Notícias/Artigos/Entrevistas Gerais

Descartes · 18 Julho 2015

Já não é a primeira vez que eu coloco aqui artigos sobre o Duckhee Lee, o miúdo surdo-mudo sul-coreano. Não resisto a colocar mais um. Este está no site do ATP, na rubrica "Stars of tomorrow": http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/star-of-tomorrow-2015-duckhee-lee

Duckhee Lee is in Tegal, Indonesia, and is comfortably winning the first set 3-1 of an ITF Futures quarter-final match against Indonesia’s No. 1, Christopher Rungkat. Lee slaps a passing shot winner to the open court to break Rungkat’s serve. He pumps his fist to his team and trots over to change sides of the court. There is just one problem; while the chair umpire signaled Lee’s ball good, he announced the score as deuce, not game. The 17 year old from South Korea does not understand why the umpire and Rungkat are both staring at him. It would take a few minutes to unwind the knot.

If you did not know Lee, saw him in his hot pink shirt, lime green tennis shoes, hair with K-Pop highlight streaks, and watched him waving his arms at the chair umpire; you might think that here is another hot headed tennis player. And you would be correct, except there is one other thing that many have not picked up on yet. Lee is both hearing and speech impaired.

On the ITF Futures circuit where officiating standards are much lower than the ATP World Tour, Duckhee Lee thinks that he has just been robbed by either a linesmen or the chair umpire who are all from Indonesia. It is easy to understand why. Lee cannot hear overrules from the chair umpire or the umpire calling the score. Many ITF Futures scoreboards only indicate the set score, and not the game score.

What follows next is a chain reaction of lost in translation. Due to his speech impediment the umpire cannot understand what Lee is trying to say and because of his hearing impediment he cannot hear what the umpire is saying. Lee uses sign language to his translator all the while waving his hands and arms at both the translator and chair umpire. Locals down in Central Java do not get to see that much tennis and do not know about Lee’s disability. They begin to laugh at Lee’s grunts and mimic his arm movements. Tension mounts and his extreme frustration takes over. In a matter of seconds he has lost the game and the momentum. On the change-over, the crowd continues to mock Lee’s outburst and seeing this, he hides his tears under a towel.

“I sometime have trouble hearing the umpire’s call,” admits Lee. “When the match hasn’t gone smoothly due to my lack of hearing of an umpire’s call it is difficult for me to control my mind and emotions. I try to express myself when the call seems not correct or fair. I try to communicate with them via body language or facial expression.”

In Korea there is a word, gibun, which basically means to hurt someone’s pride or cause loss of dignity. South Koreans are a fiercely proud people and the men learn to behave macho at an early age. Traditional music which is loaded with heavy bass drumbeats and patriotic lyrics and even the national dish, bimbimbap, hot stone bowl full of meat, vegetables and spicy cabbage is man food at its best. This could all be a result of having your nearest neighbor pointing a whole bunch of weapons, including nuclear, right at your capital city. Competing in professional tennis is how Lee earns dignity.

Now, with wounded pride, Lee lets his racquet do the talking for him. He wins nine of the next eleven games and the match. Lee would carry that energy all the way to winning the tournament. And to add insult to injury, he would do the same the next week when he defeated Rungkat again, this time in the final.

Lee's Rise

Duckhee Lee was born in Jecheon, a little town tucked in the mountains where rivers and streams flow down to fill reservoirs and lakes. Despite having only one main street and one five star hotel, Jecheon attracts Koreans seeking a bit of rest and relax destination away from the bustle of Seoul. Jecheon is the kind of place where grandparents live and old school Korean values are practiced daily.

There is not much that Doug MacCurdy has not seen or done in the role of tennis development around the world. Former ITF Director of Development, MacCurdy has headed development operations in the USA, China, India and most recently, Korea. MacCurdy was based in Korea when Lee came through the pipeline.

“I remember Duckhee Lee very well,” begins MacCurdy. “He was always one of the kids who demonstrated an advanced level of tennis in our identification and training camps. He was also very lively and social with all the other kids. I think where Lee’s team was smart was with his scheduling. In the beginning of his junior tournaments he would go faraway and come back with a bundle of points. I see he has done the same with his professional scheduling.”

MacCurdy brings up an argument as old as professional tennis coaching; which comes first ability or ranking? One side says if you are good you should be able to compete with the best starting out, and the other side feels that for some players going to the outer banks of tennis where the draw is considered weaker and wins more frequent while developing game and confidence is another option. Jimmy Connors early days as a professional is an excellent example of the latter.

If you trace Lee’s Emirates ATP Rankings history the line on your paper would like just like the takeoff of a jet airplane; a slow, steady rise. Currently, Lee is No. 305, but thanks to another Futures title last week in Japan he will enter the top 300 next week. This makes Duckhee Lee the youngest player ranked inside the Top 300.

Consider Duckhee Lee’s results since he first started playing professional about a year and half ago. To date, Lee has participated in 36 ITF Futures, made the finals of seven and won five. This means that he made the finals about once for every five tournaments and then won a little more than two out of three of those finals. On the ATP Challenger Tour, Lee has played in six events and only lost once to a lower ranked opponent. What is most obvious is about Lee’s player activity is that his bottom line is rock solid. Say what you want about what he needs to do to get better; Duckhee Lee rarely has a bad day at the office.

Speaking of game, here is what Duckhee Lee looks like during a point. Lee has a weak first serve and a really weak second serve, but he has compensated with a lethal return. Once the ball is in play, he employs a flat-line style of tennis that requires precision guided strokes and near perfect ball striking to be effective. The plus side is that balls struck flat travel faster than balls loaded with spin so if Lee is on song, he can cut his opponent’s legs out from underneath him waxing him side to side. The drawback is when conditions are less than ideal and a greater margin of error is needed for the job. On the forehand side, Lee has an excessive left shoulder rotation which allows him to hold his shot till his opponent commits. And similarly, the backhand is best described having an extreme shoulder rotation. The obvious advantage for Lee to using so much trunk in his swing is that he can generate plenty of power with his large muscle group rather than depending on his arms and equally effective is that he can disguise his intended target to the absolute last millisecond before firing off.

Former ATP player, Danai Udomchoke, has played and lost to Duckhee Lee. Most recently in Indonesia.

“His serve needs a lot of work, but he is young,” says Udomchoke. “However, considering that he has not learned to volley yet, it is remarkable how well he plays with the tools that he already has for his age. It is if not being able to win points with his serve or by approaching the net has helped him master the baseline. I was surprised at how fast he read where I was going to hit the ball.”

Christopher Rungkat agrees with Udomchoke on the last bit.

“He always seems to know where I am going to hit the ball,” begins Rungkat. “I don’t think he is guessing, it is more like he is reading my mind. Yes, he is fast, but so are a lot of players. If I had to pick one word to sum up his game, I would say- anticipation. How he knows where the ball is going off my racquet so early is most impressive.”

Overcoming Obstacles

Ryan Hodierne is a sport biomechanist at the Singapore Sports Institute and has studied the subject of deaf athletes. His research seems to collaborate with what Rungkat feels about Lee.

“He would have to use his sight, at a heightened sense, to compensate as a result of not being able to hear the ball being struck by the racket,” claims Hodierne. “It is known that with the removal of one sense, the remaining four senses are heightened.”

Anyone who has ever watched a tennis match has most likely observed a player pausing at the baseline between points while delaying his serve till a low flying airplane passes overhead. Or the chair umpire asking for the crowd to please be quiet. So, what happens to a player who cannot hear at all? How does he adjust?

Brian Ehlers is considered an expert on deaf athletes. Ehlers was the first deaf volleyball player to play for the USA Volleyball program and participated in the 1980 and 1984 Olympics.

“It’s very true that an athlete with a sensory condition loss will gain advantages, if they use them; however, the athlete’s other mental and physical [eye and touch] senses do come into play, as the body finds other ways to compensate for a sensory loss elsewhere,” states Ehlers. “Is it possible to have tunnel vision with a hearing impairment? Yes, the athletes mind becomes more focused and analytical and creative, as it finds way to utilize the other senses to better coordinate his actions in unison with the projected contact point, velocity and trajectory of the ball.”

Though Duckhee Lee has never met Brian Elhers, he seems to agree.

“My hearing difficulty does help me to focus on my own play and match,” Lee admits.

Yong-Il Yoon, former Korean tennis national player and coach of another Korean teen standout, Hyeon Chung, knows Lee very well.

“Lee is constantly communicating with Chung and other Korean players on the circuit via text messaging, and social media,” says Yoon. “Lee already has many fans that follow him and his progress at home."

“Throughout my tours I have met a lot of fans and supporters and especially Korean fans,” says Lee.

“Any athlete wants to make their parents proud,” claims Ehlers. “Yet for those athletes who have a condition, we know how emotional it is for our parents to see and experience their own kid having something others kids don’t have. Having a condition makes us deaf athletes try extra hard to show our appreciation to our parents; whom have dedicated all their extra work and time in their lives into helping us.

“A deaf athlete can become more driven and excited about proving himself to others that he belongs and can be or is like everybody else without condition,” continues Ehlers. “A deaf athlete wants to make a mark in the world via acceptance and respect by others for what they accomplish, but far more importantly, for whom they are and what they can offer to others.”

Duckhee Lee may not be able to hear the umpire call the ball out or tell his opponent good shot. But he sure will be able to see the cheers from the crowd as he continues to win tennis matches and collect trophies. And by doing so, he will make his parents, country and all athletes with hearing and speech impairments very proud.

Rafinha · 22 Julho 2015

How To Fix a Tennis Match (by Andrey Golubev and Aleksandr Nedovyesov)

Scheveningen is not a name that is likely to be familiar to the majority of people. A brief search suggests that it is a subdistrict of The Hague, which advertises itself as 'Holland's most famous seaside resort' with a 'fascinating marine world at Sea Life'. More pertinent to this article is that it also hosts The Hague Open each year, a clay court Challenger event. The Challenger Tour is far from the glamour of the likes of Wimbledon and generally consists of a collection of up-and-coming youngsters and journeymen players.

It was in this tournament this lunchtime that two of the members of Kazakhstan's overachieving Davis Cup team met in the first round, fresh off the plane from their agonising 3-2 defeat in Darwin. Fourth seed, Aleksandr Nedovyesov, was drawn to play Andrey Golubev, who he had played doubles with in Australia mere days ago. As the odds below show, the bookmakers were unable to separate them and had it priced as a perfect 50-50 match.

Andrey Golubev came out of the blocks quickly and dominated the first set, winning it 6-2. So far, there appeared to be nothing suspicious about this match. At the end of the first set, Golubev was around 1.23 and Nedovyesov was around 4.0 (thanks to @ahunnbet and @dougalltennis for these prices). This is more or less perfectly in line with where we would expect the prices to be at this stage.

The second set began with a pair of holds, but already there were a few flags being raised as the price on Nedovyesov began to shorten with Golubev's price drifting outwards. At 3-3 in the second set, Andrey Golubev was still to drop a point on serve in the second set, yet there had been an astonishing move in the prices. The image below (thanks to @ahunnbet again) shows the Betfair graph at 3-3, 30-15 on Nedovyesov's serve:

Bizarrely, not only has Nedovyesov shortened, he is actually now the favourite for the match. We can see that the most recent price matched on Nedovyesov was 1.69, which signifies an implied probability of 57.2% to win the match. Now, given that his starting price of 1.91 with Pinnacle gave him a 52.4% probability of winning, it seems rather peculiar that he was apparently more likely to win the match at 2-6, 3-3 down than he was at the start.

Now, you do sometimes see markets like this if there are injury doubts about a player and a retirement is expected. Given that Betfair pays out on the winner via retirement if the first set has been completed, you can often see injured players drift right out, but it is difficult to see any indication of this. There was no MTO and there was no indication of any injury according to those watching the match. Indeed, given that Golubev had held to love in four consecutive service games at this stage, it seemed as though he was not struggling at all.

However, that just seems to leave the conclusion that someone betting on the match on Betfair knew what was going to happen in the match.

Going into the second set TB, Andrey Golubev had still only dropped one point on serve in the entire second set. Despite that though, he was priced at 3.0 to win the tiebreak with Bet365 and 1.61 to win the match. Three sloppy unforced errors and a double fault later, he was 0-4 down in the TB. He pulled it back to 2-4, but the market had no faith in him by this stage. Nedovyesov had fallen right down to 1.27 to win the match or 78.7%. Quite impressive for a player that was only around 50% at the start of the match to be almost 30% more likely to win the match down a set and up just one mini-break in the TB.

As scripted, Aleksandr Nedovyesov won the second set TB 7-2 and by this stage, the market knew precisely where this match was headed. Priced at just 1.17 for the match or 85.5%, there seemed little doubt who was winning this match. Still, there was no sign of any injury concern that might be about to cause an imminent retirement and no momentum effect would cause that sort of price move. If a player is rated at a 50% chance to win a match, it follows that he must be 50% to win a single set. There could be an argument that with the momentum of having won the second set, Nedovyesov might have been a slight favourite in the deciding set, but certainly not an 85.5% favourite.

To the surprise of nobody that was following the match, Aleksandr Nedovyesov broke early in the third set dropping to 1.07 immediately following the break and then just a steady decent to 1.01.

Now, there will be the usual arguments that there was an injury or that it is simply the complaints of bitter gamblers on the internet that lost money. However, the reality is that virtually all of the major bookmakers stopped taking bets on this match during the later part of the second set and a number of them have reported the match to the TIU, showing that it is not only the gamblers that are suspicious of this match.

Interestingly, these two players also met in the first round of a Challenger event just over two months ago in Aix en Provence. In that match, Andrey Golubev was victorious, winning 4-6, 6-4, 6-3 in the reverse situation of this match. What makes it even more interesting, particularly in the light of the odds movements on this match, is this observations from @tennispurist on Twitter:

Whatever argument you might want to make to explain today's match as a one-off, it becomes far more difficult to make that argument twice for the same pair of players. If two matches between the same two players show almost identical suspicious odds movements, surely this must be a huge red flag?

The link below shows the full match. Now that we have seen the suspicious odds movements, you can watch the match and see whether you can see anything to indicate why the odds should have moved as they did.

http://livestream.com/ATP/Scheveningen2015centrecourt/videos/93787008

Saying this is getting repetitive, but as with both the Meersbusch and the Dallas matches in the past twelve months, it is likely that nothing more will be heard of this match. The notoriously secretive TIU does not release any information beyond ban announcements, so we should not expect to hear anything. All we can do is flag up these matches and hope that eventually the weight of evidence will force action to be taken.

Once again, I will finish with a quote from my last article on this subject. It is as relevant now as it was six months ago. There have been some good articles written by the mainstream tennis media recently addressing the match fixing issue, but this start cannot be allowed to just peter out.

The authorities need to target those players and associates that are involved in match fixing. And if the authorities are not going to do it, it needs journalists to question those in authority. We saw in cycling how it was journalists that eventually blew the lid on the Lance Armstrong doping situation. Is there a serious respected tennis journalist that is willing to ask the right questions to the right people?

http://www.sportdw.com/2015/07/fix-tennis-golubev-nedovyesov.html

Vejam o erro não forçado do Golubev a 4-2 no TB do 2º set... que vergonha.

Editado 22 Julho 2015 por Rafinha

Rōnin · 23 Julho 2015

Nada de novo. Btw, esse gajo do twitter não é do MTF? :lol:

Lleyton · 23 Julho 2015

Pessoal do leste da europa :prayer:

inb4 Cazaquistão é na Ásia

Vejam o erro não forçado do Golubev a 4-2 no TB do 2º set... que vergonha.

Pareceu-me um legítimo mau ressalto de bola 8-[

Gustavo_Kei · 3 Agosto 2015

Na semana que passou, o tenusta português chegou aos quatros de final do torneio suíço de Gstaad, onde foi eliminado pelo belga david Goffin.

Vindo do maisfutebol :mrgreen:

Descartes · 6 Agosto 2015

Potito Starace e Daniele Bracciali irradiados pela Federação Italiana de Ténis

Descartes · 3 Setembro 2015

Artigo escrito pelo Mardy Fish sobre si próprio. Muito bom!

MARDY FISH
CONTRIBUTOR

“Don’t play.”

I am hours away from playing in the biggest tennis match of my life: the fourth round of the U.S. Open … on Labor Day … on my dad’s birthday … on Arthur Ashe … on CBS … against Roger Federer. I am hours away from playing the greatest player of all time, for a chance at my best-ever result, in my favorite tournament in the world. I am hours away from playing the match that you work for, that you sacrifice for, for an entire career.

And I can’t do it.

I literally can’t do it.

It’s early afternoon; I’m in the transportation car on my way to the courts.

And I am having an anxiety attack.

Actually, I’m having several anxiety attacks — at first, one every 15 minutes or so, but pretty soon every 10. My mind starts spiraling. I’m just freaking out.

My wife is asking me, “What can we do? What can we do? How can we make this better?”

And I tell her the truth: “The only thing that makes me feel better right now … is the idea of not playing this match.”

She hesitates, and looks at me for a second, to make sure I’m serious. I am serious. This isn’t me thinking — this me reacting, feeling, trying to survive. She answers plainly. “Well, then, you shouldn’t play. You don’t have to play. Just … don’t play.”

*

My anxiety disorder started in 2012, during what should have been the high point of my career. I was at the end of a long road — a few years long — on which things really started to come together for me.

In 2009, I had had this sort of eye-opening experience, this turning point. I was 27. Up to then, I’d had a nice career. It was a career that, in many ways, I could be proud of: I’d won the silver medal at the 2004 Olympics, had some results at a couple of Grand Slams, seen the world, made a good living. But it was nothing sustained.

I think it’s important that my story not have a sports vocabulary. I didn’t “choke” in Act Two, and I’m not going to “win” in Act Three.

I was newly married, and my perspective was changing, growing. And I think I just sort of realized, in a way I previously hadn’t … that “nice,” as a tennis career, wasn’t good enough for me. That I wasn’t finished. That I still wanted to do some really cool things in the sport. And that, most importantly, it was now or never.

I changed my diet, my lifestyle and, honestly, my whole outlook. I went from 202 lbs. to 172 lbs. — I found my “fighting weight.” I wasn’t really 100-percent sure where any of this was going to take me, but I knew that I had to find out.

In 2010, I started to get results. I beat Andy Murray in Miami in straight sets — a result that I never would have gotten a couple years prior. I played back-to-back five-setters at the French Open — losing the second match 10-8 in the fifth to the No. 14 seed Ivan Ljubicic, but playing at a fitness level that I never would have been able to reach before. I won two tournaments in a row that summer, in Newport and Atlanta — beating John Isner in the Atlanta final amid a heat wave on a court that was about 150 degrees. I lost the final in Cincinnati to Federer 6-4 in the third, a match I easily could have won. And I beat Andy Roddick — who had beaten me like a drum, eight straight — a couple of times.

2011 was even better. I had my best results at Roland Garros and Wimbledon. I passed Andy, one of my best friends, to become the No. 1-ranked American. And then — and maybe coolest of all — I officially became a top 10 player in the world. By the time 2012 rolled around, I was No. 8. It was everything I’d worked for, and built for myself almost from scratch, over those last few years. I wasn’t Just Another Guy on tour. I was on an elite level.

And that’s when the anxiety attacks started. Anxiety is hard to pinpoint from a cause-and-effect perspective, but when I think about its genesis for me a couple of things come to mind.

The first is that my expectations changed, both externally and internally, along with my ranking. Looking back, this wasn’t necessarily the healthiest thing. My dissatisfaction with the status quo — that had been so helpful when there were 20 players ranked in front of me — crossed over into something more stressful, and then destructive, I think, when that number became reduced to seven.

The idea that I wasn’t good enough was a powerful one — it drove me, at an age when many players’ careers are winding down, to these amazing heights. But it also became a difficult switch to turn off. I was, objectively, doing great. And looking back, I wish I had been able to tell myself that. But doing great wasn’t something that my frame of mind back then had time to process. All I could focus on was doing better. It was a double-edged sword.

And the second thing is that I began experiencing these heart arrhythmias. An arrhythmia is basically the electricity around your heart, malfunctioning. My heart would go a little crazy, and I wouldn’t be able to stop it. It was really scary. I took some time off, then had a corrective procedure called an ablation, after which I was ostensibly “fine.”

But when I returned to the court that summer, around Wimbledon … that’s when I began to get these really weird, new thoughts. Uncomfortable, anxious thoughts. Like I was nervous about something that was going to happen — even though it kept not happening. And I think that what I went through with my heart was, in many ways, this trauma lurking in the shadows of those thoughts.

I was having trouble sleeping; I couldn’t sleep alone. I had to have my wife there, with me, always. I had to have someone in the room, always. I was a guy who loved being on my own. I loved traveling on my own, that solitude. That feeling of shutting off your phone and heading on a long flight … that used to bring me peace. But I couldn’t travel on my own anymore. My parents had to come out to Wimbledon. I needed people around me at all times, period.

And through it all, I just kept having these … thoughts. This anxiety. I became consumed by this exhausting, confusing dread.

And the attacks just kept … getting … worse.

Ironically, at this point I wasn’t experiencing any problems on-court. I was still having results: fourth round at Wimbledon, quarters in Canada and Cincinnati. I was still playing well.

It was only away from the court that this problem existed, and compounded. That these thoughts kept creeping in. And they were becoming more and more frequent: from once or twice a day, to a handful of times a day, to eventually — when it got really bad, by the end of the summer — every 10-to-15 minutes. Anxious, overwhelming attacks of thought. When I’m back at the hotel, I’m googling “anxiety disorder,” “panic disorder,” “depression,” “mental health” … but really I knew nothing about any of it. I didn’t know what to do. I just had no idea.

At least, I told myself, it wasn’t happening on the court.

And then it happened on the court.

It was at the 2012 U.S. Open, at the end of that summer. I had to play a night match in the third round against Gilles Simon — a higher seed than me, but I was playing better than my seed. I felt good about my chances.

It’s a great position to be in. Night matches at the Open are reserved for the best pairings, but also for favorite players — the players people want to watch. And I was one of them. After years and years of being on the outside of that looking in, now I was part of it. I wasn’t playing in someone else’s match. It was nighttime at the U.S. Open, and I was playing in “The Mardy Fish Match.”

That was special, but it was also stressful. The match was up and down, really emotional. I was on edge the whole time: fist-pumping, throwing my racquet, and feeling … anxious. I was anxiety-ridden.

And I’ll never forget when it happened — the first, and only, anxiety attack I would have on a tennis court.

I was up two sets to one, and we were at 3-2 in the fourth. Out of the corner of my eye, I looked at the clock. It said 1:15 AM. And that, for whatever reason, was enough.

That was my trigger.

Fish Weakness Pull No Credit

My mind started spiraling downward in this snowball of thoughts: 1:15. Oh my gosh — it’s so late. I’m going to feel terrible tomorrow. We’re going to play this long match … and I’m going to have to do press after … and then I’m going to have to stretch, and eat … and I’m going to feel bad about that …

And it just kept spiraling and spiraling to the point where I couldn’t control it. I had no idea what was going on, tennis-wise. No idea. I don’t remember a thing. Somehow I ended up winning the next three games, and the set, and the match. But I don’t remember it at all.

It was nighttime at the U.S. Open, and I was playing in “The Mardy Fish Match.”

All I remember is the post-match interview. Justin Gimelstob was interviewing me, and he’s a good friend of mine. I remember looking at him before it started and telling him with this incredible urgency, “Please hurry.” Justin had no idea what I was talking about. But I just kept telling him, “Please hurry. Please hurry.” I had to leave. I had to get off the court.

Once it happened to me on the court, I knew. Nothing would be the same again.

Then two days later, it all came to a head.

We were in the car, driving to my next match against Roger — and my thoughts were filling with dread. Would it happen on the court again? Was I going to get an anxiety attack, again, in front of thousands of people? Was I going to get an anxiety attack while trying to do my job?

The thoughts kept coming, and they wouldn’t stop. They just kept coming, and coming, and coming. I was in a very bad place.

And my wife just kept looking at me, and repeating herself: You don’t have to play. You don’t have to play. Don’t play.

And I was listening … but I wasn’t listening. I was thinking, Can you imagine? Can you imagine if I didn’t play this match? I couldn’t wrap my head around it. In that moment, I couldn’t wrap my head around anything.

But then, finally, I heard her. You don’t have to play. You don’t have to play. Don’t play. And just like that, it hit me — I remember it so vividly, and so powerfully. Oh god, I thought. I’m … not going to do it. I’m not going to go out there, anxious, in front of 22,000 people. I’m not going to play Roger.

I’m not going to play.

I didn’t play.

First, I didn’t play Roger. And then, I didn’t play at all.

*

Three years later, I’m back at the U.S. Open for the first time. And though I think that I can still play at a pretty high level, this will be my last tournament. After the Open, I’ll retire from tennis.

This isn’t a sports movie, of course, and there won’t be a sports movie ending. I won’t be riding off into the sunset, lifting a trophy. I’m not going to win the tournament.

But that’s fine by me — because honestly, this isn’t a sports story. And I think it’s important that my story not have a sports vocabulary. I didn’t “choke” in Act Two, and I’m not going to “win” in Act Three.

This is a life story.

This is a story about how a mental health problem took my job away from me. And about how, three years later, I am doing that job again — and doing it well. I am playing in the U.S. Open again.

This is a story about how, with the right education, and conversation, and treatment, and mindset, the things that mental illness takes away from us — we can take them back.

Tens of millions of Americans every year deal with issues related to mental health. And the journey of dealing with them, and learning to live with them, is a long one. It can be a forever one. Or, worse, it can be a life-threatening one.

And I want to help with it.

I want to be a success story, in my own way. And I think that retiring on my own terms, in the tournament I love the most, is part of my being able to do that.

Talking about it — and keeping the conversation going, and going, and going — is also part of that. Mental health is not a very easy thing to talk about in sports. It’s not perceived as very masculine. We’re so trained to be “mentally tough,” in sports. To show weakness, we’re told, in so many words, is to deserve shame.

But I am here to show weakness. And I am not ashamed.

In fact I’m writing this, in a lot of ways, for the express purpose of showing weakness. I’m writing this to tell people that weakness is okay. I’m here to tell people that it’s normal.

And that strength, ultimately, comes in all sorts of forms.

Addressing your mental health is strength. Talking about your mental health is strength. Seeking information, and help, and treatment, is strength.

And before the biggest match of your career, prioritizing your mental health enough to say, You don’t have to play. You don’t have to play. Don’t play …

That, too, is strength.

*

As for what comes next, I’m not sure. I’m 33 now, and I know that I’ll never do anything as well as I played tennis. But that’s fine.

I still deal with my anxiety on a daily basis. I still take medication daily. It’s still in my mind daily. There are days that go by where I’ll think to myself, at night, when I’m going to bed: Hey, I didn’t think about it once today. And that means I had a really good day.

Those are the victories, for me.

But there is no tournament to win for mental health. There are no quarterfinals, or semifinals, or finals. I will not be ending this piece with a sports metaphor.

Because sports end in a result. And life keeps going.

Mine, I hope, is just getting started.

Hugo Jr. · 14 Setembro 2015

Are You Good Enough to Be a Tennis Line Judge?

Ghelthon · 21 Setembro 2015

Calls da Asderaki na final do US Open:

Não pude ver a final, e estou abismado. Não vejo ténis assim há tanto tempo quanto isso, mas acho que nunca vi um chair umpire fazer tantas calls "à primeira" (ou seja, sem esperar pelos juízes de linha). Top.

Rōnin · 23 Setembro 2015

os fiscais-de-linha do lado direito dela também fizeram um bom trabalho...

Peplin · 24 Setembro 2015

Alterações para 2016:

- Menos jogadores no qualifying dos ATP 250. Em vez de 32, cada torneio vai ter disponível na fase de qualificação apenas 16 vagas – 14 entradas diretas e mais dois wildcards.

- A inscrição no qualifying é feita três semanas antes (vale também para os ATP 500 e Masters 1000) e os jogadores que se inscreverem em vários torneios terão que eleger prioridades (1.ª, 2.ª, 3.ª opção).

- Todos os qualifiers têm direito a alojamento, independentemente do tamanho da prova, assim como o lucky loser.

- Aumento dos prémios monetários: o jogador que perder na última ronda da fase de qualificação vai receber 45 por cento do prémio monetário da primeira ronda do quadro principal e o que perder na ronda inaugural do qualifying recebe 22,5 por cento.

- Todos os jogadores inscritos no qualifying vão ter direito a uma credencial para poderem usufruir dos courts de treino e terem direito a outras facilidades durante toda a semana.

- Tanto os torneios ATP, bem como os Challengers, ficam obrigados a disponibilizar um ginásio devidamente equipado, seja no complexo ou no hotel.

- É exigido aos jogadores a apresentação de um atestado médico.

- Cada prova tem de ter um desfibrilador disponível a menos de três minutos de distância do court onde o encontro se está a disputar.

- Em cima da mesa nas reuniões entre a ATP e o Conselho de Jogadores, que têm vindo a ser realizadas desde Wimbledon, esteve também o assunto “mau comportamento em court” e, quando a isso, a ATP é clara: não há espaço para “conduta contrária à integridade do jogo, comentários públicos contra uma pessoa, grupo de pessoas, torneio, patrocinadores e outros jogadores ou responsáveis da ATP”.

Lleyton · 26 Setembro 2015

E vai haver tie-break no 5º set da taça Davis :(

Liedson · 30 Setembro 2015

Não sei se é aqui que deva de postar esta noticia, mas aqui vai:

Citação do jornal "A Bola" online

Tenistas portugueses aliciados para perderem jogos

O diário desportivo Marca deu esta semana a conhecer o escândalo das apostas no ténis em Espanha e alguns jogadores portugueses, nomeadamente Frederico Gil, Frederico Silva, Maria João Koehler, Gonçalo Falcão e Rui Machado, foram abordados para perderem jogos.

No caso de Frederico Gil falou-se de uma verba a rondar os 300 mil euros.

«Em 2010 recebi uma mensagem no facebook a oferecer-me dinheiro para perder na 1.ª ronda do Challenger de Roma com Alessio Di Mauro, que mais tarde foi apanhado no escândalo das apostas», contou Frederico Gil, em declarações reproduzidas por A BOLA.

«Queriam acertar resultados, obviamente respondi que não estava interessado. Foi sempre pelo facebook, com perfis falsos», explica a A BOLA Frederico Silva, 283.º do ranking ATP.

«Passou-se sempre em futures. Uma vez ofereceram entre 10 e 15 mil euros. Bloqueei o perfil. A última vez que isto aconteceu foi em abril, antes do Estoril Open», ressalvou.

joao86 · 3 Novembro 2015

Excelente entrevista que o Frederico Marques deu ao Record a falar sobre a próxima época, denota muito do que é o seu empenho e ambição. Da entrevista destaco as frases mais importantes:

"(Na pré-época) Vamos dar prioridade à intensidade do treino em vez de disputar set's, daí termos planeado treinarmos com o Nadal em Maiorca"

"Queremos reduzir o número de 250's e centralizar o foco nos 500 e Masters 1000, além dos Grand Slam."

"Estamos a apontar para que o Carlos Costa nos acompanhe durante 10 semanas. Vai estar com o Haas até Wimbledon e depois a situação será analisada."

"O João tem nível para top-20".

O Frederico Marques ainda não falhou sempre que traçou potencial para o João.

Jone Sampaoli · 3 Novembro 2015

Eu há uns tempos disse que ele tinha potencial para top-30, não me lembro em que tópico, e está cada vez mais lá perto. Top-20 já acho difícil, mas o Frederico sabe melhor que eu. Sabe tão bem ver um tenista nosso a este nível. Espero que ainda o consigamos ver a ir longe num Masters ou Grand Slam. Vencer um é praticamente impossível, mas com sorte no sorteio (algo que nunca acontece) não seria impossível vê-lo chegar a uns quartos de um GS, particularmente os de hard court onde se dá bem.

Hugo Jr. · 3 Novembro 2015

Por acaso com um bom sorteio estou a vê-lo a passar 3 ou 4 rondas já daqui a uns meses no Open da Austrália, acho que é o slam onde tem mais probabilidades de o fazer

Descartes · 3 Novembro 2015

Ele para já tem que se preocupar em defender a 3ª ronda na Austrália. Um lugar como CS seria uma boa ajuda. e depois é apostar em resultados decentes em Indian Wells e Miami onde tem muitos pontos a ganhar.

bobzz · 3 Novembro 2015

A partir de que ranking é que os masters são obrigatórios? 30?

Não sei se ele se devia meter nisso para já, o ranking dele vai-lhe permitir ser sempre CS em 250 e ocasionalmente até levar um bye.

Quanto aos GSs, é aproveitar se eventualmente conseguir o estatuto de CS para se tentar meter nos 16avos, o que já é bem bom.

Resumindo, é aproveitar ainda não estar no cut-off dos masters para consolidar a posição à custa dos que já lá vão estar e não vão conseguir manter o estatuto. E depois para o ano logo se vê em que pé ele está.

Editado 3 Novembro 2015 por bobzz

Descartes · 3 Novembro 2015

Os Masters (tal como os Grand Slam) são obrigatórios para todos os que entram no cut-off.

Tu estás a fazer confusão com os ATP 500. Para esses é que há uma regra específica. Todos os tenistas que terminem o ano no Top 30 são obrigados a fazer 4 torneios de categoria 500 sendo um deles obrigatoriamente depois do US Open. Destes é que o João ainda se pode safar.

Quanto aos Masters, e tomando como exemplo a época que agora está a terminar, o João só ficou de fora do cut-off em Madrid (e foi à qualificação) e agora em Paris. Os outros 6 teve que os jogar obrigatoriamente (Monte Carlo tem um estatuto próprio e, embora sendo Masters não obriga ao cumprimento destas regras).

bobzz · 3 Novembro 2015

Não era bem só isso que queria dizer. Mas pronto, é não ir a 500's :mrgreen: ele precisa do mais possível dos pontos que lá consegue. Quantos mais torneios poder ter desses a contar melhor, enquanto os amigos da frente dele têm de levar só com uns 2 que contem para o ranking.

O que eu tambem queria dizer não era que ele não fosse aos torneios, mas, que a haver qualquer objectivo específico para certas alturas da epoca, que não seja um master e sejam umas semanitas de 250, onde ele faça um bom número de bons resultados como os tem agora.

Editado 3 Novembro 2015 por bobzz

joao86 · 3 Novembro 2015

A partir de que ranking é que os masters são obrigatórios? 30?

Não sei se ele se devia meter nisso para já, o ranking dele vai-lhe permitir ser sempre CS em 250 e ocasionalmente até levar um bye.

Quanto aos GSs, é aproveitar se eventualmente conseguir o estatuto de CS para se tentar meter nos 16avos, o que já é bem bom.

Resumindo, é aproveitar ainda não estar no cut-off dos masters para consolidar a posição à custa dos que já lá vão estar e não vão conseguir manter o estatuto. E depois para o ano logo se vê em que pé ele está.

O Sousa só consegue somar pontos em 250 se fizer final, praticamente. Tem o torneio de Gstaad a contar (45 pontos) porque não foi a Paris, o que para o ano provavelmente fará (e aí Gstaad salta fora). Basicamente só pode somar pontos em torneios de 500's para cima. Não lhe adianta andar a encher o calendário para fazer meias-finais ou quartos-de-final. O que o Fred Marques pensa faz todo o sentido e já há muito que é defendido por aqui no fórum.

4/5 bons torneios em 250 já lhe enchem o espaço no ranking.

Editado 3 Novembro 2015 por joao86

bobzz · 3 Novembro 2015

Eu estou a partir do ponto de vista, pessoal é claro, que se ele quiser fazer a vida dele em 500s está aqui está de volta ao lugar 50 sem qualquer dificuldade. Assim, para mim faz mais sentido deixar esses de lado e ter lugar para mais uns 250 a somar pontos, em que ele consegue garantir pelo menos 90 pontos na quantidade de torneios que ele quiser (para ele hoje em dia isso é mais ou menos fácil, felizmente).

Se acham que ele consegue ir buscar os pontos que tem ganho nos 250 aos 500, tudo muito bem.

Eu cá não acho, e por isso é que penso que ele devia aproveitar a posição que tem agora no ranking, que para mim é óptima porque lhe permite fazer aquilo que eu disse atrás ao invés de ter forçisamente de ir pelo caminho dos 500, para se manter por lá e não dar dois passos atrás.

Para mim isto é bem claro. Ele com mais 3 torneios 500 onde fizesse 45 pontos em todos, e já tou a puxar, tinha neste momento menos 255 pontos do que o que tem agora, o que o mandava para os 45os.

joao86 · 3 Novembro 2015

Eu estou a partir do ponto de vista, pessoal é claro, que se ele quiser fazer a vida dele em 500s está aqui está de volta ao lugar 50 sem qualquer dificuldade. Assim, para mim faz mais sentido deixar esses de lado e ter lugar para mais uns 250 a somar pontos, em que ele consegue garantir pelo menos 90 pontos na quantidade de torneios que ele quiser (para ele hoje em dia isso é mais ou menos fácil, felizmente).

Se acham que ele consegue ir buscar os pontos que tem ganho nos 250 aos 500, tudo muito bem.

Eu cá não acho, e por isso é que penso que ele devia aproveitar a posição que tem agora no ranking, que para mim é óptima porque lhe permite fazer aquilo que eu disse atrás ao invés de ter forçisamente de ir pelo caminho dos 500, para se manter por lá e não dar dois passos atrás.

Para mim isto é bem claro. Ele com mais 3 torneios 500 onde fizesse 45 pontos em todos, e já tou a puxar, tinha neste momento menos 255 pontos do que o que tem agora, o que o mandava para os 45os.

A questão não é essa. A questão não é ele conseguir manter. É que o João só vai subir decentemente no ranking agora se estiver bem nos grandes torneios. E como ele é ambicioso, faz todo o sentido fazer isso.

Rafinha · 7 Novembro 2015

THE CURIOUS CASE OF FERNANDO VERDASCO’S ODDS

Fernando Verdasco has won $12,231,985 in his entire career so far.

We can assume that he has actually earned double that, considering the money he got from sponsors.

With a Career High ranking of #7, actually still inside the top 50, he would be one of last players you could associate to match fixing.

Of course there is not any proof: no SMS, no Skype conversations, no money transactions etc… so I would let the odds speak. As I wrote here we need more and more media to underline suspicious matches, otherwise the Tennis Integrity Unit will just keep catching little fishes.

First of all, for the audience not used to the gambling world, you have to know that generally bookmakers allows bigger bets in the proximity of the event start. They do this because they can always make mistakes when they put early odds but when the match is about to start the market is supposed to be stable and less risky for them.

Another important factor is this: if a player is supposed to win a match, he is always supposed to win the first set also. Money Line (winner of the match) odds and 1st set odds are always very similar, but the 1st set odds are closer because on the distance of one set the difference between two players is minor.

The final thing to remember, for those unfamiliar with gambling: the line moves based on how the match is being bet. If most of the money is coming in on one player, his odds will get lower. The bookies don’t make money based on predicting who wins the match or most fans predicting wrong. They want every match to be bet 50/50. That way they always win.

Last but not least, if you don’t consider exchange markets as Betfair, one of the biggest bookmakers online is surely Pinnacle Sports, which allows great limits on tennis betting.

During the last US Open we could see very strange odds in the first round match of Tommy Haas vs Fernando Verdasco.

As you can see below, Fernando Verdasco was the clear favorite of the match, with odds about 1.30 (77% probability of winning the match).

So you would expect to see odds like 1.4 (71%) for Fernando Verdasco to win the first set.

And in fact all bookmakers priced about 1.4 that set BUT look at odds on Pinnacle Sports!

Why did someone take huge bets on 1st set Haas? And look when it did happen, just a few minutes before the match started!

Verdasco lost set 1.

OK, this could have been just a coincidence. After all, it only takes someone very confident against Haas and with money to spend to make a huge bet like that.

After the US Open, Verdasco competed at ATP Metz. In the first round he faced Alexander Zverev.

Average odds before match start were 1.80.

Also here you could see a quick increase of Money Line odds for Verdasco’s price in the match proximity. This happened because when bookmakers receive big bets on set 1 they tend to adjust also Money Line odds.

Did they receive big bets on set 1 for Alexander Zverev? Oh yes! Look at the price, Verdasco to win set 1 moved to 2.1. He was the favorite to win the match but not to win set 1!

And when did the bets have to have been placed? Again, a few minutes before the match started, when bigger bets are allowed.

Verdasco lost set 1.

Next match in the same tournament was against Gilles Muller.

Again, a few minutes before the match started Verdasco’s price suddenly increased.

Verdasco lost the first set and the match.

In the same tournament he also played doubles and…again we have a big increase of his price. The match started with 50/50 odds and ended like this:

Watching the match you could see cases of Verdasco apparently NOT hitting the ball (he let the ball bounce twice when it seemed he could have easily hit) in a crucial point during first set tiebreak.

Verdasco lost the match.

After France he moved to Japan and in Tokyo we could notice a HUGE increase of his price in doubles.

Richard Gasquet/Fernando Verdasco were initially priced at average 2.4 odds (41% probability to win the match) and they moved to 7.7 (13%!) as if they had almost no chance against Juan Sebastian Cabal/Robert Farah.

Verdasco lost the match.

Last but not least, he played in Valencia against Guillermo Garcia-Lopez.

Look at the odds movement. The price was stable at around 1.7 until 30 minutes before the match started. From this moment someone started taking big bets on Garcia-Lopez and Verdasco’s price reached 2.11 when match started.

This means that someone decided in the last 30 minutes that the probability of Verdasco winning the match had to move from 58% to 47%.

Same behavior for set 1 odds.

Verdasco lost set 1 and the match.

I reported only the most blatant matches but there are others that are quite similar even if with smaller odds movement but always with same outcome.

Again, I must reiterate that all of these do not amount to proof and that these are not accusations. Rather, these are betting patterns that are usually associated with match-fixing. I cannot prove it, but hopefully someone in tennis with the power and the ability will (or already has) to make sure that no match-fixing is going on.

And if it is, we hope that it involving a player of Verdasco’s caliber and fame won’t stop them from doing the right thing.

http://lastwordonsports.com/2015/11/07/curious-case-fernando-verdascos-odds/