Are draws rigged?

Just desperate to know, how on earth Nole ALWAYS ends in the same half as Federer in slams....I mean, what are "they" going to do once Fed retires

NITB are you turning wum on us?

NO, it's a genuine question, politically incorrect and rather unfashionable, but genuine

I don't believe draws are rigged. Sometimes I can see why some fans despair. I thought his FO draw was harder than this one.

What does WUM mean btw? I've heard that term so often but clueless about what it means?

luciusmann wrote:What does WUM mean btw? I've heard that term so often but clueless about what it means?

I remember being in the same dark woods once upn a time until Duggie kindly educated me: WUM is a short for Wind up merchant.



That aside, who's harder to beat at Wimbledon Nadal or Federer, I mean if you were to play them, who'd you chose?

i wouldn't believe the draw is rigged lets face it all 4 were on the same side it just wouldn't be any fun here.

I would say Nadal would be more difficult to defeat if it was me up against them NITB

You know he wouldn't go away and that he was just going to keep coming at you.

legendkillar wrote:I would say Nadal would be more difficult to defeat if it was me up against them NITB

You know he wouldn't go away and that he was just going to keep coming at you.

I reckon Federer at his best is worse than Nadal, his serve is absolutely deadly when it's on...you just need a little wobble on your own serve, and you're a gonner....

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would say Nadal would be more difficult to defeat if it was me up against them NITB

You know he wouldn't go away and that he was just going to keep coming at you.

I reckon Federer at his best is worse than Nadal, his serve is absolutely deadly when it's on...you just need a little wobble on your own serve, and you're a gonner....

With Federer though I think there are opportunities to jump on some errors. I think with Nadal he can play sub-par and no matter how much you jump on him, it is hard to really ever dominate him.

Surely Mahut vs Isner is rigged?

Both Nadal and Federer look pretty difficult to beat. If I was Djokovic I can imagine I would rather have played Murray than Federer so I can understand why a Nole fan would be upset with the draw. But Djokovic has proved he is capable of beating either. I don't think he would be the favourite but IMO he has the best chance of any player.

WickhamWonderland wrote:Surely Mahut vs Isner is rigged?

id actually love to see them break their own record and can see alot of people turning to that match to see if do.

I think Nadal and Federer are equally hard to beat on grass when playing well. One of their huge advantage is they are both great movers on grass and that is really important.

It's a good question NITB. I do think they can be rigged sometimes, espeically at Wimbledon where there is no camera, afa I know, but just a radio telling us the draw.

Clearly the Mahut/Isner match is another entertainment match in the first round.

Have to admit it crossed my mind when I saw Federer and Nadal on opposite sides of the draw and the Mahut and Isner match. I hope its not the case, I would have liked to see Murray and Federer face off in a semi and Nadal Djokovic face off in a semi. But We are four great players playing well at the same time so maybe it doesn't matter who got who.

Yeah, this is the 5th straight slam that Federer and Novak have been in the same half. FO, fed and novak same half. AO 2011 Fed and Novak in the same half. USO 2010 Fed and Novak in the same half. Wimby 2010 guess what Fed and novak in the same half. I don't even remember as far back as FO 2010, but they were probably in the same half back then as well. There is supposed to be a 50 percent chance of #3 and #2 being in the same half of the draw, is it just unlucky for Novak that he gets Fed as opposed to Murray 5 times on the trot. Or could it be that they really want to have those Fedal finals and therefore they make sure to keep those two out of each other's half.

Clearly, this is fishy in my mind, the ATP hurting Novak's grandslam chances on purpose year after year in order to get Fedal finals, You flip a coin how many times is it going to come up heads 5 times on the trot. Maybe six or seven because I don't remember that far back to the draws of 2 years ago. Things that make you say hmmm????

In fact, i just did the mathematical calculation Novak getting Fed five times in a row has a 3.125% probability. How conveniently lucky for the grandslam sponsors that they save the possible Fedal match for the final and land on heads 5 straight times in a row.

Sorry but I think this draw proves that the draws are not "rigged". If there was any chance of a fix Murray would have been kept well away from both Federer and Nadal in the semi's by the AELTC!

Murray can't be kept out of Fed and Nadal's half he has to be in one or the other as 4th seed. I just think it is pretty convenient how now that Fed has lost the #2 ranking he still basically gets seeded as the 2. Even when Djoko was #3 he was always in Fed's half and Murray in Nadal's half. I think this is getting really weird, if the at the USO they again put Fed in Novak's half I am going to have some real questions about the integrity of the process.

socal

I meant if Nadal and Federer had been in the same half Murray wouldn't have had to go through either to get to the final. As Nadal and Federer have been the top seeds for as long as anyone can remember it was a rare opportunity to play a semi without having either as a potential opponant.

Just out of interest. If Nadal and Federer had been seeded 1 and 2. Would you still be complaining if Murray was in Nadals half... or would you rather he had been in Federers?

The draw wasn't rigged! I feel a bit guilty maybe it was all my fault for asking the tennis gods for my one wish.

Hawkeye do you real think it is a coincidence that although Fed and Novak are #2 and #3 for the last few grandslams should always be in the same half. That is 5 straight slams in a row, and that is as far as I can remember. They are only supposed to have a 50 percent chance of meeting but that 50 percent chance happens 5 straight times. The ratings of Federer Nadal final dwarf any other possibility, therefore they keep putting these guys in other sides of the draw. I would still complain as answer to your question, not that I think Andy is an easy out at wimbeldon? But he is certainly no Roger federer even a year or two past his prime. Why is it that Novak as either 2 or 3 gets Roger in every single slam semi? To me this smells fishy and when something doesn't smell right often there is a reason for it.

The draws will be rigged to suit whichever potential final makes the most money. In most cases it will be Federer v Nadal.

I remember when Nadal missed Wimbledon through injury how obvious it was that they were after a Murray v Federer final.

I hate to agree with you Guest, but based on what we are witnessing with the top 4 seeds in the last few slams, it is starting to look like they are rigging the draw to give Fed and Nadal the highest likely chance of meeting in the final. Funny murray, although having lost to fed twice in grandslams has a better h2h against Fed than Novak, so Murray is always put into Nadal's half. Novak is seen as a tougher draw for Nadal, as evidenced by his 4 straight wins and Nadal's own admission that he is his toughest opponent and Novak always gets put into Roger's half.

socal1976 wrote:I hate to agree with you Guest, but based on what we are witnessing with the top 4 seeds in the last few slams, it is starting to look like they are rigging the draw to give Fed and Nadal the highest likely chance of meeting in the final. Funny murray, although having lost to fed twice in grandslams has a better h2h against Fed than Novak, so Murray is always put into Nadal's half. Novak is seen as a tougher draw for Nadal, as evidenced by his 4 straight wins and Nadal's own admission that he is his toughest opponent and Novak always gets put into Roger's half.

Exactly. Nole seems to be the least wanted of the top four, at Wimbledon. Despite his great tennis this year he won't attract the crowd or publicity that either Murray in the final or a Federer v Nadal final would.

The Isner v Mahut draw is a blatant fix too.

Guest82 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I hate to agree with you Guest, but based on what we are witnessing with the top 4 seeds in the last few slams, it is starting to look like they are rigging the draw to give Fed and Nadal the highest likely chance of meeting in the final. Funny murray, although having lost to fed twice in grandslams has a better h2h against Fed than Novak, so Murray is always put into Nadal's half. Novak is seen as a tougher draw for Nadal, as evidenced by his 4 straight wins and Nadal's own admission that he is his toughest opponent and Novak always gets put into Roger's half.

Exactly. Nole seems to be the least wanted of the top four, at Wimbledon. Despite his great tennis this year he won't attract the crowd or publicity that either Murray in the final or a Federer v Nadal final would.

The Isner v Mahut draw is a blatant fix too.

Before anyone on this forum screams fix or attempts to favour players in this tournament, unless you have the proof, please refrain from making such allegations. Any further posts suggesting this will leave me no other choice than to lock this thread. This type of allegation hasn't been made against the organisers of the Australian Open or French Open and to suggest that the Wimbledon organisers have is nothing short of disgraceful.

Thanks

socal1976 wrote:Clearly, this is fishy in my mind, the ATP hurting Novak's grandslam chances on purpose year after year in order to get Fedal finals, You flip a coin how many times is it going to come up heads 5 times on the trot. Maybe six or seven because I don't remember that far back to the draws of 2 years ago. Things that make you say hmmm????

don't get me started on this again, please i've already ruined the Wimbledon draw thread.

FYI 14 of the last 19 slams Nadal and Murray have been in same half. V.unlikely, but not impossible even with a fair coin toss. That said in darkened rooms where prestige and money is linked to certain matches happening, you have to trade off the likelihood of a fair draw going through an odd streak against the likelihood of a fixed draw for commercial purposes.... its impossible to conclude either way as obviously there is not evidence of anything dodgy.

It might be worth going back through old slams on the women's side and seeing how often the two Williams' were drawn on opposite sides of the draw when the rankings suggested a 50/50 chance of being on the same side.

socal1976 wrote:Clearly, this is fishy in my mind, the ATP hurting Novak's grandslam chances on purpose year after year in order to get Fedal finals, You flip a coin how many times is it going to come up heads 5 times on the trot. Maybe six or seven because I don't remember that far back to the draws of 2 years ago. Things that make you say hmmm????

.

Its a 1 in 32 chance

hawkeye wrote:socal

I meant if Nadal and Federer had been in the same half Murray wouldn't have had to go through either to get to the final. As Nadal and Federer have been the top seeds for as long as anyone can remember it was a rare opportunity to play a semi without having either as a potential opponant.

Just out of interest. If Nadal and Federer had been seeded 1 and 2. Would you still be complaining if Murray was in Nadals half... or would you rather he had been in Federers?

The draw wasn't rigged! I feel a bit guilty maybe it was all my fault for asking the tennis gods for my one wish.

I'd prefer Murray to have a SF with Federer then a final with Nadal. Hes never beaten Fed in a slam, but has had to try in two max pressure slam finals. I think he would have a better chance against Fed in a slam SF, with slightly less pressure of the maiden slam inches away. He has of course beaten Nadal a couple of times in slams and so if you had to play one or the other in a final, then mentally i think he would stand a better chance against Nadal.

socal1976 wrote:I hate to agree with you Guest, but based on what we are witnessing with the top 4 seeds in the last few slams, it is starting to look like they are rigging the draw to give Fed and Nadal the highest likely chance of meeting in the final. Funny murray, although having lost to fed twice in grandslams has a better h2h against Fed than Novak, so Murray is always put into Nadal's half. Novak is seen as a tougher draw for Nadal, as evidenced by his 4 straight wins and Nadal's own admission that he is his toughest opponent and Novak always gets put into Roger's half.

Not saying this means anything, but in all the most recent master series. The potential SF draws were as follows:

YE Nadal/Djoko, Murray/Fed (i.e the groups). SFs not random, so groups considered instead
Cincinatti - Fed/Nadal, Djoko/Murray
Indian wells - Nadal/Murray, Djoko/Fed
Madrid - Nadal Fed, Djoko/Murray
Miami - Nadal Fed, Djoko/Murray
Monte - Nadal/Murray, Fed/-
Paris - Fed/Murray, Djoko/-
Rome - Nadal/Fed, Djoko/Murray
Shang - Nadal/Murray, Fed/Djoko
Montreal - Nadal/Murray, Fed/Djoko

Djoko/Fed occurs 3 times would have been 4 of 10 if Djoko had shown up to Monte

much more probable kind of spread

Its impossable to fix a draw so Murray doesn't have to play Nadal or Federer (or Djokovic for that matter). If he's going to win a slam he's going to have to beat 1 or most probably 2 of these players unless he gets very very lucky.

ARE DRAWS RIGGED?

No.

Next silly question please.

Answer = no.

Because why take the risk and it came out, the events reputation would be destroyed.

Tom I did the calculation myself on another thread and came up with 1/32 chance for Fed and Nole to be drawn in the same half 5 straight times. Of course I don't have a smoking gun, how would I get such evidence legendkillar. I actually am not just accussing wimbeldon it seems very odd that this has happened in 5 straight slams. Fact: it is the financially most rewarding final to have fed and Nadal play each other. Fact: 50 percent of the time the #3 player should be put into the #1s half of the draw. Fact: For at least 5 grandslams (possibly more) the #3 player (either fed or nole) have been placed in the #2 players half, precluding Federer and Nadal meeting till the final. Fact: mathematically this type of anomaly of 5 straight heads should occur just 3 percent of the time. Fact: what control or transparency do we have on the draw being conducted properly. In my mind with the money that is involved and the lack of transparency in the process, I would be surprised if there wasn't a bit of tinkering for the financial interests of the tournament and most importantly for TV revenues.

Jubbahey wrote:ARE DRAWS RIGGED?

No.

Next silly question please.

What is really silly is actually not to ask the question in the first place.

Tom in addtion to the fact that Murray has also drawn Nadal 14 out of 19 times, another statistical anomaly this whole draw thing is getting fishier and fishier for me. If you wanted to maximize your chances of Fedal finals this is exactly the draw you would pick for the top 4. Murray has a winning head to head against Fed (although 2 grandslam losses) put him into Nadal's side where nadal has a better head to head, this improves your chance of Nadal getting through. Novak is tougher on Nadal, well put him in Roger's half this improves the chances of a fedal final as well. Now if you put Andy and Novak in the same half you have a good chance that one will get through to the final while Fed and Nadal knock one or the other out on a Friday semi match which never gets the same ratings.

Wimbledon can tinker with the seeding. At the moment they do so by way of a grass formula. If they wanted they could have seeded Federer number 2 because of his grass record. Personally I think they should have. If "they" had wanted to "fix" things they had no need to tinker with the draw. IMO they should have done this.

This year the Wimbledon seedings don't reflect Federers recognised ability on grass. Maybe I'm one of the few here who would have been really sad to see a match up between the two almost equal odds on favourites for the title in the semi's. It would have been a huge opportunity for Djokovic, Murray or anyone in the bottom half of the draw to get to a Wimbledon without having to face either of the best grass court players. I can understand how fans of these players might be dissapointed. But isn't that dissapointment also a recognition that they have lost what would have been an unfair advantage.

Thankyou again Tennis Gods. All these matches still have to be played. Neither Nadal or Federer have been handed the title. Chances are whoever wins the title will have to beat two players in the top four.

Hawkeye, again you are making an argument particular to wimbeldon. Fed hasn't been the second best player in the world now for some months. His form on grass is taken into consideration but there is a guy right now that is 41-1 on the year. It would have been much more public if they dropped Djokovic down to #3. And they would have gotten a lot more controversy for dropping a guy who has won all but one match this year and seven tournaments plus a grandslam down to the third slot. So instead they stealthily did the same thing. The only benefit that Novak seems to have from his #2 ranking at grandslams is that they list him as #2 and then give his seeding to Federer. 5 straight times he has gotten Federer in the semis and nadal in the final based on the seeding, why does he never get murray or nadal in the semi?

Only problem with that theory is that Murray has been No4 for longer than most players in a similar position, so he will always get a 50/50 toss up to be in one half or another, and since Nadal has been No1 for a while, if heads comes up more than tails, then in all likelihood if heads = top half then thats the luck of the draw.

No1 and No2 should not meet until the final, thats a gimme since draws began. 3&4 can only be in either half, but like the above, if the No3 gets tails more often, then Murray ends up where he ends up as No3 gets the next pick out of the hat after the two top players.

And how anyone can believe that "they" would rig another Mahut/Isner match needs therapy.

Conspiracy theorists -------------------------> exit door

Socal, kudos to you for looking into those stats, but your theory would only exist if they had had the same seedings for 5 years, the fact that they haven't shows that it is random.

Jubba, the fact is that Murray is always put in Nadal's half (14 of 19 times) and Fed is always put into Djoko's (5 straight) both are stastical anomalies that seem to help the financial pocket books of the tournament. What exactly is the conspiracy that TV executives and tournament directors want to make as much money as possible, is that a conspiratorial suggestion?

I admit it does look dodgy. But there isn't any proof that the draw is rigged.
The draw is something that we just have to accept unless there is proof saying otherwise.

Actually, Jubba it doesn't rely on Novak and Roger having the same ranking for the last few years. For the last 2 years Novak and Roger have interchanged the 2 and 3 ranking. if you also consider that the organizers would prefer to have Nadal get to the final as well as Roger than the theory works out perfectly. Djokovic is a tougher matchup for Nadal than murray, so they put him in Roger's half. Murray has a winning head to head against Roger, so they put him in Rafa's half. 14 out of 19, and 5 out of 5 is an odd statistical anomaly for something that should be 50/50. And especially since the dollars signs favor this statistical anomaly taking place.

Y I Man wrote:I admit it does look dodgy. But there isn't any proof that the draw is rigged.
The draw is something that we just have to accept unless there is proof saying otherwise.

I generally, accept that we wait for proof, except in law sometimes we don't. For example, there is a concept in common law known as Res ipsa loquitor. "the thing speaks for itself". If I remember my law school training well. Basically it means you can be found liable with little or no direct evidence if the circumstances would almost certainly infer guilt without direct evidence. The proof that you are suggesting we provide does not exist or is not easily accessible to someone who has no legal authority to acquire the evidence. But here are the extremely shady circumstances. 1. The pocketbooks of powerful people are benefitted by keeping Fed and Nadal away from each other till the final 2. the statistics provide for odd anomalies like Novak getting Roger 5 straight times when this should be 50/50 proposition and 3. Nadal gets murray the vast majority of the time when this to should be a 50/50 proposition. And even bigger statistical anomaly if you consider both these things happening at the same time. 4. there is no oversight or transparency in this process and therefore if someone wanted to very easy to rig.

"if you also consider that the organizers would prefer to have Nadal get to the final as well as Roger than the theory works out perfectly"

I think that is a spurious idea, I would rather "assume" that they would want Murray in the final.

But socal, the fact that they have all swapped places in the last 5 years only goes to show how random the picking is, as you have to take names out of a hat to put the No1 in whatever half and then the No3 in whatever half.

Many different hats for each level, one for the top two, one for the next two, (and I think another two hats for the 5/6th & 7/8th) then the next eight up to 16th place, then the next 16 (or however the maths works out). But all 32 seedings are geometrically placed, so that its a fair road to the final, no player having an advantage over another.

How can they fix a draw when its just names/balls out of a hat/bag ?

One thing I have learned in life from working in the third world and in America, when money is involved and there is no control or oversight of the process than the process will be corrupted to favor the money or times than not.

I thought the press was present there during the actual draw?
Neil Harman (reporter for the Times Newspaper) said on twitter he was ushered out of the room because his blackberry kept going off as he was tweeting.
Like Jubba said, it was balls/names being drawn out of a hat etc.

Actually, Jubba the rankings have been unbelievably consistent for the last 4 years. Either Fed or Nadal have been #1 or #2. Djokovic has always been #3, and murray for the most part has been #4. And the analysis doesn't change at all if simply Djoko and Fed switch the 2 and 3 spots.

Furthermore, you are assuming the organizers would want murray maybe at wimbeldon, but I doubt even for wimbeldon. First of all we are talking about who the global tennis audience would want to see in the final not what the british fan would want to see. Secondly, you keep focusing on wimbeldon while I keep talking about a trend that is showing up over and over again across the board at all slams.

Its not done behind closed doors is it ?

I thought there was Media there and camera's recording the event.

It certainly sounded like that on the radio this morning.

But how can it be a conspiracy across the whole globe socal, there would have to be a conniving body of people over-seeing every event.