now. Nadal is being beaten by Rosol in the second round. Again. Just like in 2012, but it seems this time that Rosol is having an easier time of it.
  • edited March 2015

    Decision in the case of Wayne Odesnik

    Mr Odesnik, a 29-year-old player from the USA, provided an out-of-competition urine sample to USADA on 14 December 2014, and further samples to the ITF (on behalf of the Programme) on 17 December 2014 and 12 January 2015. Those samples were sent to WADA-accredited laboratories in Salt Lake City, USA and Montreal, Canada for analysis, and were found to contain one or more of: metabolites of methenolone; metabolites of androst-(2,3)-en-17-one; and GHRP-6. All are Prohibited Substances under the 2014 and 2015 WADA List of Prohibited Substances: methenolone under section S1 (Anabolic agents); androst-(2,3)-en-17-one under section S4 (Hormone and metabolic modulators); and GHRP-6 under Section 2 (Peptide hormones, growth factors, related substances and mimetics). They are therefore also prohibited under the 2014 and 2015 versions of the Programme. Accordingly, Mr Odesnik was charged with an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.1 of the Programme.

    Mr Odesnik’s commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.1 of the Programme was confirmed, which was his second such violation, having been sanctioned in 2010 for the possession of human growth hormone. It was, therefore, determined that he is suspended from participation for a period of 15 years, back-dated to commence from 30 January 2015, and so ending at midnight on 29 January 2030. It was also determined that Mr Odesnik’s results at the Happy Valley Challenger event, Australian Open and Maui Challenger event should be disqualified, with forfeiture of the ranking points and prize money that he won at those events.


    Post edited by Luke Burrage on
  • Now if only David Walsh can get enough evidence and convince enough people, Nadal might have to have Lance Armstrong moment.
  • Now if only David Walsh can get enough evidence and convince enough people, Nadal might have to have Lance Armstrong moment.

    It's certainly possible.
  • Now if only David Walsh can get enough evidence and convince enough people, Nadal might have to have Lance Armstrong moment.

    This is the crucial part for me. Lance never had a positive test. He admitted to it, so I suppose he was doping. But if you never catch him breaking the rules, not even once, and punish him anyway, what good are your rules to begin with?

    Basically, I feel like the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. You can't hang a guy because you don't like him.
  • We don't know what evidence there is already. When a player is suspended for failing a drug test, the ITF don't anounce it, and allow the player to announce they are taking time off for injury. If the player successfully appeals the drug test results, the fail mark is removed and they return to active play without any news.

    So positive tests don't make the news. There are no statistics of positive tests. We don't know how many times Nadal has tested positive and had his ban overturned. We do know he takes many regular breaks for injuries though.

    The prosecution looks out for the big names. The ITF and the ATP make a lot of money from Nadal! Big name players in the past have admitted to failing drug tests but being let off the hook (Agassi) and Nadal himself has helped other players have their drug test suspensions overturned.
  • Interesting, considering another sports' handling of a similar case. Baseball does have some skeletons in the closet with respect to drug testing, though. Anyway: Ryan Braun. MLB follows a similar protocol, where positive tests are supposed to be confidential, and then some time later the league announces, "A-Rod has failed a drug test, he will be serving a 25-game suspension."

    In Braun's case, news of a positive test leaked to the press. He appealed, and won his appeal because the testing protocol was not followed. The league office was frothing at the mouth that the arbitrator (agreed upon ahead of time by both sides) decided in Braun's favor. They alleged he got off on a technicality. No, he got off because the rules weren't followed. So there was no positive test. Period.

    At this point the whole thing was supposed to still be confidential, and thus never makes the news.

    Some time later, MLB gets information from Tony Bosch (you may remember him as the guy that went to jail recently) and dials up a long suspension for Braun, among others. Also the MLB paid him for his testimony. I would think that's something the MLBPA's lawyers could have fought it with, but apparently they didn't.

    At this point, Braun admits to breaking the rules, and accepts the suspension.

    I guess there isn't really much of a moral to the story. Maybe just that I feel the league acted in bad faith the whole way. They weren't trying to find out the truth, they were just trying to bust him. A guy evades a suspension because you didn't follow your own rules, so you pay someone else who says he broke the rules, so you can suspend him? Leaves a rotten taste in my mouth.

    Braun isn't a good guy in this story either, he still cheated! I guess my takeaway is don't care about baseball.
  • Odesnik got his first ban shortened by a year by sharing more info, but whose names did he share? Not sure. There are obviously more people involved, considering who has ties to very dodgy doctors.

    At this point I'd love non-doping players to come forward and just share everything they know. In the past Murray has said "nobody likes a snitch" but since the Lance Armstrong thing, I'm sure more players are seeing better sense. With so much money involved, and players relying on the tour for most of their income, it would probably take Federer and/or Murray to finally call bullshit on Nadal.
  • You're assuming Federer and Murray aren't also guilty. How exactly does Federer remain so good despite being so old in tennis years?
  • First, Federer's not that old in the modern tennis world. There are loads of 30+ players sticking around these days. Modern training and techniques have really helped extend playing careers. Some of the doubles players are well into their 40's!

    "30-Over Winners (9) – There have been nine 30-over winners on the ATP World Tour this season in the first two months of the season. Last year, players 30-over won titles 13 times. Leading the 30-over winners are David Ferrer and Roger Federer, with three and two titles, respectively."

    That said, Ferrer isn't above (my) suspicion when it comes to chemical aids.

    Second, unlike Nadal, who takes time off for "injuries", then comes back and wins tournament after tournament, Murray took time off for a back operation and just sucked for an entire year. This is the same with Federer after his back troubles. In 2013 Federer dropped down to 8 in the rankings, and 2014 Murray dropped to 12.

    If Murray is doping, he must be a Machiavellian genius, but one who isn't very good at doping. Out of ALL the players on the tour, he's the only one who publicly calls out other players for breaking testing regulations, says the current rules and tests are a joke, and calls for more testing.

    Talking of David Walsh, here is what happened when he interviewed Murray:

    "We're about to leave when he brings up Lance Armstrong. What can you tell me, he asks. I want to play the small-time mafia guy in the interrogation room: I know nothing. But Murray is not taking no as an answer. He has seen the documentaries, he has read the books and he needs more. The gym where he does his peak oxygen uptake testing used to have an Armstrong poster on the wall and before the Texan was banned, he said to the lady in charge he thought she should take it down.

    The poster has gone now, as have the two Livestrong bikes at another gym he uses in the US. Murray wants to know about the $10m (PS6.5m) Armstrong has been ordered to pay SCA Promotions and how many cyclists died from EPO abuse and what happened to the blood bags in the Eufemiano Fuentes case and why they weren't analysed."

    If Murray is doping, being so outspoken about it and courting famously anti-doping journalists is a genius move. But his results just don't bare it out.
  • I know I'm the only one who cares about tennis, but it's Wimbledon time of year. I used to think Wimbledon was the best tournament but presumed I only thought that due to growing up with it as the main British event... but it turns out it really is just the best tournament. I'm not sure why other cities don't just make a 1:1 scale copy of Centre Court for their tournaments, even if they pick a different playing surface. Nowhere else comes even close to the atmosphere on that court.

    Also: Nadal out to Dustin Brown. Probably the most fun match I've seen in years, due to the from-another-era style of play by Brown. Serve and volley is what grass court tennis is all about, and we had a master class.
  • I also somewhat care about tennis, but only enough to watch finals and such.

    What I find interesting is that in NYC there is a TON of tennis being played. There are public courts, and you often have to pay and/or wait to use them. But tennis comes up even less than golf. I'm really curious how popular it actually is in the US.
  • The "public" courts in New York require a $200 permit to use, with steep fines for trying to play without having one.
Sign In or Register to comment.