The two week gap (previously ) between French and Wimbledon

[brokenshoelace]

According to this thread, us Rafa fans should be expecting the WTF to be played on clay and a 2 year ranking system to be implemented any day now.

I expected this coming. Just because Rafa was not successful in convincing ATP of the above two stupid suggestions, does not mean that he convinced ATP to use the current version of clay schedule.
When you cannot find fault, you try to talk about irrelevant stuff. Nobody said he can convince ATP of whatever he wants.

Why does it have to be ALL or NOTHING?

Take a second to think this through. Do you think actual scheduling decisions (which are more than likely far more complicated than they sound) are strictly dictated by one player's wishes? You know what goes on behind organizing a tournament, and things aren't as simple as moving one piece and replacing it with another.

Up until March of 2012, Rafael Nadal was the vice-president of the ATP players' body (Federer is the president). His role, in that context, is to look after the players (which include Nadal himself). Things aren't as simple as Nadal complaining to the ATP, even if he publicly spoke about it. That decision was more than likely taken in accordance with the ATP players' body wishes.

You realize it's the ATP's JOB to look after the players. You think guys like Ferrer want to play 3 weeks in a row? You don't think that benefited everyone who participated in Barcelona? Did it benefit Nadal the most? You bet. Were his wishes in large part self serving? Absolutely. Does it change the fact that it was the right thing to do?

Nadal has been vocal about many issues, including the length of the season, a sentiment that was echoed by Murray, Roddick and Federer himself (some more vocal than others). You think the ATP listened to Nadal just because he complained, or that there was a concerted effort to make the schedule less strenuous on the players?

The arguments in this thread are incredibly naive and absolutely biased. You're portraying things as if Nadal complained about something and his wishes were met, while ignoring how much more complicated things are. I'm pretty sure the players' body as a whole had a lot more to do with it, and yes, it was likely led by Nadal, who was probably doing his job.

You guys are getting ridiculous with your comparisons. This is in no way similar to the Carlos Bernandez situation (which was in no way similar to the FIFA scandal or deflate-gate). Maybe it's better to sit back and think before going on agenda driven crusades just to vilify a player?

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yeah and wtf does that have to do with the scheduling of the clay events? No one has to play all the events Nadal plays on clay and most play nowhere near as many as he does. So clearly it benefits him most to alter the clay schedule. Logical people would assume a 9 time French Open champion has some pull with the ITF/ATP in changing the calendar when they already do stuff like banning umpires from his matches. He chooses to play them all 'cos up until this year it was where he scored most of his points. They could put more grass events after Wimbledon if they wanted to so there's no nonsense here and no google search needed.

None of this is backed up by anything. Zero. Like, literally, no proof whatsoever.

Use your head. Do you reckon they changed it 'cos a player ranked 1000+ asked or 'cos maybe the 9 time French Open champion objected? I know it's a tough one to think about but give it a shot. You won't get proof as has been pointed out 'cos sports governing bodies don't usually proclaim: "Hey world, we changed the tennis calendar 'cos grumpy here asked us".

Read my above post before you condescend. You really have no idea what you're talking about. You're almost literally wrong about everything. It's a talent.

 

[Front242]

None of this is backed up by anything. Zero. Like, literally, no proof whatsoever.

Use your head. Do you reckon they changed it 'cos a player ranked 1000+ asked or 'cos maybe the 9 time French Open champion objected? I know it's a tough one to think about but give it a shot. You won't get proof as has been pointed out 'cos sports governing bodies don't usually proclaim: "Hey world, we changed the tennis calendar 'cos grumpy here asked us".

Read my above post before you condescend. You really have no idea what you're talking about. You're almost literally wrong about everything. It's a talent.

Well you don't see me starting endless threads about the same thing. Seems an even better talent to me so I bow to your superiority. As for me being literally wrong about almost everything, in your opinion only I might add, you literally run out of ways to debate points with anyone here you disagree with and then quickly resort to insulting them instead. Classy. Must serve you well working as a lawyer.

 

[Kieran]

There's a funny argument going on here: GSM has made a claim he plainly can't back up with anything other than his dislike of Rafa. Front defended him on this, out of principle obviously, and not because he detests Rafa.

And yet a simple thing like proof could very easily decide this in their favour. What have we got instead? This:

Rafa complained. I hate Rafa. Therefore Rafa got the thingy changed.

Yeah, but wow, you're kinda more intelligent than this one. :cover

And has any of it got to do with the extended grass season? Maybe this is coming:

There's a 3 week break between RG and Wimbo. Rafa needs longer than 2 weeks to transition. I hate Rafa. Therefore Rafa complained and the ATP caved in and gave him an extra week.

Makes sense...

 

[Front242]

Who says I merely defended him out of principle and not simply 'cos it makes a lot of sense that they did in fact change things 'cos of Nadal's wishes? You? Oh that makes it unanimous so.

 

[Kieran]

Who says I merely defended him out of principle and not simply 'cos it makes a lot of sense that they did in fact change things 'cos of Nadal's wishes? You? Oh that makes it unanimous so.

Oh I didn't say you defended him out of principle...

 

[Front242]

It has also been explained in this thread why you won't get the ATP/ITF admitting they changed it 'cos of any one player but I understand it's hard for Nadal fans to agree on anything negative about him. It's just not in their nature to do anything but defend him on absolutely everything.

 

[Kieran]

It has also been explained in this thread why you won't get the ATP/ITF admitting they changed it 'cos of any one player but I understand it's hard for Nadal fans to agree on anything negative about him. It's just not in their nature to do anything but defend him on absolutely everything.

You probably haven't really said anything really negative about Rafa, (although if you didn't, it would be a first for you): it's more another unsubstantiated negative about the ATP - yet another one - that you could help your cause by having more to back it up with than a terror and a hatred of young Ralph Nadal...

 

[brokenshoelace]

It has also been explained in this thread why you won't get the ATP/ITF admitting they changed it 'cos of any one player but I understand it's hard for Nadal fans to agree on anything negative about him. It's just not in their nature to do anything but defend him on absolutely everything.

I always love this sort of arguments: "Nadal fans will always defend him."

Well, and "Nadal haters will always attack him."

What's your point?

 

[Front242]

It has also been explained in this thread why you won't get the ATP/ITF admitting they changed it 'cos of any one player but I understand it's hard for Nadal fans to agree on anything negative about him. It's just not in their nature to do anything but defend him on absolutely everything.

I always love this sort of arguments: "Nadal fans will always defend him."

Well, and "Nadal haters will always attack him."

What's your point?

Is it that hard to understand? Federer does many stupid things and his fans admit he was wrong when it's not even debatable. For the most part the same cannot be said of Nadal and his fans. There are few who openly admit to any wrongdoing from team Nadal.

 

[Kieran]

And by the way, it's not unreasonable to defend somebody by simply asking to see proof. The argument that, "well there is no proof because the ATP won't admit it or destroyed the evidence" only begs the follow up: can you even prove that this coverup happened?

And of course, the eventual answer has to be "no", if you're ever going to be honest about this.

It gets too simple-minded to bear, sometimes. Best to just stay on topic and discuss the OP...

 

[Front242]

And by the way, it's not unreasonable to defend somebody by simply asking to see proof. The argument that, "well there is no proof because the ATP won't admit it or destroyed the evidence" only begs the follow up: can you even prove that this coverup happened?

And of course, the eventual answer has to be "no", if you're ever going to be honest about this.

It gets too simple-minded to bear, sometimes. Best to just stay on topic and discuss the OP...

I think we're all mature enough to understand that lack of proof means nothing in this day and age. Well, most of us anyway. You think justice was served with Oscar Pistorius? The world is corrupt.

 

[DarthFed]

It ain't about grass feet or an extra week for Rafa. With his game he will always be vulnerable even to scrubs the first week of Wimbledon. That topspin doesn't kick up as high and it's harder to play great defense and simply outlast the nobodies of the tour. The difference between him narrowly escaping the weaklings in his prime vs. the ugly losses the last 3 years is due to the loss of a step.

The fatigue/lack of grass court practice excuse is just all too convenient.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Think about this logically for a second. Nadal is vulnerable in the first week of Wimbledon. That much is undeniable. He could have 10 grass court matches under his belt before Wimbledon and still be vulnerable. Again, this is a fact.

But what you're saying implies that it could in no way help him. The truth is, he's even MORE vulnerable without getting a few grass court matches under his belt. Do you know the one time Nadal didn't win a single match at Wimbledon? 2013, when he lost to Steve Darcis in the first round, after having skipped Halle.

Of all his Wimbledon losses, that was by far the worst. He wasn't playing a big hitter or a big server. He was playing against a legit 5 footer with a one handed backhand and no fire power. He was also in the middle of one of the best runs of his career. Confidence, form, and health. And yet he gets straight setted.

You're telling me that without a few grass court matches to get him up to speed he couldn't have beaten the mighty Darcis?

I understand it's a Nadal hate-fest season around here but these posts are making less and less sense.

Winning helps you build confidence. Remember Nadal at Queens 2008? When he clobbered Roddick and Djokovic to win the title? So he's vulnerable in the first week of Wimbledon to "scrubs" but he's not vulnerable in the first (and only) week of Queens to legit major winners? Truth is, he's vulnerable to both, but the more he plays and potentially wins, the less vulnerable he is.

More wins and he will be confident which helps his chances. Even then he has difficulties. You're comparing his best ever year on grass with the rest of his career. That and 2011 were the only times he didn't struggle mightily in the first week. The extra week and practice excuse is overrated when talking why he has struggled awfully in the 1st week.

 

[Kieran]

And by the way, it's not unreasonable to defend somebody by simply asking to see proof. The argument that, "well there is no proof because the ATP won't admit it or destroyed the evidence" only begs the follow up: can you even prove that this coverup happened?

And of course, the eventual answer has to be "no", if you're ever going to be honest about this.

It gets too simple-minded to bear, sometimes. Best to just stay on topic and discuss the OP...

I think we're all mature enough to understand that lack of proof means nothing in this day and age. Well, most of us anyway. You think justice was served with Oscar Pistorius? The world is corrupt.

That argument in itself is evidence of a sort of moral corruption. Cynicism is an intellectual negative, you should know this, buddy. If we follow that particular rabbit down the hole, we wouldn't believe anything - or support any sports stars.

But here's a fact: absence of evidence sometimes just means that nothing happened. You're only on this because you hate Nadal. Likewise GSM. It's not an argument, it's a witch hunt. One you can't back up with a shred of proof.

So why not return to the topic of the OP, eh?

 

[Front242]

I'm actually not the one diverting people from the topic but whatever. I'm merely replying to all the Nadal fan defensive replies.

 

[Kieran]

Of course you are.

I disagree with Darth. The extra week can only benefit the players, including Nadal, or even especially him since he's been besieged on clay in recent years and in struggling to defend there, hasn't managed the transition well. He may not do better this year than last, but that's not down to anything other than the fact he's struggled everywhere all year...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

According to this thread, us Rafa fans should be expecting the WTF to be played on clay and a 2 year ranking system to be implemented any day now.

I expected this coming. Just because Rafa was not successful in convincing ATP of the above two stupid suggestions, does not mean that he convinced ATP to use the current version of clay schedule.
When you cannot find fault, you try to talk about irrelevant stuff. Nobody said he can convince ATP of whatever he wants.

Why does it have to be ALL or NOTHING?

Take a second to think this through. Do you think actual scheduling decisions (which are more than likely far more complicated than they sound) are strictly dictated by one player's wishes? You know what goes on behind organizing a tournament, and things aren't as simple as moving one piece and replacing it with another.

Up until March of 2012, Rafael Nadal was the vice-president of the ATP players' body (Federer is the president). His role, in that context, is to look after the players (which include Nadal himself). Things aren't as simple as Nadal complaining to the ATP, even if he publicly spoke about it. That decision was more than likely taken in accordance with the ATP players' body wishes.

You realize it's the ATP's JOB to look after the players. You think guys like Ferrer want to play 3 weeks in a row? You don't think that benefited everyone who participated in Barcelona? Did it benefit Nadal the most? You bet. Were his wishes in large part self serving? Absolutely. Does it change the fact that it was the right thing to do?

Nadal has been vocal about many issues, including the length of the season, a sentiment that was echoed by Murray, Roddick and Federer himself (some more vocal than others). You think the ATP listened to Nadal just because he complained, or that there was a concerted effort to make the schedule less strenuous on the players?

The arguments in this thread are incredibly naive and absolutely biased. You're portraying things as if Nadal complained about something and his wishes were met, while ignoring how much more complicated things are. I'm pretty sure the players' body as a whole had a lot more to do with it, and yes, it was likely led by Nadal, who was probably doing his job.

You guys are getting ridiculous with your comparisons. This is in no way similar to the Carlos Bernandez situation (which was in no way similar to the FIFA scandal or deflate-gate). Maybe it's better to sit back and think before going on agenda driven crusades just to vilify a player?

1. With Rafa being vice president at that time, he actually had a larger clout and so it is not just about complaining in public. He was actually in a position to influence it.

2. Yes, it did benefit all players who participate in Barcelona (and who are good enough to be invited to Masters tourneys). No schedule change can benefit just one player, unless they have started player one person tourney.

3. You are asking is it the right thing to do, no. Just think about this. Barcelona is a 500 event. It should not even be taken into consideration while deciding where to place Masters tourneys which are more important events. There are seven weeks of clay season. Obviously, one does not want to keep a Master's event in the very first week of the season or the last week (the week immediately before RG). That leaves 5 weeks. If you want to schedule, the three Masters tourneys so that no two of them are consecutive (which they wanted to do so after the 2006 Rome Fiasco after which both Roger and Rafa dropped out of Hamburg). The elimination of Hamburg and the introduction of Madrid gave them the opportunity to rearrange things and they did so. The only reason it got changed was due to Rafa's complaints and influence.

4. You would be naïve to think that these kinds of decisions are made by some kind of vote by all players. There is no such vote. The top players and/or player's rep often get more say in these things.

5. Your paragraph about overall schedule is not relevant to this discussion.

6. I don't think anyone compared the scheduling issue to umpire issue or FIFA.

7. The problem is that you think you are the only person who understands how the system works as well as the only person who can think logically.

 

[Carol]

Of course this late decision about three weeks between RG and Wimbledon would have benefited more to Rafa than anyone else due he played almost every final in every clay tournament also more than anyone else wherefore wasn't easy to arrive to Wimbledon with the best condition though he won one after one twice both GS.
I'd like to know if after the USO the AO would be played two weeks later who would be the "brave one" to win both tournaments and I don't think only the age would be the factor

 

[GameSetAndMath]

There's a funny argument going on here: GSM has made a claim he plainly can't back up with anything other than his dislike of Rafa. Front defended him on this, out of principle obviously, and not because he detests Rafa.

And yet a simple thing like proof could very easily decide this in their favour. What have we got instead? This:

Rafa complained. I hate Rafa. Therefore Rafa got the thingy changed.

Yeah, but wow, you're kinda more intelligent than this one. :cover

And has any of it got to do with the extended grass season? Maybe this is coming:

There's a 3 week break between RG and Wimbo. Rafa needs longer than 2 weeks to transition. I hate Rafa. Therefore Rafa complained and the ATP caved in and gave him an extra week.

Makes sense...

1. I clearly backed up my claim in post #29. If you want to ignore it that is your problem.

2. Thanks for muddying the waters. The two quotes above are not mine and an unsuspecting reader would think they are mine since you referred to me in the first sentence. I clearly stated multiple times that Rafa has nothing to do with the increase in the length of the grass season.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

And by the way, it's not unreasonable to defend somebody by simply asking to see proof. The argument that, "well there is no proof because the ATP won't admit it or destroyed the evidence" only begs the follow up: can you even prove that this coverup happened?

And of course, the eventual answer has to be "no", if you're ever going to be honest about this.

It gets too simple-minded to bear, sometimes. Best to just stay on topic and discuss the OP...

I have already provided the proof in post #29. I have shown you the schedule of 2010. I have shown that Rafa dropped out of Barcelona because he did not like the schedule, despite wanting to play in Barcelona. I have shown a newspaper article in which he clearly expresses his outrage. I have shown you the schedule of 2011 which is exactly as per his desire. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, then it is a duck.

Even ATP is not stupid enough to write a memo saying that they changed the schedule to accommodate the wishes of Nadal. You can believe what you want to believe. That does not change the facts.