Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Weeks 10 & 11 - ATP Masters 1000 - BNP Paribas Open - Indian Wells, CA, USA


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52844
Date:
Weeks 10 & 11 - ATP Masters 1000 - BNP Paribas Open - Indian Wells, CA, USA


No Djoko!  biggrin



__________________


Pro player

Status: Offline
Posts: 1094
Date:

Yay

__________________


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 6842
Date:

So ridiculous.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 35580
Date:

I have just come back from the other side of the pond, had to transit New York on way back on Saturday night. Have to say, they are the only ones I can recall asking for vaccine proof now and it seems to me that ship has sailed. Im not sure really now why it is a requirement any longer? My vaccine was the 4th one we all were asked to take from October and Im not sure it helps anyone that I have it any longer?

I was adamant Djokovic shouldnt get into AO last year, we obviously allowed him to play Wimbledon etc and it feels to me the USA needs to move forwards on this one. Dont see the reason to ban him from entry other than the law is what it is (and the law shouldnt be changed for one person) but in this case the law is out of date.

Not a Djokovic fan but this time the law is wrong and out of date .

__________________


Strong Club Player

Status: Online
Posts: 477
Date:

The US covid requirements expire in May.

In NZ, we've only just gotten the newer vaccine (literally, they were available from the 1st March) for the more recent strains and it's open to adults over 30.

__________________

She/her



Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52347
Date:

Blue_Belle wrote:

The US covid requirements expire in May.

In NZ, we've only just gotten the newer vaccine (literally, they were available from the 1st March) for the more recent strains and it's open to adults over 30.


You're not doing to badly - London has only had the newer vaccine as of January or so.

Certainly in November, when I was called for the fourth, it was the old, original one, to which I said why bother? I think, as of 2023, the new bivalent one is finally available. 



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52844
Date:

L96:  (24) Daniel Evans WR 29 (CH = 22 in September 2021) vs BYE
L96:  Qualifier vs Jack Draper WR 56 (CH = 38 in January)

L96:  Tomás Martín Etcheverry (ARG) WR 61 (= CH) vs Andy Murray WR 55 (CH = 1 in November 2016)

Pablo Carreño (15) awaits the winner of that one.

L96:  BYE vs (10) Cameron Norrie WR 12 (CH = 8 last September)

In Djoko's absence Alcaraz is the top seed.



-- Edited by Stircrazy on Tuesday 7th of March 2023 09:57:00 AM



__________________


Pro player

Status: Offline
Posts: 1199
Date:

JonH comes home wrote:

I have just come back from the other side of the pond, had to transit New York on way back on Saturday night. Have to say, they are the only ones I can recall asking for vaccine proof now and it seems to me that ship has sailed. Im not sure really now why it is a requirement any longer? My vaccine was the 4th one we all were asked to take from October and Im not sure it helps anyone that I have it any longer?

I was adamant Djokovic shouldnt get into AO last year, we obviously allowed him to play Wimbledon etc and it feels to me the USA needs to move forwards on this one. Dont see the reason to ban him from entry other than the law is what it is (and the law shouldnt be changed for one person) but in this case the law is out of date.

Not a Djokovic fan but this time the law is wrong and out of date .


 It may be out of date but that is the rule and Djokovic should not get special treatment just because he can play tennis well.

i was in LA in January and neither you on your recent trip or I would have been allowed in without the vaccine certificate. So he has to face the consequences of the decisions he has made.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 35580
Date:

brittak wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:

I have just come back from the other side of the pond, had to transit New York on way back on Saturday night. Have to say, they are the only ones I can recall asking for vaccine proof now and it seems to me that ship has sailed. Im not sure really now why it is a requirement any longer? My vaccine was the 4th one we all were asked to take from October and Im not sure it helps anyone that I have it any longer?

I was adamant Djokovic shouldnt get into AO last year, we obviously allowed him to play Wimbledon etc and it feels to me the USA needs to move forwards on this one. Dont see the reason to ban him from entry other than the law is what it is (and the law shouldnt be changed for one person) but in this case the law is out of date.

Not a Djokovic fan but this time the law is wrong and out of date .


 It may be out of date but that is the rule and Djokovic should not get special treatment just because he can play tennis well.

i was in LA in January and neither you on your recent trip or I would have been allowed in without the vaccine certificate. So he has to face the consequences of the decisions he has made.


 I wrote it clumsily but I think I wrote that I agree - they shouldnt change the law for one man or let him get around the law, but the law is wrong at this time ie the us is out of touch and shouldnt be banning people at this stage at all For not having the vaccine. IMO - just like the UK or Mainland Europe now, at least I believe. 



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 35580
Date:

The Brits collide- Evo has a bye but then plays the winner of Jack or a qualifier. In round three, the winner of that plays Andy , if he gets through Etcheverry (recent Santiago finalist on clay) or PCB.

Cam has an opener against Bublik or a qualifier. Berrettini is the first high seed he could face.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 19012
Date:

Stircrazy wrote:

L96:  (24) Daniel Evans WR 29 (CH = 22 in September 2021) vs BYE
L96:  Qualifier vs Jack Draper WR 56 (CH = 38 in January)

L96:  Tomás Martín Etcheverry (ARG) WR 61 (= CH) vs Andy Murray WR 5t5 (CH = 1 in November 2016)

Roberto Carreño (15) awaits the winner of that one.

L96:  BYE vs (10) Cameron Norrie WR 12 (CH = 8 last September)

In Djoko's absence Alcaraz is the top seed.


Is this a hybrid version of Roberto Carballes and Pablo Carreño ? wink



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52844
Date:

Bob in Spain wrote:
Stircrazy wrote:

L96:  (24) Daniel Evans WR 29 (CH = 22 in September 2021) vs BYE
L96:  Qualifier vs Jack Draper WR 56 (CH = 38 in January)

L96:  Tomás Martín Etcheverry (ARG) WR 61 (= CH) vs Andy Murray WR 5t5 (CH = 1 in November 2016)

Roberto Carreño (15) awaits the winner of that one.

L96:  BYE vs (10) Cameron Norrie WR 12 (CH = 8 last September)

In Djoko's absence Alcaraz is the top seed.


Is this a hybrid version of Roberto Carballes and Pablo Carreño ? wink


Something like that!    Now corrected.  It was late...   

P.S.  Had it been t'other, I'd at least have remembered to put in the accent (Carballés).  wink



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 19012
Date:

Stircrazy wrote:
Bob in Spain wrote:
Stircrazy wrote:

L96:  (24) Daniel Evans WR 29 (CH = 22 in September 2021) vs BYE
L96:  Qualifier vs Jack Draper WR 56 (CH = 38 in January)

L96:  Tomás Martín Etcheverry (ARG) WR 61 (= CH) vs Andy Murray WR 5t5 (CH = 1 in November 2016)

Roberto Carreño (15) awaits the winner of that one.

L96:  BYE vs (10) Cameron Norrie WR 12 (CH = 8 last September)

In Djoko's absence Alcaraz is the top seed.


Is this a hybrid version of Roberto Carballes and Pablo Carreño ? wink


Something like that!    Now corrected.  It was late...   

P.S.  Had it been t'other, I'd at least have remembered to put in the accent (Carballés).  wink


I did in fact look that up on the ATP site and they had no accent.  Also, when I hear his name announced, it is usually CarbAlles and not CarballEs, but having checked on Spanish wikipedia, it does appear that you are correct.

I mean, how could I ever doubt you LOL.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 52844
Date:

Bob in Spain wrote:
Stircrazy wrote:
Bob in Spain wrote:
Stircrazy wrote:

L96:  (24) Daniel Evans WR 29 (CH = 22 in September 2021) vs BYE
L96:  Qualifier vs Jack Draper WR 56 (CH = 38 in January)

L96:  Tomás Martín Etcheverry (ARG) WR 61 (= CH) vs Andy Murray WR 5t5 (CH = 1 in November 2016)

Roberto Carreño (15) awaits the winner of that one.

L96:  BYE vs (10) Cameron Norrie WR 12 (CH = 8 last September)

In Djoko's absence Alcaraz is the top seed.


Is this a hybrid version of Roberto Carballes and Pablo Carreño ? wink


Something like that!    Now corrected.  It was late...   

P.S.  Had it been t'other, I'd at least have remembered to put in the accent (Carballés).  wink


I did in fact look that up on the ATP site and they had no accent.  Also, when I hear his name announced, it is usually CarbAlles and not CarballEs, but having checked on Spanish wikipedia, it does appear that you are correct.

I mean, how could I ever doubt you LOL.


Bob, I'm always open to correction, but never on the basis of anything shown on the ATP site:  it simply does not "do" accents (& you know how I love those)!  wink  It thinks, for example, that Sean Hodkin comes from "Warsall"....



__________________


Pro player

Status: Offline
Posts: 1199
Date:

JonH comes home wrote:
brittak wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:

I have just come back from the other side of the pond, had to transit New York on way back on Saturday night. Have to say, they are the only ones I can recall asking for vaccine proof now and it seems to me that ship has sailed. Im not sure really now why it is a requirement any longer? My vaccine was the 4th one we all were asked to take from October and Im not sure it helps anyone that I have it any longer?

I was adamant Djokovic shouldnt get into AO last year, we obviously allowed him to play Wimbledon etc and it feels to me the USA needs to move forwards on this one. Dont see the reason to ban him from entry other than the law is what it is (and the law shouldnt be changed for one person) but in this case the law is out of date.

Not a Djokovic fan but this time the law is wrong and out of date .


 It may be out of date but that is the rule and Djokovic should not get special treatment just because he can play tennis well.

i was in LA in January and neither you on your recent trip or I would have been allowed in without the vaccine certificate. So he has to face the consequences of the decisions he has made.


 I wrote it clumsily but I think I wrote that I agree - they shouldnt change the law for one man or let him get around the law, but the law is wrong at this time ie the us is out of touch and shouldnt be banning people at this stage at all For not having the vaccine. IMO - just like the UK or Mainland Europe now, at least I believe. 


 Apologies I didnt mean to jump at you! I have just been a bit fed up with some of the press coverage suggesting he has been hard done to in some way. Tommy Haas quote saying it was a disgrace had just about finished me off!! Ranting over!



__________________
1 2 315  >  Last»  | Page of 15  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard