Us open 2018

[calamity]

Whhhhaaaa?

Greatest tennis player ever.

 

[Aberration]

lol...didn't seem that way when John McEnroe got away with saying far worse than Serena.

Whataboutism.

 

[calamity]

Whataboutism.

When the shoe fits...

 

[Aberration]

But if the cop lets 99 speeders go by who he clocks speeding, and then stops you, "the rules" are not "the rules," they're arbitrary guidelines enforced on a whim.

You’re thinking something else is going on? Because that’s the way traffic enforcement has been for the almost 20 years I’ve been driving.

 

[Nap]

Greatest tennis player ever.

That would be like saying a dominant player in the CFL is the greatest Football player ever. Serena is clearly one of the best female tennis players, but to simply say Greatest tennis player disregarding the competition is rather ridiculous.

 

[calamity]

That would be like saying a dominant player in the CFL is the greatest Football player ever. Serena is clearly one of the best female tennis players, but to simply say Greatest tennis player disregarding the competition is rather ridiculous.

Saying she is the best does not mean she can beat men. It just means she is the best. It's kind of like how Mayweather is the best fighter ever even though he would get slaughtered by a heavyweight or Bolt is the best runner ever even though he probably could not complete a marathon.

Serena is the most dominant athlete in her sport, and she has been for the longest period of time, ever. She's maybe even the best athlete ever, in that respect. More consistently on top than Jordan, longevity superseding Tiger, maybe right there with Tom Brady, Floyd and Usain.

 

[Nap]

Saying she is the best does not mean she can beat men. It just means she is the best. It's kind of like how Mayweather is the best fighter ever even though he would get slaughtered by a heavyweight or Bolt is the best runner ever even though he probably could not complete a marathon.

Mayweather is one of the most skilled boxers of all time, but he isn't considered the greatest primarily due to his weight class. If he were to have done what he did at the heavyweight level then we would no longer consider Ali the greatest of all time.

Edit: Even with Mayweather when he is mentioned as the best it is prefaced with Pound for Pound.

 

[Nap]

Saying she is the best does not mean she can beat men. It just means she is the best. It's kind of like how Mayweather is the best fighter ever even though he would get slaughtered by a heavyweight or Bolt is the best runner ever even though he probably could not complete a marathon.

Serena is the most dominant athlete in her sport, and she has been for the longest period of time, ever. She's maybe even the best athlete ever, in that respect. More consistently on top than Jordan, longevity superseding Tiger, maybe right there with Tom Brady, Floyd and Usain.

I look at that as a different argument altogether, and wouldn't necessarily disagree with it. The problem is when people say "Greatest Tennis Player" which is an objectively false statement as there are hundreds of men that would dominate her on the tennis court.

 

[jonny5]

Serena needs to teach her kids that two wrongs dont make a right. Also, she needs to learn that she is only there for entertainment. If she annoys the fans, shes not going to be playing tennis anymore. Even if she is right that she was treated unfairly according to the rules, there is a proper avenue for lodging a complaint. And this avenue is not on court. She may have able to call in a official to appeal to, but generally the Umpire is always right. And unsportsmanlike behavior is always wrong. If anything she has a point that male players should also be treated more harshly. This idea that everyone is speeding but only she got punished (FOR SPEEDING!) is the dumbest argument.

 

[Jack Hays]

The rules don't, but the point is when they are arbitrarily enforced then problems like what we've been discussing since Saturday are inevitable. Bottom line is if you're going to routinely ignore a rule that everyone who knows anything about tennis realizes is being broken and ignored in virtually every match, the exact WORST time to start enforcing the BS rule that everyone knows is routinely ignored is in the finals of a grand slam.

You're willfully missing the point, and changing my example to do it. :roll:

If you want to claim, "The rules are the rules!!!" and then ignore "the rule" 99% of the time, you're full of **** and people are going to call you out on your arbitrary decision to suddenly decide that a major final is a good time to enforce the BS rule you ignore all the rest of the time.

The bottom line is the chair umpire's basic job is 1) to ensure fair play, and 2) otherwise get the hell out of the way of the competition. He failed here. Right or wrong, the USTA has decided through its chair umpires that they don't believe in-match coaching affects the competition, because everyone who knows anything about tennis knows it happens virtually every match and is routinely ignored, and the chair umpires also know this because they're not morons. What they MIGHT care a little about is coaching that's a bit too obvious to routine observers. Well, that's nonsense, because it has the perverse effect of rewarding teams that bother to set up hand signals ahead of time and therefore deliberately intend to cheat throughout the match, and punish teams that don't.

None of which matters in the slightest. The rule is the rule, and a claim of lax enforcement is not a defense.
At the end of the day it was not the coaching violation that got Serena in trouble, but rather the racket smashing and verbal abuse of the umpire.

 

[Jack Hays]

lol...didn't seem that way when John McEnroe got away with saying far worse than Serena.

His misbehavior does not excuse hers.

 

[TurtleDude]

Well, then they should quit treating women as second class citizens and show Serena (the greatest tennis player ever) some respect, which this ump clearly did not. And, judging by that cartoon from Australia, the "uppity N*****" thing is still a ****ing problem.

I don't disagree with the claim that a man would not have been docked a game.

 

[TurtleDude]

His misbehavior does not excuse hers.

actually its much more than that. its a pattern and practice. I know-I have or still am a national level judge for three sports. I used to judge pro squash which is much harder to call than tennis. Pro players understand some judges or referees will grant "Strokes" much more readily than others. AS LONG AS you are consistent they usually are ok. Its just like a baseball umpire. Some call a narrow strike zone-others wider. The problem comes when a team perceives the ump calling things differently for each team. That's Serena's valid point

 

[JasperL]

You’re thinking something else is going on? Because that’s the way traffic enforcement has been for the almost 20 years I’ve been driving.

It's an example...to illustrate the point.

If "The rules are the rules" they need to be enforced predictably, regularly, consistently.

 

[Jack Hays]

actually its much more than that. its a pattern and practice. I know-I have or still am a national level judge for three sports. I used to judge pro squash which is much harder to call than tennis. Pro players understand some judges or referees will grant "Strokes" much more readily than others. AS LONG AS you are consistent they usually are ok. Its just like a baseball umpire. Some call a narrow strike zone-others wider. The problem comes when a team perceives the ump calling things differently for each team. That's Serena's valid point

That umpire was not responsible for anything except the match in front of him. He enforced the rule in that match. There was no valid basis for complaint.

 

[TurtleDude]

The rules don't, but the point is when they are arbitrarily enforced then problems like what we've been discussing since Saturday are inevitable. Bottom line is if you're going to routinely ignore a rule that everyone who knows anything about tennis realizes is being broken and ignored in virtually every match, the exact WORST time to start enforcing the BS rule that everyone knows is routinely ignored is in the finals of a grand slam.

thread winner. I average 40 hours of watching live tennis at a major league tournament-(ATP Masters, Women's Premier Level) each year. My box is on the south end of the stadium. I can touch the players when they are toweling off, I have watched coaches for fifty years. I have had big time coaches sit in my box during early rounds or right next to my box. I have had detailed conversations with them. I personally know four players who were in the top 100-three men and won woman. The collegiate Rolex winner for women's tennis sits in the box next to me. She was on the tour for two years. Doubles legend Lisa Raymond sits in their box since the woman was on the National Championship team with Raymond. So I have a pretty good perspective on pro tennis. The issue is NOT whether the coaches in the stands are "coaching". They ALL ARE coaching. the question is how often is it enforced? almost never

 

[Jack Hays]

• Tennis federation sides with ump, against Serena
  
  

 

[TurtleDude]

That umpire was not responsible for anything except the match in front of him. He enforced the rule in that match. There was no valid basis for complaint.

you play much sports? Do you understand the concept of pattern and practice?

 

[Jack Hays]

you play much sports? Do you understand the concept of pattern and practice?

I did and I do. I'm 68 now, and mainly a spectator except for the occasional round of golf.
"Pattern and practice" aren't important in this case. Each match is a single event. The umpire enforced the rule. Serena's coach admitted he violated it. There's nothing more to discuss.

 

[TurtleDude]

I did and I do. I'm 68 now, and mainly a spectator except for the occasional round of golf.
"Pattern and practice" aren't important in this case. Each match is a single event. The umpire enforced the rule. Serena's coach admitted he violated it. There's nothing more to discuss.

you miss the point.

If a player has been serving the entire tournament the same way-and an umpire doesn't call a foot fault for the same service motion until the tie breaker-that Umpire is going to get thrashed by the players and will lose lots of credibility. that's what happened here.

 

[Jack Hays]

you miss the point.

If a player has been serving the entire tournament the same way-and an umpire doesn't call a foot fault for the same service motion until the tie breaker-that Umpire is going to get thrashed by the players and will lose lots of credibility. that's what happened here.

No. What happened here is that the umpire enforced the rule and the player descended into racket smashing, abusive behavior, and was penalized.

 

[JasperL]

None of which matters in the slightest. The rule is the rule, and a claim of lax enforcement is not a defense.
At the end of the day it was not the coaching violation that got Serena in trouble, but rather the racket smashing and verbal abuse of the umpire.

Of course it matters, you just don't care. Lax and ARBITRARY enforcement means it's not a "rule" at all but a guideline at the whim of the chair umpire, and when it's enforced arbitrarily and randomly anyone surprised at the chair umpire being called out for arbitrarily enforcing this in practice non-rule is a moron.

It's kind of an important concept you're dismissing. If the chair umpire arbitrarily enforces a rule, he becomes more like a tyrant than a neutral referee whose job is to ensure fair play. I don't know why this is confusing to you. For the system to work, all parties involved need to trust that he's doing his job without bias, and by definition arbitrarily enforcing a rule destroys that concept and the trust people have in the system. It's not just tennis - that's just a game - but in everyday life.

Imagine a boss who watches 99 employees come in late and violate that "rule" then arbitrarily fires the 100th person who walks in late. Or a system of that lets wealthy charged with DUI off with warnings but imposes fines and prison to poor defendants. That's tyranny, not a system of rules or laws, because enforcement is entirely dependent on the tyrant with the power to levy penalties, arbitrarily, when he sees fit to do so, or not, at his whim.

 

[Jack Hays]

Of course it matters, you just don't care. Lax and ARBITRARY enforcement means it's not a "rule" at all but a guideline at the whim of the chair umpire, and when it's enforced arbitrarily and randomly anyone surprised at the chair umpire being called out for arbitrarily enforcing this in practice non-rule is a moron.

It's kind of an important concept you're dismissing. If the chair umpire arbitrarily enforces a rule, he becomes more like a tyrant than a neutral referee whose job is to ensure fair play. I don't know why this is confusing to you. For the system to work, all parties involved need to trust that he's doing his job without bias, and by definition arbitrarily enforcing a rule destroys that concept and the trust people have in the system. It's not just tennis - that's just a game - but in everyday life.

Imagine a boss who watches 99 employees come in late and violate that "rule" then arbitrarily fires the 100th person who walks in late. Or a system of that lets wealthy charged with DUI off with warnings but imposes fines and prison to poor defendants. That's tyranny, not a system of rules or laws, because enforcement is entirely dependent on the tyrant with the power to levy penalties, arbitrarily, when he sees fit to do so, or not, at his whim.

Please see the link in #167.

[FONT=&quot]“Carlos Ramos is one of the most experienced and respected umpires in tennis,” the International Tennis Federation said in a statement. “Mr. Ramos’ decisions were in accordance with the relevant rules and were re-affirmed by the U.S. Open’s decision to fine Serena Williams for the three offenses.”[/FONT]

 

[JasperL]

Please see the link in #167.

[FONT="]“Carlos Ramos is one of the most experienced and respected umpires in tennis,” the International Tennis Federation said in a statement. “Mr. Ramos’ decisions were in accordance with the relevant rules and were re-affirmed by the U.S. Open’s decision to fine Serena Williams for the three offenses.”[/FONT]

I saw it, and their statement does nothing to address my point. :shrug:

 

[TurtleDude]

I saw it, and their statement does nothing to address my point. :shrug:

if they agreed Serena was treated wrongly, it casts in doubt the results. CYA is at play here