BNP Paribas Open, Indian Wells, CA, 2020 - ATP Masters 1000

[calitennis127]

I wonder if clay season can be played, for the moment RG's not cancelled but who knows ?

Based on news reports I have seen to date, the only country they should consider cancelling events in is Italy. But there is a long time between now and May.

You have to keep in mind that this is all politically motivated. If Obama was president I assure you nothing would be cancelled because the media would want the stock market soaring before the election. This is all about taking Trump down. It has nothing to do with actually saving lives. The different responses to the 2009-2010 swine flu and coronavirus now show this.

 

[brokenshoelace]

The biggest proof that so many Americans live in a bubble is thinking that the worldwide hysteria has to do with Trump. The US media isn't above playing this up to score points against Trump, that's for sure, but when you factor in how countries like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, France, Italy, Germany, etc...are reacting to this and you still can't see past Trump-related narratives then you're an idiot.

Also, the comparison to the swine flu means nothing. It may well have been worse. It doesn't make Coronavirus any less serious in terms of the measures that need to be taken. But logical fallacies, again, are commonplace around here.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Roger did this man...He released the virus so tournaments would be cancelled and his slam record would be safe. Makes perfect sense . I told him to cook his bat properly but did he listen? Noooooo.....

 

[calitennis127]

The biggest proof that so many Americans live in a bubble is thinking that the worldwide hysteria has to do with Trump. The US media isn't above playing this up to score points against Trump, that's for sure, but when you factor in how countries like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, France, Italy, Germany, etc...are reacting to this and you still can't see past Trump-related narratives then you're an idiot.

Oh cheese, thanks. I happen to think you say idiotic things too. So I guess we get nowhere with that.

The fact is that the American media sets the international news cycle - for better or (almost always) for worse. People the world over regard The New York Times as a "legitimate source" that is "responsible." And anyone can see that everyone at the NYT and "WaPo" want the coronavirus to be as bad as possible so they can use it to take down Trump. Paul Krugman of the New York Times was celebrating last week that the Dow was down a few thousand points while his colleague Gail Collins was calling this the "Trumpvirus."

Also, as to your point about living in a "bubble" - I'm not forming my opinion simply by what's going on in America. I noted in another post that I spoke recently to someone from Kazakhstan who said that there are no cases in his home country or the other countries bordering China. The situation in Italy does seem severe, but Italy is just one country. Italy having some problems doesn't mean civilization needs to be shut down and that Indian Wells has to be cancelled.

The governor of California should be far more worried about Pelosi's incompetent ass allowing San Francisco to be infested with litter, feces, and needles than he is about coronavirus.

Also, the comparison to the swine flu means nothing.

No, it actually means a lot because media narrative - especially when it comes to the stock market - means everything. In 2009 there were a total of 1,000 deaths and 20,000 hospitalizations in just 6 months in the United States but the stock market went up because the media worshiped Obama and did not want the economy to sink while he was president. With Trump as president they are drooling over the possibility of the coronavirus causing a recession and undermining Trump's re-election prospects.

It doesn't make Coronavirus any less serious in terms of the measures that need to be taken.

No one isn't saying that precautions should not be taken, especially in the countries hit the hardest. There's no need to take the moral high ground as if only you care about the preciousness of human life.

But logical fallacies, again, are commonplace around here.

Logical fallacies like believing that the Indian Wells tennis tournament should be cancelled because of one case in the Coachella Valley?

 

[brokenshoelace]

Oh cheese, thanks. I happen to think you say idiotic things too. So I guess we get nowhere with that.

The fact is that the American media sets the international news cycle - for better or (almost always) for worse. People the world over regard The New York Times as a "legitimate source" that is "responsible." And anyone can see that everyone at the NYT and "WaPo" want the coronavirus to be as bad as possible so they can use it to take down Trump. Paul Krugman of the New York Times was celebrating last week that the Dow was down a few thousand points while his colleague Gail Collins was calling this the "Trumpvirus."

Also, as to your point about living in a "bubble" - I'm not forming my opinion simply by what's going on in America. I noted in another post that I spoke recently to someone from Kazakhstan who said that there are no cases in his home country or the other countries bordering China. The situation in Italy does seem severe, but Italy is just one country. Italy having some problems doesn't mean civilization needs to be shut down and that Indian Wells has to be cancelled.

The governor of California should be far more worried about Pelosi's incompetent ass allowing San Francisco to be infested with litter, feces, and needles than he is about coronavirus.



No, it actually means a lot because media narrative - especially when it comes to the stock market - means everything. In 2009 there were a total of 1,000 deaths and 20,000 hospitalizations in just 6 months in the United States but the stock market went up because the media worshiped Obama and did not want the economy to sink while he was president. With Trump as president they are drooling over the possibility of the coronavirus causing a recession and undermining Trump's re-election prospects.



No one isn't saying that precautions should not be taken, especially in the countries hit the hardest. There's no need to take the moral high ground as if only you care about the preciousness of human life.



Logical fallacies like believing that the Indian Wells tennis tournament should be cancelled because of one case in the Coachella Valley?

Actually I have every right to take the moral high ground when people have died because of this (check out the death toll in Iran, for example), and someone else's first instinct is to worry about Trump...

As far as "Italy is just one country..." well, yeah...and the virus doesn't recognize nationalities, I don't think. If measures aren't immediately taken, its neighboring countries have a lot to worry about. You'll repeat that you're not suggesting measures shouldn't be taken, and I'll repeat that I don't give a shit how the media is framing Trump when there's a bigger issue at stake.

As far as the Indian Wells bullshit...that wasn't my logical fallacy.

 

[Moxie]

I wonder how the ATP will handle people defending points? It would seem unfair to take them away, without having a chance to defend them.

Wonder if they'll just leave the points as they are, up until/if they ever play it this year?

 

[calitennis127]

Actually I have every right to take the moral high ground when people have died because of this (check out the death toll in Iran, for example), and someone else's first instinct is to worry about Trump...

Well that is exactly what the American media and the Democratic Party are doing. They immediately made this about Trump and I am simply reacting to them. I was not the one who wrote a piece for Yahoo News overjoyed at the possibility that this could be Trump's Katrina moment.

As far as "Italy is just one country..." well, yeah...and the virus doesn't recognize nationalities, I don't think. If measures aren't immediately taken, its neighboring countries have a lot to worry about. You'll repeat that you're not suggesting measures shouldn't be taken, and I'll repeat that I don't give a shit how the media is framing Trump when there's a bigger issue at stake.

There are multiple "bigger issues" at stake, and one of them is the global economy, which Trump's enemies are deliberately trying to tank so that Trump won't get re-elected. But economic conditions aren't just about Trump getting re-elected; they are about the economic well-being of millions of people. So if you want to take the moral high ground, you should care about the living people whose wealth will be affected in addition to the small numbers of people who die.

Over 575,000 people died from swine flu.....and coronavirus has a long way to go to catch up. It's worth pointing out that 575,000 is a big number in absolute terms but it is still only a tiny percentage of the global population. It also makes sense to care about the millions of people who will not die but will see their wealth take a hit simply because the Democrats and the media scum are in an all-out war to take down Trump at all costs.

As far as the Indian Wells bullshit...that wasn't my logical fallacy.

No but it's the logical fallacy of the Californian political leaders who you think are the smart ones in the USA. It's also funny to see you call views you don't like or facts inconvenient for your case "logical fallacies."

For example, this is something you consider good logic:

"Even though Nadal beat Monfils and Gonzalez in good health, he lost to Delpo because he was hurt."

This is total nonsense, but you will accuse anyone who objects to your line of thinking as being guilty of "logical fallacy."

Sure.

 

[mrzz]

Wonder if they'll just leave the points as they are, up until/if they ever play it this year?

Within the logic of the rolling rankings, this makes no sense. The idea is that points that are older than one year are no longer valid, period. Everyone would lose their points this week anyway and no one had anything for granted. People losing on R1 (or R2 in case of bye) would earn zero points. Tournament is cancelled, nobody gets a chance to score more points, that's it. Life goes on. Too bad for Thiem (a player I like and root for) that he loses 1000 points, but he enjoyed and reap the benefits of those points for one year. It would be extremely unfair to let him benefit from it any longer.

 

[calitennis127]

Within the logic of the rolling rankings, this makes no sense. The idea is that points that are older than one year are no longer valid, period. Everyone would lose their points this week anyway and no one had anything for granted. People losing on R1 (or R2 in case of bye) would earn zero points. Tournament is cancelled, nobody gets a chance to score more points, that's it. Life goes on. Too bad for Thiem (a player I like and root for) that he loses 1000 points, but he enjoyed and reap the benefits of those points for one year. It would be extremely unfair to let him benefit from it any longer.

Maybe they can replay Indian Wells at some other point in the year. A creative idea that would probably never happen would be to make the courts grass between Roland Garros and Wimbledon, or make it indoors immediately after the US Open, although I'm sure Nadal fans would oppose those two possibilities.

 

[tented]

ATP Statement On Coronavirus & BNP Paribas Open

ATP Tour calendar beyond Indian Wells remains as status quo

ATP Chairman Andrea Gaudenzi on the 2020 BNP Paribas Open not being held:

"While we regret that the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells will not take place, the ATP Tour calendar beyond Indian Wells remains as status quo. We continue to monitor the situation daily, working closely with our player and tournament members with the understanding that direction must be taken from local public health authorities. We are committed to exploring all options for the operation of upcoming tournaments as the health and safety of our players and all other stakeholders remain our top priority. Any further updates will be communicated on ATP platforms."

 

[Moxie]

"Even though Nadal beat Monfils and Gonzalez in good health, he lost to Delpo because he was hurt."

This is total nonsense, but you will accuse anyone who objects to your line of thinking as being guilty of "logical fallacy."

Yes, I noticed you started a whole (trollish) thread about this. I won't honor that bit of crap with a response, but give you one here. It's not a "logical fallacy," it's a factual one. Nadal was injured in the 3rd round v. Almagro. You can read what The Telegraph has to say about that and see a photo of him being treated. Yes, he did beat Monfils and Gonzalez with an ab strain, but his record against both is very good. I don't know of anyone who downplays del Potro's form in 2009. And I have said ever since that SF was ever played that JMDP would probably have won it anyway, given that he was on-form to win the tournament, but the score line might not have been so lopsided had Nadal been 100%.

 

[Moxie]

This is a very interesting article from The Guardian regarding the rest of the calendar and considerations made by tournaments as they go forward:

Tennis in turmoil after Indian Wells cancelled due to coronavirus fears

Tennis was hurled into the coronavirus maelstrom on Monday after the overnight cancellation of the Indian Wells Masters

www.theguardian.com

This caught my eye:
“It would be foolhardy for a tournament to unilaterally cancel unless it had the safeguard of government or local health authority backing,” an insider close to the organisation of a tournament in Europe said on Monday. He added: “If outside agencies recommend caution or cancellation because of health concerns, no tournament director is going to risk either the lives of players, spectators and staff, nor take a financial hit by going ahead with the event and voiding an insurance policy.”

Hadn't thought of it, but the specter of insurance raises its head. I think the implication is: say a player contracted the virus and died. If the locality had been placed under an emergency situation and the tournament proceeded anyway, they could get sued for something like "wrongful death," with no insurance protection. Anyway, do read the whole thing for some idea of what is going on in the (presumably very stressed) upper echelons on decision making in tennis right now.

 

[mrzz]

Maybe they can replay Indian Wells at some other point in the year. A creative idea that would probably never happen would be to make the courts grass between Roland Garros and Wimbledon, or make it indoors immediately after the US Open, although I'm sure Nadal fans would oppose those two possibilities.

I really like this tournament I would love to see it happening somehow later in the year (extremely unlikely though). Anyway, you can have it later and simply award the points as they happen. No need to make any changes about that. In fact, players don't even defend the points of the tournament, they defend the points of the week.

 

[Moxie]

I really like this tournament I would love to see it happening somehow later in the year (extremely unlikely though). Anyway, you can have it later and simply award the points as they happen. No need to make any changes about that. In fact, players don't even defend the points of the tournament, they defend the points of the week.

Given that California has a pretty nice climate, and who knows where we'll be when the Asia Swing rolls around, they may be able to play it after the USO. Swap it out for Shanghai? Larry Ellison has a lot of pull.

 

[mrzz]

say a player contracted the virus and died.

Even if in the business of risk assessing you must consider all scenarios, the odds of a healthy non-elderly adult dying from the virus are extremely small. Given the precautions, the odds of infection at the tournament would not be great, and still for a legal action to take place it would require proof that the infection occurred at the tournament. Combine those odds and the risk is probably the same of an ordinary accident. It could well be the reasoning (or one of the reasons) behind it, but I surely disagree with it.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Nadal would have won his 4th Indian Wells title and gotten back to no.1. And now RG could even be in doubt. Can Federer and Djokovic get any luckier???

 

[Moxie]

Even if in the business of risk assessing you must consider all scenarios, the odds of a healthy non-elderly adult dying from the virus are extremely small. Given the precautions, the odds of infection at the tournament would not be great, and still for a legal action to take place it would require proof that the infection occurred at the tournament. Combine those odds and the risk is probably the same of an ordinary accident. It could well be the reasoning (or one of the reasons) behind it, but I surely disagree with it.

I actually considered adding an umpire, a lines person or tournament official in there, who are generally older. However, I think you're not taking on board the importance of having valid insurance. My business is all about that. If your tournament insurance risks being invalidated against coverage for this virus because you were warned by a government entity, for example, that takes away your "Act of God" protection. You may say it's not provable that the exposure occurred at one particular event, but the tournament IS exposed by being incautious. On the other hand, I feel fairly certain that IW will have a valid insurance claim for their losses this fortnight, most likely as "act of god." They won't get it all, and will take a hit, but if I were weighing it in my hands, I'd have cancelled, too, from an insurance standpoint.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I too initially thought IW was overreacting by cancelling the tourney. But, today came the news that several universities in California, Washington, New York and New Jersey have all stopped face to face classes and are moving on with online teaching only to finish the rest of the term. IMO cancellation of classes (as these are regular events and not a huge or unusual gathering) at universities mean the risk is higher than mere cancellation of events such as IW tennis tourney.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

No need to make any changes about that. In fact, players don't even defend the points of the tournament, they defend the points of the week.

Exactly even in good times, sometimes due to calendar idiosyncracies a particular tournament falls a week or two after the dates in which it was held the prior year. At those times, the practice of ATP is to drop the points earned once 52 weeks have elapsed since the time the points are accrued instead of giving a chance for the players to defend their title etc.

I think it is the right policy and ATP should continue to use it now also.

Having said that I don't realistically see IW getting another chance to host it this year. If the situation gets worse, they still cannot host. If the situation clears up, no other tourney would be willing to give up their slot to IW.

 

[Moxie]

I too initially thought IW was overreacting by cancelling the tourney. But, today came the news that several universities in California, Washington, New York and New Jersey have all stopped face to face classes and are moving on with online teaching only to finish the rest of the term. IMO cancellation of classes (as these are regular events and not a huge or unusual gathering) at universities mean the risk is higher than mere cancellation of events such as IW tennis tourney.

I thing one thing that people aren't considering is that it's a two-way street. One case of Covid-19 in the Coachella valley, and it's an over-reaction. But people who come to IW come from LA, SF, etc, where there are many more cases, the risk is bringing it IN. Not to mention players who come from China and Italy, as two examples. Right now people are reconsidering large gatherings where you put people in close proximity. It just seems responsible.