PDA

View Full Version : Is it a trap that Roger Federer lost to Andy Murray?


adamaglaia
Aug 17th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Roger Federer lost to Andy Murray in Cincy.

I know that a lot of folks took part in the Penn $1,000,000 Pick Em Contest, which candidates have to predict the winner of each match, the one who has got all the correct predictions will be rewarded 1 million us dollars.

But now I guess nobody could win that money.

I guess there might be something tricky going on.

Mother_Marjorie
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:14 PM
Roger Federer lost to Andy Murray in Cincy.

I know that a lot of folks took part in the Penn $1,000,000 Pick Em Contest, which candidates have to predict the winner of each match, the one who has got all the correct predictions will be rewarded 1 million us dollars.

But now I guess nobody could win that money.

I guess there might be something tricky going on.

The last time Roger lost on American soil was similar circumstances a couple of years ago. Played Rogers Cup, then immediately to Cinci. Roger always tries to get to tourney sites at least a few days before. However, he wasn't able to get the time he needed. He was tired and his loss wasn't that unexpected.

The last male player to win at the Rogers and Cinci back-to-back was Roddick in 2003, the same year he won the US Open. Its a very difficult swing.

Murray is only the second player Roger has lost to on tour this year. People are attempting to make a huge deal of the loss, but its no big deal to Roger, I'm sure. Roger knows he'll probably still dominate the field at the US Open.

adamaglaia
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:17 PM
but then penn tennis can save 1 million us dollars, why would expect Federer get kicked out so quickly?

controlfreak
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:21 PM
I don't think Roger would be prepared to lose for money. He already has many millions of dollars.

Besides, picking every single match outcome in a tournament correctly would be so unlikely that they can offer the $1,000,000 prize without fear. It's like giving odds of 1000-1 that Stephanie Dubois will win Wimbledon. It's so unlikely, the risk is near zero.

Craigy
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:27 PM
1st of all, no.
next, http://menstennisforums.com/ :)

wukenaihe
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:33 PM
yup, I took part in the Penn $1,000,000 Pick Em Contest.

But why dose Penn sponsor this game if they are not willing to pay?

adamaglaia
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:36 PM
because they make sure no one is going to win, lolololol...

furrykitten
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:36 PM
How about just giving Murray some credit for such a great win?

Craigy
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:38 PM
How about just giving Murray some credit for such a great win?
Because they are all haters :sobbing:
Oh no, Murray isn't good enough to beat Roger. :rolleyes:

wukenaihe
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:43 PM
anyway, it sounds kinda reasonable:tape:

Corswandt
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:50 PM
Fed played shite throughout the Rogers Masters and not only did he get away with it, he actually won the title.

From what I saw on his match vs Srich, he was playing much the same way he played at Toronto: inconsistent and relying on his serve to get himself out of trouble, à la Sampras. So it would be a further sign of the lack of depth of the ATP if Fed had managed to go deeper into the tournament or even win two TMS titles in a row playing the way he was.

So no, I don't think there was anything to it.

Avid Merrion
Aug 17th, 2006, 01:52 PM
How about just giving Murray some credit for such a great win?
exactly, there's always got to be some kind of conspiracy lurking around....