MTO's

I may have called Nadal's MTO too critically today. He turned out to have a problem, but he has taken many dubious ones, and he is not alone.

Would it not be a better rule to say that the penalty of any MTO regardless of circumstances is to forfeit upto and including the taker's next service game? Then there is no risk or perceived risk of tactics and tennis reflects what it is, a game of fitness to play and skill? If you are unfit for any reason the bad luck should remain where it falls.

They should only be taken at the end of sets imo. The disruption will not affect the two players too much

barrystar wrote:Would it not be a better rule to say that the penalty of any MTO regardless of circumstances is to forfeit upto and including the taker's next service game?

I do not know; that sounds quite rough.  By and large, you should earn the points you win.  Docking a player a point here or there is fine, but the whole game?  As much as I hate tactical MTOs, at the end of the day I think I am willing to live with them.

I couldn't watch the match today except for part of the last set. It seems nonetheless a bizarre coincidence that Nadal has once more got injured in a key moment of the match and thus felt the need to call yet another MTO. It's either: Nadal will never lose when he's injury free or.....ops he did it again.

In the specific instance this morning at AO, Wawrinka was visibly upset because Ramos did not make any announcements or tell him what was going on.

ATP 2013 Rule Book has this (Section 7.25.D)…

D.Medical Time-Out
The following are examples of announcements to be made when there is a medical time-out:
When the chair umpire decides to call for the physiotherapist, the chair umpire shall announce:
“The physiotherapist has been called to the court.”
After a three (3) minute time-out is authorized, the chair umpire should make the public announcement of:
“Mr..________________is now receiving a medical time-out.”
The following announcements are to be made privately to the physiotherapist and both players/teams:
“Two (2) minutes remaining” “One (1) minute remaining”
136
137
VII. THE COMPETITION
“Thirty (30) seconds remaining” “Treatment complete”
“Time” (public)
Once the “Treatment complete” notice has been given to the physiotherapist and both players/teams, then if needed, the player should be given the time neces- sary to put on socks and shoes before “Time” is called.
If there is no play after an additional thirty (30) seconds, the delay is penalized in accordance with the Point Penalty Schedule.

None of this seems to have been followed.

From the ITF version…

c. Medical Time-Out
A Medical Time-Out is allowed by the Referee in consultation with the Grand Slam Supervisor or Chair Umpire when the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer has evaluated the player and has determined that additional time for medical treatment is required. The Medical Time-Out takes place during a change over or set break, unless the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer determines that the player has developed an acute medical condition that requires immediate medical treatment.
The Medical Time-Out begins when the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer is ready to start treatment. At the discretion of the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer, treatment during a Medical Time-Out may take place off-court, and may proceed in conjunction with the Tournament Doctor. *
The Medical Time-Out is limited to three (3) minutes of treatment.
A player is allowed one (1) Medical Time-Out for each distinct treatable medical condition. All clinical manifestations of heat illness shall be considered as one (1) treatable medical condition. All treatable musculoskeletal injuries that manifest as part of a kinetic chain continuum shall be considered as one (1) treatable medical condition.
17
Muscle Cramping: A player may receive treatment for muscle cramping only during the time allotted for change of ends and/or set breaks. Players may not receive a Medical Time-Out for muscle cramping.
In cases where there is doubt about whether the player suffers from an acute medical condition, non-acute medical condition inclusive of muscle cramping, or non-treatable medical condition, the decision of the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer, in conjunction with the Tournament Doctor, if appropriate, is final. If the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer believes that the player has heat illness, and if muscle cramping is one of the manifestations of heat illness, then the muscle cramping may only be treated as part of the recommended treatment by the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer for the heat illness condition.
Note:
A player who has stopped play by claiming an acute medical condition, but is determined by the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer and/or Tournament Doctor to have muscle cramping, shall be ordered by the Chair Umpire to resume play immediately.
If the player cannot continue playing due to severe muscle cramping, as determined by the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer and/or Tournament Doctor, he/she may forfeit the point(s)/game(s) needed to get to a change of ends or set-break in order to receive treatment. There may be a total of two (2) full change of ends treatments for muscle cramping in a match, not necessarily consecutive.
If it is determined by the Chair Umpire or Referee in consultation with the Grand Slam Supervisor that gamesmanship was involved, then a Code Violation for Unsportsmanlike Conduct could be issued.
A total of two (2) consecutive Medical Time-Outs may be allowed by the Referee in consultation with the Grand Slam Supervisor or Chair Umpire for the special circumstance in which the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer determines that the player has developed at least two (2) distinct acute and treatable medical conditions. This may include: a medical illness in conjunction with a musculoskeletal injury; two or more acute and distinct musculoskeletal injuries. In such cases, the Physiotherapist/Athletic Trainer will perform a medical evaluation for the two or more treatable medical conditions during a single evaluation, and may then determine that two consecutive Medical Time-Outs are required.

Players are always getting criticised for taking MTOs and then playing better after them. But that's the point of MTOs!
Especially in a final, you want both players to be able to play, so I didn't have any problem with Rafa's today or Djokovic's in the 2012 USO.
I don't know if anyone follows Challengers much here, but I get the impression that it is quite common there for the experienced pros there to call for a nice massage at crucial stages of a match, letting their less experienced opponents tense up. So maybe a fairly small penalty of a point or two would make someone consider if they really need it.

summerblues wrote:

barrystar wrote:Would it not be a better rule to say that the penalty of any MTO regardless of circumstances is to forfeit upto and including the taker's next service game?

I do not know; that sounds quite rough.  By and large, you should earn the points you win.  Docking a player a point here or there is fine, but the whole game?  As much as I hate tactical MTOs, at the end of the day I think I am willing to live with them.

You have got to ask which is more fair, a system which is abused by players who snuff out their opponent's momentum, or one which ensures no cheating and that the disadvantage of injury stays where it falls as well as reinforcing that an MTO should be an indulgence?

Maybe they could have a rule similar to snooker (albeit in snooker it has a different purpose). If there's anything that could affect your play you must state it before the match begins.

The Special Juan wrote:Maybe they could have a rule similar to snooker (albeit in snooker it has a different purpose).  If there's anything that could affect your play you must state it before the match begins.

But to what end, then what?

If you've stated it before the match then you can take a MTO unpunished. Else, unless you suffer a glaringly obvious injury (e.g. DelPo's nosebleed in IW last year), something should be done, but I'm not sure what.

Nadal only took a medical time out as courtesy to the crowd and paying viewers who were hoping for an exciting match. After the injury if he was just thinking of himself he should have retired.

The Special Juan wrote:If you've stated it before the match then you can take a MTO unpunished.  Else, unless you suffer a glaringly obvious injury (e.g. DelPo's nosebleed in IW last year), something should be done, but I'm not sure what.

What would stop someone like Nadal having a list as long as his no doubt injured arm?

djlovesyou wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:If you've stated it before the match then you can take a MTO unpunished.  Else, unless you suffer a glaringly obvious injury (e.g. DelPo's nosebleed in IW last year), something should be done, but I'm not sure what.

What would stop someone like Nadal having a list as long as his no doubt injured arm?

I'm not sure but if someone is saying they're injured before every single match that would be classed as highly suspicious. I guess my idea can't be enforced.

Ramos should be roasted for his poor procedural performance...he allowed everyone to get worked up resulting in the disgraceful scene of a 13 time slam winner being booed back onto court in the tournaments showcase final because no-one knew what was going on. Actually, I'm pretty sure he would have got a roasting for it.

Injury is a part of sport, you can't delay the MTO being taken or the player risks further long term damage by playing on. Likewise, it might force them to retire...which 20,000 paying fans don't want. I agree that's probably why Nadal probably took the MTO to play on for the organisers and paying crowd. As soon as the spasm struck in earnest he would have known the match was all but over but he likely felt obliged to give the crowd a match and allow Wawrinka to cross the finish line properly.

I don't see how you can realistically change the MTO situation, MTOs are there to help players...yes they could be abused but the flip side of not being able to take them is worse for the ATP tour as a whole.

There is a fine balance between a healthy set of tennis players and abuse of care provided on court. A possible Vulcan mind-meld could remove misperceptions and expose deceit, if any was involved. Short of such technology, it is very hard (Can Benedict Cumberbatch/Smaug help?).

Even though Polygraph tests can be faked, should there be a one minute polygraph test added prior to every MTO, in order to avoid wanton abuse?

djlovesyou wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:If you've stated it before the match then you can take a MTO unpunished.  Else, unless you suffer a glaringly obvious injury (e.g. DelPo's nosebleed in IW last year), something should be done, but I'm not sure what.

What would stop someone like Nadal having a list as long as his no doubt injured arm?

No doubt injured arm   

Very good.

What about this then, you call a time out, a medical staff assesses you, if they think its clear not much is wrong, then they dock you the next 2 games or something. Irespective of past times, Nadals one in this match was fairly clearly genuine, hes lost plently of times not injured, but people of course cherry pick the times he lost looking in discomfort. You gotta rememebr like Monfils, hes quite injury prone, Gaels lost whilst injured a lot too, its just not as high profile

Nadal has been dogged by this controversy all his career. He knows how to address it. If the spasms started during warm-up, it could have helped to have them looked at then.

YvonneT wrote:but I get the impression that it is quite common there for the experienced pros there to call for a nice massage at crucial stages of a match, letting their less experienced opponents tense up. So maybe a fairly small penalty of a point or two would make someone consider if they really need it.

The spectator point of view may differ from officials, but determination of improper behavior and loss of points is a tough rule. Both ATP and ITF cover some scenarios, but perhaps not all.

So far as Nadal is concerned, it seemed to be a case of "the boy who cries wolf." I would love to know if there is a source for statistics on the number of medical time outs taken by players but I would be fairly confident that if Wawrinka had taken one he would not have been booed.

.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2013/01/injury-timeouts-tennis

[put www before the above link]

I thought that the above article had some interesting ideas.

Forfeit a point for an MTO. That's not a bad idea.

MTO only available when the injured player is due to serve next.

Yes, I think those ideas are worth looking at.

hawkeye wrote:Nadal only took a medical time out as courtesy to the crowd and paying viewers who were hoping for an exciting match. After the injury if he was just thinking of himself he should have retired.

The problem is Nadal abusing MTO's in the past makes people suspect even when he takes one genuine, today might have been a genuine one but in the past he is one of those who has abused a lot.

Sorry for Rafa today, but Stan deserved to win the title as he played the better 7 matches with more tougher opponents on his side of the draw.

Alas its good to see some new face as a GS champ, this can inspire him to take challenge against the top dogs to the next level.

Lionel Hutz wrote:So far as Nadal is concerned, it seemed to be a case of "the boy who cries wolf." I would love to know if there is a source for statistics on the number of medical time outs taken by players

That is exactly how I see it.  As far as I can tell, Nadal has abused MTOs so many times in the past that he should accept that even if he has a genuine medical condition, people have to initially assume he is cheating yet again.

That said, it would be very interesting to see stats on the MTOs taken by players - preferably both the count and timing of them.  I am obviously not a fan of Nadal's and - who knows - maybe I am just biased and the numbers would not support my feel that he is using them "strategically".

I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Agree today was a good use of MTO; hence the boy who cries wolf reference.

socal1976 wrote:I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Find me one Federer fan (on this forum) who thinks yesterday's MTO wasn't genuine.
No doubt, if it was Fed who battled through and, say, SB creating a thread on how unselfish Fed was, you'd be right up there supporting that, right socal?   Or would perhaps few choice metaphors be issuing from socal's box of put-downs?

Trouble is they can't make rules based on motive, so a procedure and time is allowed.

Then they don't follow it.

The effect on the opponent is understood by the pros. I remember Federer making a big thing of apologising to Mallisse after he took an MTO to get his back looked at in 2012. It was all done at change of ends and inside the time allowance, but he still apologised for the inconvenience to his opponent.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Find me one Federer fan (on this forum) who thinks yesterday's MTO wasn't genuine.
No doubt, if it was Fed who battled through and, say, SB creating a thread on how unselfish Fed was, you'd be right up there supporting that, right socal?   Or would perhaps few choice metaphors be issuing from socal's box of put-downs?

Have you ever heard me say anything about Federer taking an MTO? Being a giant douche in an interview yes, not being the GOAT, guilty as charged. But I could care less about his MTOs and have never mentioned it in a negative light except maybe pointing out that when Fed does it that people don't seem to have a problem with it and view it as a crime against nature.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Find me one Federer fan (on this forum) who thinks yesterday's MTO wasn't genuine.
No doubt, if it was Fed who battled through and, say, SB creating a thread on how unselfish Fed was, you'd be right up there supporting that, right socal?   Or would perhaps few choice metaphors be issuing from socal's box of put-downs?

Hasn't SB basically said he is unsure whether he was injured and suspects it was all a masterplan to knock Stan out of his stride (Nadal down by a set and a break basically decided he was certain to lose and so thought serving at 80mph and barely moving was the way to turn the match around).

Born Slippy wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Find me one Federer fan (on this forum) who thinks yesterday's MTO wasn't genuine.
No doubt, if it was Fed who battled through and, say, SB creating a thread on how unselfish Fed was, you'd be right up there supporting that, right socal?   Or would perhaps few choice metaphors be issuing from socal's box of put-downs?

Hasn't SB basically said he is unsure whether he was injured and suspects it was all a masterplan to knock Stan out of his stride (Nadal down by a set and a break basically decided he was certain to lose and so thought serving at 80mph and barely moving was the way to turn the match around).

Precisely, it is funny I get accused of paranoia. Clearly on the gun it showed that he was serving at WTA second serve speed, supposedly this was part of his masterplan to fool everyone. Just like his master plan to miss slams, masters, and millions in prize and appearance fees in order to pretend that he gets injured. I have always found this to be one of the more bizarre accusations leveled at the GOAT slayer.

Born Slippy wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Find me one Federer fan (on this forum) who thinks yesterday's MTO wasn't genuine.
No doubt, if it was Fed who battled through and, say, SB creating a thread on how unselfish Fed was, you'd be right up there supporting that, right socal?   Or would perhaps few choice metaphors be issuing from socal's box of put-downs?

Hasn't SB basically said he is unsure whether he was injured and suspects it was all a masterplan to knock Stan out of his stride (Nadal down by a set and a break basically decided he was certain to lose and so thought serving at 80mph and barely moving was the way to turn the match around).

 
No, SB agreed with socal that it was a 'good' i.e. correct use of MTO yesterday. SB can correct me if I'm wrong. I think he suggested that part of the reason the crowd booed Rafa was that they were suspicious, before the re-start, that it was tactical, given Rafa's past history of MTOs. Frew McMillan said the same thing, until after they re-started, at which point it was clear the injury was genuine.

socal1976 wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I think today was a perfect use of the MTO. The player that was winning before continued to win the match and Nadal after receiving some treatment and probably some pain killers was able to give the fans another 90 minutes or more of some quality tennis. What is wrong with that frankly I don't know. If he was unable to receive assistance he probably would have withdrawn. Is that any better for Stan or for the fans? I don't think so, I think it behooves the game to help the player try to find away to continue and not withdraw?

Nadal was clearly bothered for about 30 minutes or so till the pain killers kicked and he started playing a good match and gave it a go. It was not strategic unless you believe he served 20 or 30 miles an hour less on his serve in order to instigate a perfect ruse. If he took the MTO and right away was playing like a healthy Nadal then that is one thing. But by the radar gun and his movement it was obvious that he needed it. Federer fan's need to get over this Nadal injury conspiracy belief that they have. The guy is injury prone and this is pretty well documented it is not a dastardly plan to trick his opponents.

Find me one Federer fan (on this forum) who thinks yesterday's MTO wasn't genuine.
No doubt, if it was Fed who battled through and, say, SB creating a thread on how unselfish Fed was, you'd be right up there supporting that, right socal?   Or would perhaps few choice metaphors be issuing from socal's box of put-downs?

Hasn't SB basically said he is unsure whether he was injured and suspects it was all a masterplan to knock Stan out of his stride (Nadal down by a set and a break basically decided he was certain to lose and so thought serving at 80mph and barely moving was the way to turn the match around).

Precisely, it is funny I get accused of paranoia.

No-one's ever accused you of being paranoid. You're just being paranoid.

The little voice in my head has accused me of paranoia. Or that could be an alcohol induced stupor. Maybe I am just being paranoid.

socal1976 wrote:Just like his master plan to miss slams, masters, and millions in prize and appearance fees in order to pretend that he gets injured. I have always found this to be one of the more bizarre accusations leveled at the GOAT slayer.

I will look specifically at Masters, but we already looked at slams and there is a reasonable conclusion that missed slams were not detrimental to the GOAT slayer.

Do you think a multi-millionaire really cares for missing a few here and there?

laverfan wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Just like his master plan to miss slams, masters, and millions in prize and appearance fees in order to pretend that he gets injured. I have always found this to be one of the more bizarre accusations leveled at the GOAT slayer.

I will look specifically at Masters, but we already looked at slams and there is a reasonable conclusion that missed slams were not detrimental to the GOAT slayer.

Do you think a multi-millionaire really cares for missing a few here and there?

Yes rich people like money even though they have lots of it.

i dont remember that many mto´s in nadals career to be honest

how many?

I think hes played like 800 matches in 11 years and I dont think he has taken more than 5-6 MTOs

naxroy wrote:i dont remember that many mto´s in nadals career to be honest

how many?

I think hes played like 800 matches in 11 years and I dont think he has taken more than 5-6 MTOs

Did he not have 2 or 3 in this tournament. he calls the trainer on alot.

I'm not surprised the three minute rule is ignored - I mean it's three minutes!! I'm of the opinion that the spectacle at always take priority over the rulebook. This is not to say the rulebook should be thrown in the nearest river - Rules are there for a reason and shouldn't be senselessly abused, but I can't see a reason why adhering to a set timeframe should take precedence over the quality of the event. To this end I think the tour doctors have to become a lot more involved... Don't go into particulars, as medical privacy is a basic human right, but I don't think telling the umpire "Player X might need a little more treatment, but he's good to go" would go amiss.

naxroy wrote:i dont remember that many mto´s in nadals career to be honest

how many?

I think hes played like 800 matches in 11 years and I dont think he has taken more than 5-6 MTOs

 
Here's an article from 2011 referring to a few which arose at important times in his matches, I remember with particular dissatisfaction the MTO vs. Del Potro which definitely brought about a change in momentum:
http://anygivensurface.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/unfair-advantage-nadal-and-the-mto/
 
It's also not just MTO's which mean that he doesn't get the benefit of many doubts, it's general envelope-pushing with time taken between points and such like which are all of a piece, namely gamesmanship which is only a weak word for cheating.
 
Anyway, as I said, Nadal is not the only person and this post is not about him alone. I think it's absolutely crucial that there be a penalty for an MTO so that a player who takes one is clearly genuinely concerned about his health and not horsing around.  It's not possible to assess players for the genuineness of their injury, that would introduce a hopeless conflict into the role of a healthcare professional, much fairer for the player to know that the indulgence of an MTO comes at a certain pre-ascertained price.
 
Lydian's point doesn't address this at all - players should be able to call MTO's when they want, but there is no reason why they should not have incur a cost for an indulgence which everybody knows may disadvantage their opponent.  Sure, it's bad luck to need an MTO, but tennis is a game of fitness, and often a problem experienced in a match is a direct or indirect result of being overwhelmed by0 an opponent's play, and even if it's got nothing to do with the opponent it's much fairer that the bad luck falls where it lies in the first place, rather than MTO's being yet another tactical weapon in the cheating armoury of players who find the momentum going against them.  People talk about the disgrace of a 13-time slam champion being booed onto the Court after an MTO to which I have two responses: (a) he's won and deserves his own reputation; (b) if the price of the MTO had been 0-30 on his next service game, or a break, or some other such penalty of substance, there would have been no booing, everyone would have known that he meant it.  

What's not to like?

kingraf wrote:I'm not surprised the three minute rule is ignored - I mean it's three minutes!! I'm of the opinion that the spectacle at always take priority over the rulebook. This is not to say the rulebook should be thrown in the nearest river - Rules are there for a reason and shouldn't be senselessly abused, but I can't see a reason why adhering to a set  timeframe should take precedence over the quality of the event. To this end I think the tour doctors have to become a lot more involved... Don't go into particulars, as medical privacy is a basic human right, but I don't think telling the umpire "Player X might need a little more treatment, but he's good to go" would go amiss.

 
How is an event's quality improved when a player who senses the momentum goes against him fakes a strain and gets a nice relaxing massage and a chance to calm down whilst his opponent loses momentum?
 
There's got to be a balance, and it's not fair at the moment - players should have to 'buy' an MTO with a point deduction to ensure that they really mean it.  The spectacle continues and cheating is reduced.

Furthermore, the spectacle is clearly not the priority, the spectacle only exists because people believe they are watching a genuine contest, not an exhibition, and for that there need to be rules and a no-holes barred contest. You can't seek to adjust the rules or their application as you go along to preserve a spectacle. Sometimes bad things happen - that's all part of it too - but the worst thing of all for a spectacle is if the audience feels a player has been cheated. It leaves a ghastly taste in the mouth, I remember feeling very bad for Del Potro at Wimbledon 2011.

Then what's the point of an umpire? Surely everything really only needs a timer then? I've already said I'd much rather the doctor/physio communicate the severity of the issue, even if only in rough terms, to the umpire... I'm not saying allow players to MTO on demand - but I am saying given the choice I'd rather a serious injury gets properly looked at than play continues to "maintain momentum"... I've never paid to watch a player dismantle a hobbling player, nor do I ever plan to...

Not a fan of buying an MTO either to be bluntly honest, because you are creating situations where seriously injured players may forego treatment in a tight match and then really do themselves in.

Didnt DelPo take a timeout in that 2011 match as well? Or was he's case that much more convincing? Because he lost no doubt...

naxroy wrote:i dont remember that many mto´s in nadals career to be honest

how many?

I think hes played like 800 matches in 11 years and I dont think he has taken more than 5-6 MTOs

I think there are more than that.

Petzschner @W, Del Potro @W are the two I can recall. There may be one against Kendrick, but I will have to verify.

Nadal, adept at the fine arts of MTOs and forehands in equal measure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLVy77i7hxw

socal1976 wrote:

laverfan wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Just like his master plan to miss slams, masters, and millions in prize and appearance fees in order to pretend that he gets injured. I have always found this to be one of the more bizarre accusations leveled at the GOAT slayer.

I will look specifically at Masters, but we already looked at slams and there is a reasonable conclusion that missed slams were not detrimental to the GOAT slayer.

Do you think a multi-millionaire really cares for missing a few here and there?

Yes rich people like money even though they have lots of it.

That's not unconnected to how they got it in the first place.

kingraf wrote:Then what's the point of an umpire? Surely everything really only needs a timer then? I've already said I'd much rather the doctor/physio communicate the severity of the issue, even if only in rough terms, to the umpire... I'm not saying allow players to MTO on demand  - but I am saying given the choice I'd rather a serious injury gets properly looked at than play continues to "maintain momentum"... I've never paid to watch a player dismantle a hobbling player, nor do I ever plan to...

Not a fan of buying an MTO either to be bluntly honest, because you are creating situations where seriously injured players may forego treatment in a tight match and then really do themselves in.  

"It's for the umpire", that is one of the the cri's de coeur of cheats and their supporters. The fact is that if a player is prepared to cheat to the extent of faking an injury there is almost nothing that can be done by an umpire if there is a culture of responding to requests for treatment without question. An automatic penalty puts the judgment where it most fairly rests, with the player who has his own best interests at heart. If he puts short term gain first he has only himself to thank, and he is not forcing his opponent to give his judgement the benefit of the doubt and accept a psychological disadvantage.

It is a shame because Nadal has many qualities. I asked my son to watch his grace in defeat on Sunday, it is truly impressive. I just wish he could play it straight in play.

Will research a bit more later, but here is short list…

v Del Potro @ W 2011
v Petzschner @ W 2010
v Almagro @ USO 2009
v Federer @ MC 2008
v Federer @ Hamburg 2008
v Mathieu @RG 2006

PS: The one against Mathieu is also referred to as the Banana Incident as spdocofee's UTube link shows.

kingraf wrote:Didnt DelPo take a timeout in that 2011 match as well? Or was he's case that much more convincing? Because he lost no doubt...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQijqSdWKV0

You Decide.

The larger question vis-a-vis Nadal is this? Is he taking an MTO because he may be losing the match, or he does have a genuine medical condition because of which he is losing the said match?

laverfan wrote:

kingraf wrote:Didnt DelPo take a timeout in that 2011 match as well? Or was he's case that much more convincing? Because he lost no doubt...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQijqSdWKV0

You Decide.

Not to mention him faking injuries and missing months of the season in an intricate plan to deceive righteous federer fans.