MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not? Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
05-01-2007 09:54 AM
belco
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

im too late to vote but i would have picked option A
04-24-2007 07:03 AM
Labamba
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavnich77 View Post
I think we should count them in this situation as we count the winner of retired matches.
Yes, I think so too. Atleast for now, we should keep counting them as before.
04-24-2007 07:01 AM
Labamba
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExcaliburII View Post
Great Idea

No one commented on this idea?
We just voted for a new rule, that doesn't count SR's when a retirement happens. This came too late, we can revisit the matter during the off-season and evaluate if we need to make further changes.
04-24-2007 05:02 AM
ExcaliburII
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GustavoM_Fan View Post
I think in case of retirement, SR`s should count when the winner of the match is playing final set and is leading by more than 3 games......

Per ex. (RG 2007 results )

Marcaccio d. Federer 6-0 6-0 2-0 ret. not counted

Marcaccio d. Kohlschreiber 6-0 6-0 3-0 ret. counted (3-0)

Marcaccio d. El Aynaoui 6-7 7-5 6-4 1-6 5-2 ret.counted (3-2)

Marcaccio d. Djokovic 4-6 6-4 6-2 4-1 ret. counted (3-1)

Marcaccio d. Coria 4-6 7-6 4-6 0-5 ret. not counted

.etc..... (Gustavo cant end the matchs properly )

What do you think???
Great Idea

No one commented on this idea?
04-22-2007 02:41 AM
savesthedizzle
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZackBusner View Post
Just to make sure: I suppose it is common sense that matches that ended with one player resigning still should count for SR decision if one TT player picked the winner and the opponent didn't ? (I can imagine that some people will start a discussion about this what that situation occurs, saying: "Read the new rule: This match doesn't count for SR" )
I think that should still count, of course.
04-21-2007 08:22 PM
Blue Heart24
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavnich77 View Post
I think we should count them in this situation as we count the winner of retired matches.
I agree.
04-21-2007 08:19 PM
Taz Warrior
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Labamba View Post
The poll is now closed, option A wins and it should be used in all tournaments from this point on.

Now the problem is, what should we do about this question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZackBusner
Just to make sure: I suppose it is common sense that matches that ended with one player resigning still should count for SR decision if one TT player picked the winner and the opponent didn't ?
I think we should count them in this situation as we count the winner of retired matches.
04-21-2007 07:49 PM
Labamba
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

The poll is now closed, option A wins and it should be used in all tournaments from this point on.

Now the problem is, what should we do about this question:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZackBusner View Post
Just to make sure: I suppose it is common sense that matches that ended with one player resigning still should count for SR decision if one TT player picked the winner and the opponent didn't ? (I can imagine that some people will start a discussion about this what that situation occurs, saying: "Read the new rule: This match doesn't count for SR" )
04-20-2007 11:07 PM
Labamba
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZackBusner View Post
Just to make sure: I suppose it is common sense that matches that ended with one player resigning still should count for SR decision if one TT player picked the winner and the opponent didn't ? (I can imagine that some people will start a discussion about this what that situation occurs, saying: "Read the new rule: This match doesn't count for SR" )
That's the invisible option C
04-20-2007 11:06 PM
GustavoM_Fan
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

I think in case of retirement, SR`s should count when the winner of the match is playing final set and is leading by more than 3 games......

Per ex. (RG 2007 results )

Marcaccio d. Federer 6-0 6-0 2-0 ret. not counted

Marcaccio d. Kohlschreiber 6-0 6-0 3-0 ret. counted (3-0)

Marcaccio d. El Aynaoui 6-7 7-5 6-4 1-6 5-2 ret.counted (3-2)

Marcaccio d. Djokovic 4-6 6-4 6-2 4-1 ret. counted (3-1)

Marcaccio d. Coria 4-6 7-6 4-6 0-5 ret. not counted

.etc..... (Gustavo cant end the matchs properly )

What do you think???
04-20-2007 08:56 PM
ZackBusner
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Just to make sure: I suppose it is common sense that matches that ended with one player resigning still should count for SR decision if one TT player picked the winner and the opponent didn't ? (I can imagine that some people will start a discussion about this what that situation occurs, saying: "Read the new rule: This match doesn't count for SR" )
04-20-2007 03:12 PM
Tankman
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

Option A

SRs shouldn't count because the last set isn't finished. It's as simple as that in my opinion. Whether a player is up or down 1-0 or 5-0, you can't say for sure that they were going to win or lose.

It'd be much too hard to try and call the set based on the scoreline, or who was winning, because it just raises too many questions and makes things way too complicated and subjective.

For the same sorts of reasons, I'm also against counting retired matches altogether, but that's a battle I doubt I'd win...
04-19-2007 11:07 PM
adee-gee
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

*bump*

Just a couple of days left to vote
04-17-2007 07:10 AM
Action Jackson
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

I see both sides of this, the main problem is when the retirement takes place in the match.

The match result should count of course, but not the SR, it should go to the next one, then what happens if that's a retirement as well.
04-16-2007 06:39 PM
FiBeR
Re: Players retiring - Should SRs count or not?

depends on the match

if the trail is clear.. 64 53 for e.g. it should be counted

if it is 46 64 11.. it should be counted.. (best of 3..of course.. because 3 sets are already played)

if is is 6-6* .. or let me say..4-1* .. no.. only clearly decided matches.. (already in the 3rd set..or 5th set.. and/or serving for the match or set up break up...)
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome