Johanna Konta

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Johanna Konta

indiana · Tennis legend

JonH comes home wrote:
To be clear I am talking about the general theme of Jo's threads...they seem to descend into lots of debate and discussion...Ive commented before many months ago, year ago...not aimed at the comments folks are making as I sympathise a lot. Just wondering why a) Jo takes up so much airtime and b) why it ends up in arguing time and time again

but I have made my comments on that known before...

I think possibly because when comments that can seem critical of Jo appear we have one or two particular followers of Jo who often particularly respond which is fair enough but then also initial posters may be unconvinced about 'defences' and come back again and so on. Sometimes we reach a clearer place, sometimes not, and as long as it doesn't decend too much spirited 'discussion' can be good.

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 14th of August 2021 09:29:34 PM

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:
To be clear I am talking about the general theme of Jo's threads...they seem to descend into lots of debate and discussion...Ive commented before many months ago, year ago...not aimed at the comments folks are making as I sympathise a lot. Just wondering why a) Jo takes up so much airtime and b) why it ends up in arguing time and time again

but I have made my comments on that known before...
I think possibly because when comments that can seem critical of Jo appear we have one or two particular followers of Jo who often particularly respond which is fair enough but then also initial posters may be unconvinced about 'defences' and come back again and so on. Sometimes we reach a clearer place, sometimes not, and as long as it doesn't decend too much spirited 'discussion' can be good.

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 14th of August 2021 09:29:34 PM

Yep.

Steve J · Lower Club Player

christ wrote:
Keep your strawmen to yourself.

ROTFL. How you can accuse other people of posting strawmen after some of the nonsense that you have posted is beyond me.

People like you and the others on this forum who are incapable of basic risk management scare me a lot more than covid does.

I'll say it again, what medical treatments Ms. Konta chooses to have or not have are her decision and hers alone.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Steve J wrote:
christ wrote:
Keep your strawmen to yourself.
ROTFL. How you can accuse other people of posting strawmen after some of the nonsense that you have posted is beyond me.
People like you and the others on this forum who are incapable of basic risk management scare me a lot more than covid does.
I'll say it again, what medical treatments Ms. Konta chooses to have or not have are her decision and hers alone.

Not if they put other people at risk.

I'm not saying that covid vaccines should be mandatory.

But we do have laws that can impose mandatory health decisions (i.e. mandatory isolation if you have a certain category of infectious disease, say).

So, as a matter of principle, health decisions are not necessarily the domain only of the person involved.

Steve J · Lower Club Player

UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights

portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

-- Edited by Steve J on Sunday 15th of August 2021 08:40:53 AM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

As per the European Convention for Human Rights, and Article 8 respect of private life:

"There shall be no interference by a public authority with the
exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the
law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of
national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the
country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection
of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms
of others"

(as incorporated directly into UK via the Human Rights Act)

https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf

TTMan · Intermediate Club Player

JonH comes home wrote:
73 pages of jo related posts. Next highest is Laura at 52, then Dan and Andy next. 72 pages. Most of it arguing.

There are two distinct "debates" going on here. One concerning the rights and wrongs of opting out of covid vaccination, the other concerning Jo's statements. The former has no place on this thread, it's off topic, but for the record, I'm firmly on the side of vaccination where medically appropriate.

Re Jo statements, I have said that I'm surprised that Jo hasn't jumped at the opportunity to have the vaccine and it might be wise for Jo to clarify her reasoning for not, if that is her "choice". My contention, in the presence of much speculation here, is that Jo is an intelligent athlete and I would tend to believe she has acted professionally.

As for your comments re the volume of Jo related posts, I'm not clear what it is you are trying to say but I hope you are not trying to stifle debate?

For me, I'm a big admirer of Jo as a person and what she has achieved on the tennis court but I'm also at odds with gender and racial discrimination / xenophobia and unfair misrepresentation of celebrities by the media. It just so happens that Jo has been a victim of all three, which has had a knock-on effect on her public perception. So perhaps that's one reason why she generates so many posts? I admit though, I'm guilty of writing long posts and overusing the "quote" feature. Sorry if that offends.

TTMan · Intermediate Club Player

christ wrote:
TTMan wrote:
The following document is the most rigorous "science" I could find regarding the considerations of Covid vaccines for elite athletes and perhaps what Jo and her team are taking into consideration. The final summary paragraph ends:

"Until this time [widespread vaccine rollout], sports clinicians can familiarise themselves with vaccine types, likely type to be used in their setting; efficacy; and side effect profiles; and can set up vaccination protocols for their athletes (plan the timing, site, and pre-and post-vaccination training carefully through shared decision making) so they are best prepared."... which all sounds remarkably like Jo's statement.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906689/
Two observations:
1) "taking time to set up vaccination protocols" is not immediately synonymous with "personal choice", although if you squint I can see the vague similarity
2) All of that science in the paper neglects to observe that the alternative to the vaccine may well be the disease. One can spend a lot of time planning the precise moment in an athlete's calendar at which it is appropriate for them to be vaccinated, and then have them catch the disease instead. Then the problem is not playing tennis with a sore arm, but potentially dying.

I still have to largely disagree with you on point 1 when taking her statement as a whole but would add that Jo is a person who likes to make her own decisions, so might be inclined to use the phrase "personal choice" when really she means acting on advice.

I can't argue with point 2, except to say that my previous response was focused on why Jo might have made the statement she did and like most other posts here was based on speculation of Jo's reasoning. But I think it's true to say that Jo has said nothing that is anti vaccination and earlier in her statement she describes how unpleasant her symptoms were, even though thankfully she lived to tell the tale.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

TTMan wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:
73 pages of jo related posts. Next highest is Laura at 52, then Dan and Andy next. 72 pages. Most of it arguing.
There are two distinct "debates" going on here. One concerning the rights and wrongs of opting out of covid vaccination, the other concerning Jo's statements. The former has no place on this thread, it's off topic, but for the record, I'm firmly on the side of vaccination where medically appropriate.
Re Jo statements, I have said that I'm surprised that Jo hasn't jumped at the opportunity to have the vaccine and it might be wise for Jo to clarify her reasoning for not, if that is her "choice". My contention, in the presence of much speculation here, is that Jo is an intelligent athlete and I would tend to believe she has acted professionally.
As for your comments re the volume of Jo related posts, I'm not clear what it is you are trying to say but I hope you are not trying to stifle debate?
For me, I'm a big admirer of Jo as a person and what she has achieved on the tennis court but I'm also at odds with gender and racial discrimination / xenophobia and unfair misrepresentation of celebrities by the media. It just so happens that Jo has been a victim of all three, which has had a knock-on effect on her public perception. So perhaps that's one reason why she generates so many posts? I admit though, I'm guilty of writing long posts and overusing the "quote" feature. Sorry if that offends.

My point re the volumes of posts certainly wasnt to stifle debate. My concern is that although I think we are all largely jo fans here , whatever May sometimes come across, the volume reflects the fact that posts about her often lead to a lot of debate not about Jo but about the way she is portrayed, treated, comes across and her situation (phyiscal, mental, etc) gets picked apart in a lot more minute detail than any other player - the ones I quoted are ones Id put up on a popularity level with Jo, or maybe above , and dont get the same level of detailed assessment.

i find that noise detracts, for me, Im actually supporting Jo and her achievements - her thread often goes into tangents which takes away from her, for me at least. But I dont want to stifle debate and Im not commenting per se other than that volume reflects those diversions, I believe.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Ps it also probably reflects that this board generally has a lot more traffic, certainly recently , around the womens game and the womens performances and situations at events gets picked over a lot more - are they fit, how are they feeling, where are they playing next etc etc - which is all good and fine, but maybe reflected by the fact our number one woman consequently gets that analysis with additional added focus reflected in this threads volumes.

GAMEOVER · Pro player

JonH comes home wrote:
73 pages of jo related posts. Next highest is Laura at 52, then Dan and Andy next. 72 pages. Most of it arguing.

Hwever if you look at views as opposed to posts then Laura is way ahead.As I write Laura has 113,657 ,Dan 98,996 and Jo 96,658.I daresay Emma will be zooming up the views and .posts.

TTMan · Intermediate Club Player

GAMEOVER wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:
73 pages of jo related posts. Next highest is Laura at 52, then Dan and Andy next. 72 pages. Most of it arguing.
Hwever if you look at views as opposed to posts then Laura is way ahead.As I write Laura has 113,657 ,Dan 98,996 and Jo 96,658.I daresay Emma will be zooming up the views and .posts.

Over what time period are these stats? From day zero, or recent? Both would be interesting.

GAMEOVER · Pro player

TTMan wrote:
GAMEOVER wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:
73 pages of jo related posts. Next highest is Laura at 52, then Dan and Andy next. 72 pages. Most of it arguing.
Hwever if you look at views as opposed to posts then Laura is way ahead.As I write Laura has 113,657 ,Dan 98,996 and Jo 96,658.I daresay Emma will be zooming up the views and .posts.
Over what time period are these stats? From day zero, or recent? Both would be interesting.

It's from when the first post was made. For Laura it was 15th June 2011, Dan 9th May 2009 and Jo 21st May 2009. In Jo's case from 21st September 2011 to 17th November 2015 i.e. 4 years there were no postings. Even Jo's breakthrough in 2015 seemed to take sometime to filter through.

TTMan · Intermediate Club Player

GAMEOVER wrote:
TTMan wrote:
GAMEOVER wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:
73 pages of jo related posts. Next highest is Laura at 52, then Dan and Andy next. 72 pages. Most of it arguing.
Hwever if you look at views as opposed to posts then Laura is way ahead.As I write Laura has 113,657 ,Dan 98,996 and Jo 96,658.I daresay Emma will be zooming up the views and .posts.
Over what time period are these stats? From day zero, or recent? Both would be interesting.
It's from when the first post was made. For Laura it was 15th June 2011, Dan 9th May 2009 and Jo 21st May 2009. In Jo's case from 21st September 2011 to 17th November 2015 i.e. 4 years there were no postings. Even Jo's breakthrough in 2015 seemed to take sometime to filter through.

Thanks for that GAMEOVER. So often, analysing data generates more questions than answers.