I trust less and less... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

I trust less and less...

DDrago2
09-09-2006, 10:03 PM
... to those who organise tennis events. I don't think draws are random anymore (Nadal/Federer case), and I even doubt the hawk-eye system. How do we know it is not rigged also?

jbone_14
09-09-2006, 10:24 PM
... to those who organise tennis events. I don't think draws are random anymore (Nadal/Federer case), and I even doubt the hawk-eye system. How do we know it is not rigged also?


Um Federer and Nadal are the #1 and #2 players. They aren't supposed to play each other until the final.

neenah
09-09-2006, 10:25 PM
... to those who organise tennis events. I don't think draws are random anymore (Nadal/Federer case), and I even doubt the hawk-eye system. How do we know it is not rigged also?

What do you mean by "Nadal/Federer case"?

Ten_Isse_Fan
09-09-2006, 10:30 PM
... to those who organise tennis events. I don't think draws are random anymore (Nadal/Federer case), and I even doubt the hawk-eye system. How do we know it is not rigged also?
I totally agree. People seem forget a very VERY strange fact. It has been the case for the last two years. Federer is ALWAYS at the top of every draw he enters... I mean, WTF ! They're clearly rigged. I think the ATP is sleeping with the Swiss government.

Seleshfan
09-09-2006, 10:32 PM
What do you mean by "Nadal/Federer case"?
I think it should be pretty obvious. I mean, someone is obviously giving Federer the easiest possible draws, how else could he get to like 17 straight finals, and every Grand Slam final this year. As for Nadal, they obviously started giving him the toughest possible draws after Wimbledon, since he hasn't been to a final since then. Pretty pathetic really. This conspiracy needs to end here and now!!!

neenah
09-09-2006, 10:34 PM
Well it's obviously not 100% random otherwise how would it just perfectly work out that a seeded player doesn't play a seeded player until at least the third round, unless there is an upset. I figured this was just standard, it obviously doesn't just happen that way by mistake.. :confused:

neenah
09-09-2006, 10:35 PM
I think it should be pretty obvious. I mean, someone is obviously giving Federer the easiest possible draws, how else could he get to like 17 straight finals, and every Grand Slam final this year. As for Nadal, they obviously started giving him the toughest possible draws after Wimbledon, since he hasn't been to a final since then. Pretty pathetic really. This conspiracy needs to end here and now!!!

So you looked at the draw and you saw the slight possiblity of Nadal playing Youzhny in the quarters and thought "Oh no! Nadal will loose! They make his draw so difficult.."

Ten_Isse_Fan
09-09-2006, 10:37 PM
Well it's obviously not 100% random otherwise how would it just perfectly work out that a seeded player doesn't play a seeded player until at least the third round, unless there is an upset. I figured this was just standard, it obviously doesn't just happen that way by mistake.. :confused:
:awww:

Carito_90
09-09-2006, 10:42 PM
So you looked at the draw and you saw the slight possiblity of Nadal playing Youzhny in the quarters and thought "Oh no! Nadal will loose! They make his draw so difficult.."

I think he was being sarcastic. ;)


And by the way, what you are saying doesn't really make much sense. First of all, why would they favour Federer and not, say, Roddick or Blake or Safin that are the ones that attract the biggest audience, especially in the US? If this draw thing would be a big conspiracy, they'd do it in a way that the ATP gets benefited and with Feds winning they just don't. Most people are not interested in seeing Federer win every tournament, or Federer and Nadal in the finals for that matter.

Besides, arranging draws is pretty relative beause there could always be upsets, anytime.

There's always a posibility, but I think they'd try to benefit other players, not Federer.

Eclectic Goddess
09-09-2006, 11:24 PM
I even doubt the hawk-eye system. How do we know it is not rigged also?

Marat? Is that you?

tennisforumname
09-10-2006, 12:27 AM
well, i kept hearing talk about how people expected the draw to be rigged in andre's favor (since he's the biggest publicity for the tournament/biggest crowd gatherer)... so that he'd have the easiest first rounds possible and make it into the second week. but he had a pretty hard early draw (like baghdatis in the 2nd round.) it seems like if they'd want to rig it for any of the players, he'd be up on their list, and they didn't...

Radek Stepanek
09-10-2006, 12:38 AM
You're so stupid, honestly.

Howard
09-10-2006, 12:43 AM
I think this thread is rigged.

Vass
09-10-2006, 12:45 AM
Marat? Is that you?
No, that's Darmir Dokic.
That's a serbian flag, right?

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 02:37 AM
So no one of you have the slightest doubt about organisers of tennis Grand Slams. Well I do, and I am far from believer in any "conspiracy theories". In Fed-Davydenko match I noticed a point when Federer was certain the ball was out, he challenged, and hawk-eye showed that it was in. Federer smiled and shook his head, like he wants to say "no way that was in".

You are also certain that they don't rig the draws (make them easy for Nadal this year). You see, sometimes there is manipulation with even more serious things. Tell me, on what day did that stingray kill Steve Irwin "The Crocodile Hunter"?

JW10S
09-10-2006, 02:42 AM
The draws for every professional tournament on the main tours are done in public, anyone can view them--I've attended several myself as a journalist. They are not rigged.

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 02:43 AM
So no one of you have the slightest doubt about organisers of tennis Grand Slams. Well I do, and I am far from believer in any "conspiracy theories". In Fed-Davydenko match I noticed a point when Federer was certain the ball was out, he challenged, and hawk-eye showed that it was in. Federer smiled and shook his head, like he wants to say "no way that was in".

You are also certain that they don't rig the draws (make them easy for Nadal this year). You see, sometimes there is manipulation with even more serious things. Tell me, on what day did that stingray kill Steve Irwin "The Crocodile Hunter"?

I think your Fedtardism clouds your judgement on just about every topic. As for Steve Irwin, he died on Monday, September 4th, 2006 :wavey:

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 03:05 AM
As for Steve Irwin, he died on Monday, September 4th, 2006 :wavey:

ANd how then do you explain that a whole month before that I heared he was killed? Some guys told me he was killed buy a snake. I googled for it a few days after, but could find no info and I thought they were missinformed. ANd then suddenly, a whole month after that, it's breaking news, only it's not the snake but the stingray. And all the articles I found were NOT mentioning on what day the stingray actually killed him (they only say it was 11 AM).

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 03:09 AM
ANd how then do you explain that I heared he was killed a month before that? Some guys told me he was killed buy a snake. I googled for it a few days after, but could find no info and I thought they were missinformed. ANd then suddenly, a whole month after that, it's breaking news, only it's not the snake but the stingray. And all the articles I found were NOT mentioning on what day the stingray actually killed him (they only say it was 11 AM).

O yes, "some guys", what a great resource. :rolleyes: If you googled it and it didnt happen, then shit, it was obviously made up.

O, my! he dies a month later from a completely different reason and animal! I smell conspiracy!!! :rolleyes:

And have you ever heard of time zones?

adee-gee
09-10-2006, 03:10 AM
I have undivided faith that DDrago2 will keep up his level of stupid posts :rocker2:

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 03:17 AM
Come on, don't act supid - all people around me were talking about him being killed long before it was made official - it was not only "those guys", the whole town was speaking about it only a week after. THey thought it's a snake because it was unoficial, who knows how did it leak.
If you don't trust me, read articles and try to find out when the accident actually happened - you can't.

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 03:19 AM
Come on, don't act supid - all people around me were talking about him being killed long before it was made official - it was not only "those guys", the whole town was speaking about it only a week after. THey thought it's a snake because it was unoficial, who knows how did it leak.
If you don't trust me, read articles and try to find out when the accident actually happened - you can't.

after searching google for about 2 seconds, I found the CNN.com article where it says he died "MONDAY MORNING" which would coincide with the 11 AM thing. Any other conspiracies you have?

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 03:29 AM
after searching google for about 2 seconds, I found the CNN.com article where it says he died "MONDAY MORNING" which would coincide with the 11 AM thing. Any other conspiracies you have?

Every article sais when HE DIED. No article sais, as you would expect, when the accident itself happened.

And what is you explanation, since you are so eager to continue acting supid, for the fact that here we all heared about his death long before any news officialy broke up?

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 03:33 AM
Every article sais when HE DIED. No article sais, as you would expect, when the accident itself happened.

And what is you explanation, since you are so eager to continue acting supid, for the fact that here we all heared about his death long before any news officialy broke up?

How much of a joke are you? the accident happened SECONDS before he died. If you read the articles, the stingray shot the barb in his heart, then he pulled it out, and he died. It happened on the same day. Its not like he was laying in a hospital in Sydney for a month before he croaked :rolleyes:

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 03:42 AM
How much of a joke are you? the accident happened SECONDS before he died. If you read the articles, the stingray shot the barb in his heart, then he pulled it out, and he died. It happened on the same day. Its not like he was laying in a hospital in Sydney for a month before he croaked :rolleyes:

Find me a sentence where they say, as you would expect, that on 4th semptember etc. an accident happened etc. It is always formulated in such a way that accident and the date of death are put in separate sentences. You have to conclude that it was on the same day, because of the way on which it happened; but they didn't write it that way.

And I am still waiting for your explanation...

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 03:46 AM
Find me a sentence where they say, as you would expect, that on 4th semptember etc. an accident happened etc. It is always formulated in such a way that accident and the date of death are put in separate sentences. You have to conclude that it was on the same day, because of the way on which it happened; but they didn't write it that way.

And I am still waiting for your explanation...

What more do you want or need me to tell you? ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, HE WAS PIERCED BY A STINGRAY BARB AND DIED FROM SAID PIERCING. So what if the newspapers spread it across two sentences? :rolleyes: Do you honestly think it was a cover-up or some other stupid conspiracy shit like that?

ABandt
09-10-2006, 03:46 AM
Such a thing to be arguing about.... :rolleyes:

~Amy

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 03:49 AM
What more do you want or need me to tell you? ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, HE WAS PIERCED BY A STINGRAY BARB AND DIED FROM SAID PIERCING. So what if the newspapers spread it across two sentences? :rolleyes: Do you honestly think it was a cover-up or some other stupid conspiracy shit like that?

Where is the article in which you have read that? AND WILL YOU FINALY EXPLAIN HOW DID WE HERE UNOFFICIALY LEARNED ABOUT HIS DEATH LONG BEFORE 4TH SEMPTEBER?

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 03:51 AM
Where is the article in which you have read that? AND WILL YOU FINALY EXPLAIN WHO DID WE HERE UNOFFICIALY LEARNED ABOUT HIS DEATH LONG BEFORE 4TH SEMPTEBER?

every article about his death says the same thing. Not in the same sentence, as you would like, but every article its like that. And who is this WE that learned of it long before? it was speculation from "some guys" that just happened to be true a month later. Dumb fucking luck. It happens (Although a legend like Steve dying shouldnt be anything lucky :sad: )

DDrago2
09-10-2006, 03:55 AM
every article about his death says the same thing. Not in the same sentence, as you would like, but every article its like that. And who is this WE that learned of it long before? it was speculation from "some guys" that just happened to be true a month later. Dumb fucking luck. It happens (Although a legend like Steve dying shouldnt be anything lucky :sad: )

Do you read my posts at all? It was not only "some guys" but the whole town only a few days after - "some guys" were only the first who told me.

But you don't have to answer anymore since I already made my point.

Johnny Groove
09-10-2006, 03:57 AM
Do you read my posts at all? It was not only "some guys" but the whole town only a few days after - "some guys" were only the first who told me.

But you don't have to answer anymore since I already made my point.

yeah, ok, so the WHOLE TOWN listened to those jokers and believed them? Because obviously, fact and speculation are interchangable. :rolleyes:

But honestly, this is a topic that need not be discussed. Lets let the man rest in peace, ok? :wavey: