Mens Tennis Forums banner
41 - 60 of 61 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
Well, I'm #6 right now! so get your fact straight...

And I was doing very well just before you took the game over :confused:...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
70,116 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
I don't cheat. It really offends me that you've called me a cheater. You made it clear that you don't want to play anymore, that's fine. As far as I'm concerned this is over. If you want to come back, I'll keep you on the rankings list and you can rejoin whenever.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Hi there,

*I* run Heath first of all, not Scott - I was asked to take over his player when he started running the game. I'm sorry I have not contributed to FMTT further than just sending points, but I have many other things I have to do and honestly only play because I was asked to.

Please do not accuse Scott of cheating because of my inefficiency to make my presence more aware. I did not expect this to be an issue, and I am disappointed FLL, that you of all people would accuse anyone of cheating when you yourself have been accused before aswell. I am sure you did not appreciate it, and can understand how Scott, anyone who plays this or any game, and particularly myself, feels.

Sorry you're dissatisfied with your results, if you'd like, why don't I just start posting the points right on here so you can see, maybe that will brighten your day.

:rolleyes:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,747 Posts
Firstly, I would like to apologize to Randy and Scott for inadvertantly posting something that caused this mess.

I have spoken to Randy on at least one occasion on MSN in the past, and I am satisfied that he is the one that is sending London's scores.

I would have liked to stay out of this mess, but that fact that a few posters are using my previous post as some form of ammunition to further their own agendas compels me to post and clarify.

As you may, or may not know, I speak to Marly and Scott reasonably regularly in the Lleyton forum. Marly and I have been, with Scott's encouragement, formulating characters and backgrounds and storylines for our players, and we have recently attempted to post things like press conferences, storylines etc. (errm, unfortunately, my doubles partner is still working on her half of our St Petersburg victory press conference... but we're getting there!) Regrettably, a good deal of players do not seem interested at all in giving back to the FMTT game, and the three of us were hoping to remedy that.

In that context, we have recently talked about the concept of rivalries, and my 'damn you' post at London, was a 'toe in the water' experiment in that regard. I was planning to write a press conference along those lines for my loss when I got home from work for the weekend (right now), but instead I'm spending my free time writing this post instead, and it would appear that when I DO find the time to write my press conference, I'll have to make it a very polite, bland once since it appears that some people seem to take delight in making their own theories about London, and I do not intend to assist that lot.

Regrettably, while it was always clear to me that Randy was sending the points for London, I had the misconception that Scott was still 'artistic director' when it came to London, since he posted news articles about London in the Vienna / Madrid threads. Hence my reference to Scott. It comes from a misunderstanding on MY part, and my part ALONE. Again, I apologize to Scott and Randy for that.

Some people seem to have conveniently forgotten that London won the USO whilst the previous organizer ran the game. At the point Scott took over, if I am not mistaken, the following players had bonus points for hardcourt:

London 7, Lapentti 5, Urumov, 5, Spears 4, Kasuns 3, Bargary 1, Seles 1.

So, the odds are already stacked in London's favour when it comes to hardcourt tourneys. Lapentti and Urumov also have a good deal of bonus points, let's see how they fared in the most recent hardcourt tourneys, when Scott was running the game:

HK: London wins, gets 1 more bonus point (the gap widens)
Urumov: FINALIST. Lapentti lost in the QF. Interestingly, if London had not won the first set tiebreak in his QF match, he would have exited at that stage too.

Tokyo: London wins, get 3 more bonus points (the gap widens more, making it even easier for London to win on hardcourts)
Urumov: QF (lost 3rd set tiebreak); Lapentti: QF

Vienna: London wins, get yet another 3 bonus points for hardcourts
Urumov: QF (lost 3rd set tiebreak); Lapentti: QF

St. Petersburg: London wins (1 more hardcourt bonus point), Lapentti: FINALIST, Urumov: SF.

In general it looks like Urumov and Lapentti have not done too poorly with their bonus points, either. It is quite simple. London is enjoying a positive feedback effect from the bonus points. Step 1: He wins a hardcourt tourney. Step 2: He gets bonus points. Step 3: He has an added advantage for future hardcourt tourneys, and it's easier for him to win a hardcourt tourney. Repeat Step 1. The majority of recent tourneys were on hardcourt, ergo, Heath Izra London is kicking butt.

It's quite elementary, there's no need to keep awake at night cooking up wild theories to explain it. If you have a problem with London winning all the time, 1. consider changing your points regularly, and/or 2. petition that the bonus points system be modified to blunt this positive feedback effect (but think carefully first, would YOU think it's unfair if your player was in London's shoes?). Publicly accusing someone of cheating without any conclusive evidence is a rather hateful and immature thing to do. :mad:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
What bothered me was:
1.London's bonus pts were gained when Scott played as him.
2.All ranking pts from before the US Open were removed yet bonus pts from that time were not removed, which favours London heavily
3.When London lost, Scott posted a sad smiley next to the result
4.This is Randy's 1st post in ATPworld.com

I will still perticipate in this game cuz i like it alot, but those are the things that bother me. If Randy really does runns London than its all fine, but if Scott still has stuff to do with him...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
& just a suggestion that is not realted to this fight:
I think indoor tournys should have their own INDOOR points rather than hard, cuz if someone wins the Aus Open or the US Open or even both they will virtually DOMINTE the entire hard courts season, & if the indoor season is also hard-courts, he will dominate the tour completely.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,747 Posts
London def. Vandecaetsbeek 6-2 1-6 7-6(1)
Lapentti/Spencer def. Espinosa/Vandecaetsbeek 1-6 6-2 7-6(7)

Partial transcript of press conference

Q: Any comments on your singles performance this week?

AV: Obviously, I am very disappointed that I lost yesterday, if I didn't say so, I wouldn't be human, or I'd be lying. Well, there are still some good things I can take away from this week. I made it through qualifying again, and this week I managed to defeat a seeded player in the main draw for the first time. I also managed to push the top-ranked player to a third-set tiebreak, so it's an improvement from my previous performances and I can't complain.

Q: Can you talk about that tiebreak?

AV: Well, I had my opportunities, but in the end Heath was too good. He played extremely well, and showed why he is the top-ranked player on the tour at the moment. To play like that is something I must learn, I must lift my game at crucial points. My serve also let me down in that tiebreak, I double-faulted twice then. It is something I plan to work on in the offseason, to improve my serve and make it more consistent.

Q: Do you have any other plans for the offseason?

AV: I'm not sure if my season's over just yet. I've committed to a challenger in Knoxville next week, but so far there aren't enough other committments there and it is not certain if that tournament will go on. Besides that, there is the training I mentioned, also, I'd like to go visit my father's family in Belgium. I haven't seen them in nearly two years.

Q: No plans to visit Australia?

AV: *laughs* No, not just yet, I was there earlier this year, and I hope to play at the Australian Open early next year anyway. I hope that making the quarters here will be enough to push up my ranking so that I'll be able to get into the main draw directly there, but we'll see. I'll be trying my best to improve my position in the warmup tournaments too.

Q: On to doubles, disappointing loss there too?

AV: Of course, it was a much closer third-set tiebreak, and coming from our win in St. Petersburg last week, we were hoping to consolidate our positions in the doubles rankings by doing well here too. It's back to my serve again... my opponents in both singles and doubles get a lot of free points from my second-serve so I'll be trying hard to improve on that.

Q: You've had to play against your partner thrice in the qualification rounds in the last four weeks now, how do you feel about that?

AV: On the one hand, when we both started we knew that we'd be low down in the rankings and since the qualification draws are rather small, we'd have to play against each other once in a while.... thrice in four weeks is a lot, but I guess it's the luck of the draw. However, it is hard... we both really dislike having to play against each other. Normally we'll be cheering each other on to do well in singles, but when we play against each other we have to put that aside and become enemies on court. But we become friends again afterwards. *laughs*

Q: Even though you've beaten him three times in a row now?

AV: *laughs* Yes, Angelo's great, he's still talking to me! I don't think my winning record against him really means anything, it could have just as easily been 3-0 in his favour. He knows my game really well, obviously, so our matches have always been competitive, this week he was the only person besides London to take a set from me, and the last time we played it was two tiebreak sets. I hope we both get high enough soon to be able to get into main draws directly, then we'd run into each other less often in singles.

Q: Thanks for your time.

AV: No worries.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
When was I accused of cheating??? I don't run any games...........

Seems I'm not the only one having doubts! I haven't accused you of anything yet! I've just said that I don't fully trust you thus making me retire because I can't play when I'm not in 100% trust with the organizer! Why I don't 100% trust, I was thinking the same thing as Niminator...

I'm sorry if I offended you because it was not my intention, believe me...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Stop the fighting! We don't need it here. This game is very fun and hey, if London wins everything, congrats! He is becoming the Larisa Ferrer on the FMTT. Don't worry, i will kick is ass soon and i'll be #1 forever(hahahaha!!!). I sound like Dr. Evil :D

Make Love, not War!

peace out you guys! This drama and accusing things makes this game less interesting, so please stop it :sad:

David
 

· Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
And by the way FLL, you are leaving me without a doubles partner! Would anyone like to play with 1/2 of the US Open double champs next year?

:fiery: at FLL for dumping me here! You better not do that in FWTT or i'll really kill you :eek:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
70,116 Posts
Discussion Starter · #53 ·
Niminator said:
What bothered me was:
1.London's bonus pts were gained when Scott played as him.
2.All ranking pts from before the US Open were removed yet bonus pts from that time were not removed, which favours London heavily
3.When London lost, Scott posted a sad smiley next to the result
4.This is Randy's 1st post in ATPworld.com.

1. Yes, and?
2. I didn't remove bonus points for anyone, they weren't flawed. It was the ranking system that is messed up, and the only person that the updated ranking system has really affected is Esaiasson.. he's maybe one spot higher than he would have been.
3. London lost. Remember that. And yes, a sad smiley. I feel an afinity for him because he was my player. Wouldn't you feel the same if you gave your's up to someone else?
4. Yes it is, but he's a good friend and he wanted to dispell the rumors that I cheat. He's in no way a fan of the ATP tour and just has no desire to post here. However his tenure and number of posts on WTAworld should speak for itself. If you think that I signed up under his name to post that, get Poe to check the IP addresses, he'll find that one is American and one Canadian.


I'm glad that you're going to continue playing the game, especially since your player is doing quiet well. Bonus points are majoritively removed next year, so people will be on an equal footing. Had you played London this week, you would have beaten him. In fact, that's true of the majority of the events. In a lot of cases you've been hurt by the fact that you're seeded so highly.

For next year I'll think about implementing your plan about having indoor points instead of carpet points, if the majority of the players in the game agree to it. I try to run this as democratically as I can, and I appreciate any imput that you think would improve the game.

As for the people that don't think I'm being totally truthful, there's no way to prove that I am. I can only say that I'm not cheating, it's up to you to believe that or not. But I do have fun running this game, and it's sad to me that the most participation I've had so far is people jumping on my back. This would be very fun if everyone participated in-character... posting interviews, articles, etc.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
70,116 Posts
Discussion Starter · #54 ·
The field for Shanghai is set:

H. London
J. Esaiasson
G. Golduck
F. Lapentti
P. Seles
L. Clijsters
A. Urumov
C. Daniilidou

If Clijsters wins the Paris final, he will move ahead of Seles. Otherwise, this is the seeding. Be thinking about your points... the 1, 3, 5, and 7 players will be in one group and the 2, 4, 6, and 8 in the other.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
70,116 Posts
Discussion Starter · #59 ·
Lapentti said:
i don't understand why Lapentti is ranked that low(even if #4 is not bad). i have won 2 TMS and made the final of a grand slam plus some other events? can you clear that up for me Scott please :kiss:
Yes, I'm sorry about that. I didn't really affect you that much, the difference isn't that great and even with those points still on I don't think you would be much higher. Maybe #3. The issue was that the previous game runner had used a ranking system that had very little tiers, i.e. people got about the same # of points for winning a masters series as for winning a $400k. So I decided to take those points off. It really hasn't affected the rankings much at all. The people who did well have continued to do well. You're probably the one person that it effected negatively rankings-wise, and I'm sorry for that.
 
41 - 60 of 61 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top