MTO's

First topic message reminder :

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.

There are cheats in every sport. However the incidences of MTOs, never mind strategic MTOs are low. To bring in draconian changes to weed out a few cheats is going to massively undermine the vast majority of players who need the MTO for genuine injury.

Please point us...to speak to LKs question...to all the strategic MTOs going on?

Djokovic against Murray during the USO final is the only one I can think of.

My comment a few days back was about MTOs on the Challenger tour - and reading blogs about those tournaments, "tactical" MTOs do seem to occur frequently. I guess some of that is Challengers have the juxtaposition of wily old vets and inexperienced young players.

The thing is umpires are not in a position to determine whether a player needs the MTO or not, and no healthcare professional is going to categorically state that a player is faking without an extensive assessment.

I like barrystar's idea - not for treatment that fits in the changeovers or end of sets, but for true time-outs, make the player buy it with a point or two. Rough on a player who turns his ankle during a final set tie-break but otherwise seems fair enough.

Even that USO final, Djokovic did have an issue with his leg/thigh but it was probably just cramp (he was stretching it a lot in the few games before). Again, you don't want him to be unable to compete in the last game - but under barrystar's proposal, he would have had the choice of a MTO and starting from 30-0, or of fitting a quick massage into the changeover. Presumably, he would have managed with the latter.

lydian wrote:There are cheats in every sport. However the incidences of MTOs, never mind strategic MTOs are low. To bring in draconian changes to weed out a few cheats is going to massively undermine the vast majority of players who need the MTO for genuine injury.

Please point us...to speak to LKs question...to all the strategic MTOs going on?

Yep, where is this plague of strategic MTOs that keeps getting talked about but no real incidents and proof is ever mentioned it is just assumed that Djokovic and Nadal aren't hurt when they take an MTO until proven otherwise and that this is some terrible problem in the game. As you pointed out MTOs are not that common and the incidence of strategic MTOs are probably even less common. To me people simply assume that certain players abuse MTOs with really no evidence that they are. It is about reading someone's intent based on your subjective analysis of that person and his alleged track record. I know lets just make the player take a lie detector test prior to the MTO just to be sure. If there were MTOs in every other match and a plague of dubious looking ones that is one thing. But really outside a few federer fans with their suspicions of Djoko and Nadal there really isn't anyone calling for widespread change. Do some players possibly take strategic MTOs on occassion, sure anything can and probably does happen. Is it a major issue that requires punishing everyone to eradicate, no it is not.

YvonneT wrote:My comment a few days back was about MTOs on the Challenger tour - and reading blogs about those tournaments, "tactical" MTOs do seem to occur frequently.

It would seem that lydian and socal at least, maybe others, don't believe that to be true.

I should confess the limitation of my knowledge here - I only watch a few challengers myself so much is hearsay plus I have no medical training. But an MTO to have a leg massage just before your opponent serves to stay in a set, with no obvious impediment after, does seem suspicious.

Maybe we have a different view here in when an MTO should be taken - to me it's for an issue that absolutely needs to be addressed, perhaps sometimes it's used for an issue that it's desirable for the player to have addressed.

JuliusHMarx wrote:If it's all about the show and the fans, then if you're struggling mentally, you should be allowed MTO to consult your coach or even a sports psychologist. Logically it makes sense to allow this, because otherwise a mental capitulation could lead from a great 7-6 first set to a 6-1, 6-2 non-event in the next 2 sets, and the fans don't get their money's worth.
If, on the other hand, mental toughness is part of the game, surely physical toughness should be as well.
Why differentiate between the two?

Very good comment. The problem with an MTO is that one person's problem comes to cause problems for the opponent. So I recommend a one point deduction for a non-acute MTO and they can only be taken at the beginning of the players serve. Because it is an elective MTO in a way. An acute injury is different. If somebody gets a bad cut or something, there should be no deduction.

By the way, the fact that so many people take MTO's is proof of the tactical value of it. This is rarely a case of "take an MTO or retire". Its "take an MTO or play-on sub-par." I mean in how many other sports do players stop after an hour and get a massage.

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

I have a minor objection to the 1.6% calculation. If it is calculated as a percentage of total points played, it looks even smaller.

To me (and echoing Barrystar), the strategic valuation of such MTOs is lost in this statistical number. For example, I would suggest we look at how many of MTOs occur in a final, per player, per SF, per QF, etc. IMHO, the closer a player is to the trophy, the more important these become. Qualitatively, the scoreline before and after the MTO should also be factored in.

If you consider Federer, with 5 in 1148 matches, it makes such a calculation not have much value.

However the closer they are to the title, the more liekly it is that they will carry an injury that will require a MTO.
Given Nadals fitness problems, that number of MTO's is nowhere near significant enough, given the sample size. Its the exact counter to the cherry picking that goes om.

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

Now we have heard it all 13 MTOs over a decade on tour is the reason we should change the rule and punish the innocent as well as the guilty. This is all because Nadal beats their hero Federer and it can't be because he is just better. It has to be because of the time he takes between points, the MTOs, the coaching, the slow courts, the racquets, the strings, the balls, global warming, and the bubonic plague.

No, the reason behind changing the rule has nothing to do with Nadal or Federer as far as I'm concerned. Maybe read some of the previous posts to see the overall argument.

falzy21 wrote:However the closer they are to the title, the more liekly it is that they will carry an injury that will require a MTO.

Yes, and tournaments progress, the significance of MTOs should be factored in. As a player goes further in a tourney, fitness becomes that much more important. Hence my argument to tie it to the round of a Tennis tournament, the opponent, etc.

falzy21 wrote:Given Nadals fitness problems, that number of MTO's is nowhere near significant enough, given the sample size. Its the exact counter to the cherry picking that goes om.

1. What is considered a significant number? One MTO per year, per slam, per match, per career, per surface?
2. In Nadal's specific case, he has retired from matches, IIRC, 7 times in his career. The argument that one should not retire, because The Show Must Go On has also been made on this thread. If a player cannot move, is it really a show that fans want? . Recall Gasquet v Hewitt @USO 2006, fifth set MPs.

Statistically its VERY hard to say what a statistically significant number is, it would depend on the distribution, and whether than many career mto's is out of the ordinary given his fitness issues. My guess is that isnt soo unusual as to be dodgy.

In terms of the significance of a time out, well thats also hard, it cant just be what round theyre playing in, it needs to be the score, the momentum of the match, you also have to account for that people do just get genuinely injured in big matches sometimes.
For what its worth ive never seen Nadal retire injured or take a MTO when he didnt look impaired, I believe ive seen most of the instances quoted

falzy21 wrote:Statistically its VERY hard to say what a statistically significant number is, it would depend on the distribution, and whether than many career mto's is out of the ordinary given his fitness issues. My guess is that isnt soo unusual as to be dodgy.

Posters on v2 (as evidenced by this thread) have a category of dodgy/not dodgy based on their opinion.

falzy21 wrote:In terms of the significance of a time out, well thats also hard, it cant just be what round theyre playing in, it needs to be the score, the momentum of the match, you also have to account for that people do just get genuinely injured in big matches sometimes.
For what its worth ive never seen Nadal retire injured or take a MTO when he didnt look impaired, I believe ive seen most of the instances quoted

There would be no reason to retire otherwise. Looking impaired is again an opinion and is a very contentious debate.

Its statistics laver, significance is usually also based on what people perceive.
Anyway the point is, its a tough argument to suggest that Nadal is acting suspiciously on his time outs given what we have, such was the drive of the thread, and thats my point, prior to getting into semantics

It's also hard to believe when the guy has just 13 MTOs across a similar length career. Federer has 5, Djokovic probably more than both...and Nadal is the one who gets perennially crucified for it.

I still don't buy it JHM, since the cramp rule change as asked before please point us to strategic MTO reasons why the rule needs tightening up further. I'm all ears...however I can't quite help but believe that these comments for change have simply, like for Nadal, been blown up out of complete perspective.

laverfan wrote:

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

I have a minor objection to the 1.6% calculation. If it is calculated as a percentage of total points played, it looks even smaller.

I agree, the percentage calc is probably a bit misleading.  One would have to be taking tons of MTOs - relatively speaking - before the percentage would look high.

That said, 13 over Nadal's career does not look that bad to me.  I would just want to make sure it really is 13.  Your list further up this thread had I think 12, but the way I understood it, it did not purport to be complete.  So, are we sure the list was only missing one more?

Lydian, where did you get that 13 from?

falzy21 wrote:Statistically its VERY hard to say what a statistically significant number is

I think it is pretty obvious we will not get to anything "statistically significant" no matter what.  But I do not think we are aiming for hard proofs here.  We are just developing a "best estimate" opinion.

SB, Laverfan had researched it earlier in the thread.
Yes stats are hard to quote re: MTOs but 13 in 13 years speaks for itself.
Even if you looked at bigger events for QFs and above where a MTO might be pulled more often, and we don't know where the 13 were taken in the draws, Nadal's has reached over 125 QFs or above from 500 events upwards. However, its the overall number and it doesn't seem much bigger than anyone else's, he just gets the vitriol anyway...usually from Fed fans of course.

Clearly there are players who take tactical MTOs from time to time but I have to say Nadal has never been one who I can recall doing it. 13 MTOs and 7 withdrawals seems to me consistent with a player who suffers from chronic injuries.

I think I'll abandon my attempt to broaden the argument, look at MTO's in Challenger and 250 events, etc. to figure out the extent of the problem if any. Seems like Rafa (and fans) vs Fed (and fans) is the preferred approach.

summerblues wrote:

laverfan wrote:

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

I have a minor objection to the 1.6% calculation. If it is calculated as a percentage of total points played, it looks even smaller.

I agree, the percentage calc is probably a bit misleading.  One would have to be taking tons of MTOs - relatively speaking - before the percentage would look high.

That said, 13 over Nadal's career does not look that bad to me.  I would just want to make sure it really is 13.  Your list further up this thread had I think 12, but the way I understood it, it did not purport to be complete.  So, are we sure the list was only missing one more?

Lydian, where did you get that 13 from?

Perhaps I can shed some light.

I had researched 12, based on newspaper articles, match commentaries, by year, (the round in which these occurred can be easily determined, if necessary)

laverfan wrote:
Here is a bit longer list…

v Del Potro @ W 2011
v Petzschner @ W 2010
v Murray @ AO 2010
v Almagro @ USO 2009
v Gonzalez @ USO 2009
v Djokovic @ Madrid 2009
v Murray @ Rotterdam 2009
v Federer @ AO 2009
v Federer @ MC 2008
v Federer @ Hamburg 2008
v Federer @ W 2007
v Mathieu @ RG 2006

the 13th came from v Wawrinka @ AO 2014.

Federer number was also based on the same method of research.

It is interesting that 13 slams is considered a significant number, but 13 MTOs are not.

Fascinating view of a human brain and how numbers get processed and signified.

Well its all relative to the general patterns of the sample size, just because theyre the same number does not give them identical meaning.
Number of MTO's also doesnt necessarily correlate with dodgy MTO use, theres soo many counfounders...

falzy21 wrote:Well its all relative to the general patterns of the sample size, just because theyre the same number does not give them identical meaning.
Number of MTO's also doesnt necessarily correlate with dodgy MTO use, theres soo many counfounders...

Agreed. It is fascinating, nonetheless.

I am going to add the tournament round to the following list…

R16 - v Del Potro @ W 2011
R32 - v Petzschner @ W 2010
QF - v Murray @ AO 2010
R32 - v Almagro @ USO 2009
QF - v Gonzalez @ USO 2009
SF - v Djokovic @ Madrid 2009
F - v Murray @ Rotterdam 2009
F - v Federer @ AO 2009
F - v Federer @ MC 2008
F - v Federer @ Hamburg 2008
F - v Federer @ W 2007
R32 - v Mathieu @ RG 2006

Again what does that ACTUALLY say? are you saying its a lot? Often at big times? How many is that compared to others or his career? How long was the MTO? Was it on the same chronic injury? Was he losing in all of those?
The list is well and good, but meaningless without context, otherwise its semi blind guessing.

MTO's can be dodgy yes, but they should be there otherwise it puts risk of greater damage. Im sure the lower ranks do use it tactically, but to be quite frank if your concentration can be completely broken by a 3 minute wait , and you cant keep your cool, then thats your problem just as much as it is the ATP

Laverfan's list is very interesting and I think shows how Nadal got a reputation for tactical MTOs.

Five out of the first six were in finals. That's disproportionate and invites suspicion.

Worth also noting though, that the one v Stan last week was only his 4th in 4 years and his first in two and half years.

Thank you Murdoch, least were getting to the point of things.
Hes had a few time outs, but hes also had quote a few injuries, id imagine a lot of those were his knees.
Most of them are also around 2008 -2009 time, when his kness were causing serious concern
A couple of those finals were on clay, a time where he has a huge workload. Two more were in 2009, matches I saw, One was the Aussie final, the follow up to a 5-6 hour marathon. Rotterdam was again the knee.

The earliest 2 I don't know a great deal about

The madrid time out was the tourny before RG, where he seemed to have knee trouble.

The other 2 09 ones were in the same tournament, just as he came back from inury.

I would guess that he has a higher than normal number of MTO's but contextually, its hardly stonewall evidence of a serial MTO cheat, thats the point.

Far as I remember, the most controversial of those was 2011 Wimby against del po. Where he went off court at a crucial time for a pain injection, complaining that he felt a "crunch" in his foot. Del Po wasnt happy, didnt keep is cool and focus and subsequently threw a good chance to win away.

When these are taken is also important, is it before the opponent is serving for the set for example?

falzy, the motivation behind his MTOs will of course only ever be conjecture.

I would be amazed if any of them were purely fictional i.e. there's nothing wrong and he's just trying to disrupt his opponent.

Could they have been niggles which he chose to get treated at a time that worked in his favour? Possibly.

The only one I remember clearly is the one v Del Potro that you mentioned. It came before a first set tie break which Nadal won. He seemed in genuine discomfort at the time but played just fine for the rest of the match once he'd had treatment.

The thing that always looks worse with Rafa is that often he has treatment and is then able to play like a beast. Which suggests it's not injury, its just pain.

My take on it is that a lot of it is/was a product of Rafa's obsessiveness. He's so obsessed with everything being 'right' (see all his little rituals) that if he's feeling a pain in a close match, he freaks out a bit.

True but he hasnt come out on all cylinders in all those occasions Rotterdam, and Aus come to mind.
In some sense we may underestimate modern medicine, the pain treatment he gets probably does let him move well for a bit, until it wears off of course

laverfan wrote:

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

I have a minor objection to the 1.6% calculation. If it is calculated as a percentage of total points played, it looks even smaller.

To me (and echoing Barrystar), the strategic valuation of such MTOs is lost in this statistical number. For example, I would suggest we look at how many of MTOs occur in a final, per player, per SF, per QF, etc. IMHO, the closer a player is to the trophy, the more important these become. Qualitatively, the scoreline before and after the MTO should also be factored in.

If you consider Federer, with 5 in 1148 matches, it makes such a calculation not have much value.

It's definitely not just 13

Off the top of my head I can remember FO 2011 against fed. Nadal was losing 2-5 in the first, took an mto and won the set. Same thing in MC 2006, losing 2-5 took an mto and then won the set.

undoubtedly there were other instances too, the list doesn't mention 2005.

also took mtos In both 06 and 07 Wimbledon finals.

@ZZ… thanks for the clues. I will research a bit more.

...what about researching Djokovic, Federer and Murray to the same degree?
Again, its Nadal who's every MTO is poured over.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I think I'll abandon my attempt to broaden the argument, look at MTO's in Challenger and 250 events, etc. to figure out the extent of the problem if any.

That would be very interesting but it looks like no serious stats on MTOs are kept.  Really the only way I can think of how I could get an idea how many MTOs are taken across the board would be to keep track going forward in the matches I am watching.  If, say, over the next 200 matches I see 10 MTOs, then I could conclude that on average a player takes MTOs in 2.5% of their matches.  Of course, the question still remains how to translate it into whether or not that would be too many.

One way that one could (in theory, not in practice, as the data is not available) make a guess as to whether players cheat is as follows:  check whether the number of non-cramp related MTOs increased after MTOs for cramps were disallowed.

lydian wrote:...what about researching Djokovic, Federer and Murray to the same degree?
Again, its Nadal who's every MTO is poured over.

I agree we should look at more players if possible.  I think Nadal gets poured over to some extent because he has more fans here than some others.  I imagine Nole may well be a worse offender than Rafa and I doubt I am alone in that.  You even see Nole mentioned quite often in this context but since nobody cares about Nole, there are not many posters who rise up to his defence, hence it does not create much debate.

ZZ wrote:It's definitely not just 13

Yes, I am also thinking that 13 looks too good to be true.  MTOs do not always make news and no stats are kept so it is not all that easy to find them all.  I suspect those 13 were easily found because they were noteworthy - either they happened in big matches or were controversial.

Just a quick glance through Google apparently found another one - vs Nihikori in Miami 2012.

lydian wrote:...what about researching Djokovic, Federer and Murray to the same degree?
Again, its Nadal who's every MTO is poured over.

Federer's MTOs are already listed. It is hard to find them documented.

summerblues wrote:

ZZ wrote:It's definitely not just 13

Yes, I am also thinking that 13 looks too good to be true.  MTOs do not always make news and no stats are kept so it is not all that easy to find them all.  I suspect those 13 were easily found because they were noteworthy - either they happened in big matches or were controversial.

Just a quick glance through Google apparently found another one - vs Nihikori in Miami 2012.

I had started in 2005 and started looking, 2006, 2007, and had not reached 2012, yet.

Nadal (some more)…

v Dodig @USO 2013
v Nishikori @Miami 2012
QF - v Fognini @China Open 2013

@Lydian… since it is slow research, can you research one of Djokovic or Murray, and SB can research the other?

laverfan wrote:and SB can research the other?

Heh, I could try, but how do you even go about it?  I tried Google and the 2012 from Nishikori came up quick but I would have missed many of the ones that you found.  Also, this would probably put Nadal at disadvantage because you are much more meticulous than Lydian or I can hope to be - so we are likely to miss more of Nole's and Andy's MTOs than you will miss for Rafa.

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:...what about researching Djokovic, Federer and Murray to the same degree?
Again, its Nadal who's every MTO is poured over.

I agree we should look at more players if possible.  I think Nadal gets poured over to some extent because he has more fans here than some others.  I imagine Nole may well be a worse offender than Rafa and I doubt I am alone in that.  You even see Nole mentioned quite often in this context but since nobody cares about Nole, there are not many posters who rise up to his defence, hence it does not create much debate.

You're a better poster than "nobody cares about Nole", SB, I'm surprised by that comment.

Perhaps the reason for the relative lack of response about Novak is that his fans on here don't take criticism of him as a personal affront to themselves?

For what it's worth, it seems pretty clear it to me. There were a whole load of MTOs that were due to his allergies. Once that was sorted, I recall USO11 when he could hardly serve, DC when he turned his ankle and USO when Andy was about to serve for the title, which I think was entirely tactical and more than a little suspicious.

ZZ wrote:

laverfan wrote:

summerblues wrote:

lydian wrote:I agree, you would think its happening all the time from this thread. It isn't. Nadal has had 13 MTOs in total...and played fuller seasons from 03-14...so he's averaging around 1 per season.

Is it really only 13 for his career?  I would have thought it was more.  Agree that 13 does not look bad.

I have a minor objection to the 1.6% calculation. If it is calculated as a percentage of total points played, it looks even smaller.

To me (and echoing Barrystar), the strategic valuation of such MTOs is lost in this statistical number. For example, I would suggest we look at how many of MTOs occur in a final, per player, per SF, per QF, etc. IMHO, the closer a player is to the trophy, the more important these become. Qualitatively, the scoreline before and after the MTO should also be factored in.

If you consider Federer, with 5 in 1148 matches, it makes such a calculation not have much value.

It's definitely not just 13

Off the top of my head I can remember FO 2011 against fed. Nadal was losing 2-5 in the first, took an mto and won the set. Same thing in MC 2006, losing 2-5 took an mto and then won the set.

undoubtedly there were other instances too, the list doesn't mention 2005.

I don't think FO11 was an MTO. Fairly certain the trainer just came on at the change of ends.

HM Murdoch wrote:You're a better poster than "nobody cares about Nole", SB, I'm surprised by that comment.

Perhaps the reason for the relative lack of response about Novak is that his fans on here don't take criticism of him as a personal affront to themselves?

HMM, that was my attempt at humor, clearly not well chosen. I apologize.

But I think the substance of what I was trying to convey is correct. I agree the reason is that Nole's fans on here do not take criticism of him personally. With you in particular I am amazed how you manage to separate your player preferences from your analysis. Socal also I think is more level-headed than he makes out to be.

However, I do not think that any demographic differences between fans of various players are large enough that one could say for example "Nadal fans are too emotional, hence their reactions". At the end of the day I think that among large enough group of fans of any player you will find all kinds - those that take their favorite's criticisms more personally as well as those who do not. I think if we had a larger contingent of Nole's fans on here, due to the law of averages, we would probably see some of his supporters who would also be quite sensitive about criticisms of him. In that I think my comment was essentially correct - my ill-chosen words notwithstanding.

No need to apologize, SB, my text came out harsher than the feeling behind it!  

I wouldn't group all Nadal fans as a mass who respond in the same way. But I just get exhasperated that whenever Nadal is being discussed in anything less than a flattering way, the argument always comes round to "other players do it too, why are we picking on Rafa?".

It seems to me that with the 'sins' of the other players, we stay on subject. When we give Fed stick about shouting at umpires, or Novak stick about being a hyperchondriac or Andy stick about moaning, the responses are usually along the lines of "he shouldn't have done it" or "come on, it's not that bad".

The 'being picked on' defence seems a particular Nadal thing to me.

It's not a huge issue to me, it's only a chat about tennis after all! It's just a pet peeve.

It may take me a little while to research Djokovic and Murray, I have almost completed Nadal. One or two more seasons to go. There may be other Federer MTOs around 2005-06, but looking through newspapers articles is pretty slow, even if I can search faster on Google news with some speed reading.

@BS.. I looked the RG 2011 recording I have, it is not an MTO, AFAIK.

@ZZ… I have the Skysport HD of W 2006, and do not see an MTO, but I was forwarding at quick speed. Can you perhaps suggest a scoreline, one for 2007 as well please?