thanks for your answer :wavey:Hi Ceze!
It’s my understanding that the backup is always used if either player withdraws, even when an LL is in play. For example:
DAY01 has Bertens vs Lisicki, and you pick Bertens. If lisicki withdraws, a LL is put in place, Mladenovic. Even though Bertens still plays, your pick is invalid and a back-up is used. This is because you picked Bertens to beat Lisicki; she now plays Mladenovic, making your pick invalid.
At least, that’s how I’ve always understood the rule :shrug: now that you ask about it though, I could be wrong :lol: In which case, I’d argue that a “walkover” is different than a withdrawal before the match starts.
Here I disagree: in your example I didn't pick Bertens to beat Lisicki, but I picked her to be the winner and go to the next round, whoever her opponent is. A bit as in FITD, the aim of suicide game is to go as far as possible in the rounds by picking "survivors", and my player survived!
Here I agree and I better understand the interest of this rule Thanks for the explanation. Even if I'm sad it prevented me from winning this week :sad: (Osaka )More importantly, back to your initial question of WHY this rule was in place for Osaka. The biggest reason is that we never know WHEN a player withdraws. Sometimes it’s done in press conference, sometimes on twitter, sometimes not until a player walks on court. So, in theory, often it’s nearly impossible to tell WHEN the walkover was actually granted. Therefore, I could pick Bertens after I knew Osaka had a walkover, but before it was made official, thereby making it impossible for the tournament runner to know whether my pick was made on time or not. Essentially, “start time” is impossible to determine, unlike a normal match where start = “first point”
This, plus the other obvious reason of the fact that no match was actually played, are the two big reasons why we void a walkover no matter what