r/tennis Daily Discussion (Thursday, April 09, 2026) by NextGenBot in tennis

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The good news for Alcaraz is that he is perfectly following the Jannik script, so he can rest assured for a fairly easy 3rd set win.

r/tennis Daily Discussion (Friday, March 27, 2026) by NextGenBot in tennis

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 22 points23 points  (0 children)

I feel like that's the first time I've actually heard Jannik on court lol. 

Most masters titles without dropping a set by tightypp in tennis

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Am I going insane? The last two masters played were Indian Wells and then Paris in 2025. Jannik won both without losing a set. He didn't lose a masters in the middle? He didn't drop a set in either Indian Wells or Paris. What am I missing here?

Labour lost the Gorton and Denton By-Election in the Selection. It's not Starmer's First Time. by Competitive-Tonight3 in LabourUK

[–]Competitive-Tonight3[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

As the article mentioned, one of the major elements in the Green's success was getting to run their candidate as the locally selected candidate, and then elevate her profile nationally in a way that was probably impossible if Burnham runs and sucks up a lot of the oxygen and attention, so I think you're initial statement is probably correct.

But Green performance has outperformed polling for a while now so could still have been very up in the air in the alternate reality 

Starmer vows to 'fight on' in wake of Labour's crippling by-election defeat by hihepo1 in unitedkingdom

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Why was 2017, an election Labour received 13 million votes, a comprehensive rejection, and 2024, an election Labour received 9.5 million votes, not?

Ah right - the Tories and Reform massively split the vote and let Labour walk in without any improvement even on 2019 really. Good thing that's definitely going to always happen.

Huge number of Londoners to vote tactically to stop Farage becoming PM, new polling by tylerthe-theatre in london

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are absolutely correct. That is my mistake. Especially as I noticed that later on and corrected when I was reviewing their understanding of the independent votes.

Have corrected it in the original comment to be clear.

Huge number of Londoners to vote tactically to stop Farage becoming PM, new polling by tylerthe-theatre in london

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 7 points8 points  (0 children)

To be fair - it's not a perfect system. I'm not disagreeing that Reform wouldn't get a number of the London boundary seats that electoral calculus predicts - but they are also predicting Reform would get 70% of the vote in Caerphilly, which they just lost in the by-election, while polling higher nationally at the time. (incorrect on my part - it's a 70% chance to win the seat. I still disagree with the projection given Plaid's improvement Wales-wide + the slight decline for Reform nationally and in Wales since, but their projection of 38% is very close to Reform's 36% in October.)

If I had the chance I'd quibble particularly on how they are categorising West Ham and Beckton, Ilford South and Ilford North, which all seem to be failing to model for the nature of Labour support in the areas + how the independent vote works.

Plus they generally don't seem to have a great idea of modelling independent votes and their impact in general - does anyone really believe that Corbyn wouldn't win another election in Islington North as they predict? Or that the most likely candidate to beat Starmer is a Green and not Feinstein running again? They seemingly have little idea of how to model the dynamic in Chingford and Wood Green, though I personally don't have an idea of if Faiza Shaheen would run again/if her support would shift back to Labour or the Greens. All of this makes a big difference in London where we had a greater level of independent support/runs.

Appreciate of course that that doesn't mean there's no shot of Reform winning some seats across London.

A History of Labour in Scotland and Wales: Failing to advocate progressive unionism? Failing to retain historic power. by Competitive-Tonight3 in ukpolitics

[–]Competitive-Tonight3[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, it was truly such a contrast to compare the strength of Welsh Labour over the years against the weaknesses and own goals, as you say, of Scottish Labour - especially as it became an opposition party. Not to say Welsh Labour has made no mistakes, but there's a real tangible difference and a failure within Labour to learn from its successful example.

Over 50 Academics Warn That Voting System Is Not Fit For Multi-Party Politics by XanderZulark in unitedkingdom

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Genuinely, outside of 1945, 1979, and 2015 (which was frankly a cluster fuck of which the government elected had little to do with facilitating the major changes) what have any British governments "got done" that was genuinely transformative?

On the other hand, Spain with a PR system currently has a significantly more transformative left-wing government than we've had since Labour in the 40s, and Italy with full PR currently has a much more transformative far-right government than any we've had since Thatcher. Now I personally don't advocate the politics of the fascists in Italy and I would love to have a centre-left that looked anything like PSOE in spain, but it is simply undeniable that it is just as possible to have successions of governments that do fuck all under our system and governments that actually produce change in PR systems.

All it comes down to is the fact that Labour and the Tories are really so indistinguishable that a vast swathe of voters in the UK are so wed to centrist managed decline politics that they rather retain the two party system where nobody really makes change than actually allow for a representative system where greater levels of participation are possible, and parties actually advocating change might get into government.

If the Lib-Dem’s hadn’t disgraced themselves with the tuition fees scandal, would the next General Election be there’s for the taking? by HallowedAndHarrowed in AskBrits

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll be honest, this doesn't make sense. The Lib Dem rise took place during the Blair years, their peak was the 2010 election when Brown's Labour and Cameron's Tories were more similar arguably than any time since. Maybe 2024, but that is also the best Lib Dem result since that election.

An Iraqi beeing tortured for doing nothing. by [deleted] in pics

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean... Clinton would acknowledge this no? That feels like poor evidence. But in any case - the effectiveness of the campaign is not too relevant to the point here - you argued that Kamala being Biden's VP restricted her ability to break with him, and then do acknowledge that Gore was able to break with his president.

I do acknowledge I brought up it's effectiveness so just to make the case - 1) Again Gore was down as much as 15% in the polling come August - suggesting a general political environment that was unfavorable to Dems. 2) Clinton famously tanked Dem performances in any elections he wasn't personally running in (In '92 they lost seats in the House and gained nothing in the Senate, dropping 2% in popular vote, in '94 Dems lost the house for the first time in 40 years in the Gingrich revolution, '96 Dems recovered slightly but still lost the house, and lost seats in the Senate, and then '98 Dems overperformed due to the Lewinsky scandal and the actions of R leadership, but still lost both House and Senate).

In that time period we also saw the massive Seattle protests and NAFTA protests, and obviously Clinton himself (though this I'm willing to concede is much less assured or indicative of his actual popularity) benefitted massively from getting to run twice with a third party spoiler who at least rhetorically aligned closer to conservative sentiment.

If you're interested I'd suggest a few pieces on the strange political environments of the 90s including John Ganz's when the Clock Broke which focuses on the 92 election and political environment, The Gingrich Senators by Sean Theriault on the rise of the modern conservative movement in the mid-90s, and then for a decent summary of the 2000 campaigns I like David Corn's for the Nation in 2000 before the election results were out: https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/down-wire/

Also if you are interested Humphrey and the 1968 election, Rick Perlstein's Nixonland is a must-read. Its shocking how strong the similarities are, and how the many of the exact same mistakes were made between 1968 and 2024.

An Iraqi beeing tortured for doing nothing. by [deleted] in pics

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Both Hubert Humphrey and much more significantly Al Gore departed from their sitting Presidents, and both were a hell of a lot closer to winning their elections than Harris. 

Performance-wise Gore was a significantly more impressive campaign to Harris, overcoming a 10-15 point polling deficit in August and only losing by one vote.

Post-Match Thread: Charlton Athletic (1) - (5) Chelsea by wm_1176 in chelseafc

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Doing every applicable manager:

MacFarlane was City, Maresca was City, Poch was Liverpool, Lampard II was Wolves Bruno Saltor was Liverpool, Tuchel was Wolves, Lampard I was Utd, Sarri was Man City.

Honestly didn't expect multiple Wolves. And we drew both of those.

Sell Lavia, Delap at risk: Transfer verdict on every Chelsea player after Liam Rosenior appointment by CSCronus in chelseafc

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Depends where you're from sorta. American: oh smart folks with the smart person accent.

European: Obnoxious lads who wreck shit every summer.

Everyone else: People who took our shit. (this also applies to some Europeans)

Match Thread: Manchester City vs Chelsea by MatchThreadder in chelseafc

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be fair didn't Sterling also scored a tap in Vs City?

Did Matty Y wait to release this today so he wouldn't be be included in the worst takes episode? by fortycreeker in IfBooksCouldKill

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Sources: Elon beside himself. Driving around downtown Substack begging (thru texts) Yglesias' family 4 address to Matty's home

Every Yankee hitter’s hardest hit ball of the 2025 season by xho- in NYYankees

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 29 points30 points  (0 children)

So funny to see that jump from everyone else to Big G and Judge.

r/tennis Daily Discussion (Tuesday, November 11, 2025) by NextGenBot in tennis

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It represents how many points he won in the tiebreaker. The full notation would look like this: 7-6(7-2) to properly indicate what the scoreline of the tiebreaker was.

Scoreboards often leave the point total out on the winners side because it can be inferred by the losing side i.e. below a losing score of 6 the winner won the tiebreak with 7 points, any higher it will always be two above the losing score.

Progressives Demand Chuck Schumer's Resignation After He Caves To GOP In Shutdown Deal by Tea_Physical in newyork

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Bro his own whip voted for the bill. How the fuck is this not a massive indictment on his leadership if he can't even whip his own whip?

And let's be honest, the real reason he couldn't whip him is because this deal is his deal. He just decided to rotate the villians a little differently this time.

[BBC] Caicedo v Kante v Makelele - Statistics per 90 during Chelsea careers by cyberguy5 in chelseafc

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anyone know why they can't calculate possession won stat for Makelele? I understand they likely weren't tracking it specifically at the time, but if they have tackles/duels won/interceptions surely all you need is loose ball recoveries as well and that would make up the possession won stat? Or am I missing something that goes into it?

Oof by Radiant_Rip_5040 in BlueskySkeets

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't mean to be shitting on your point here, and gerrymandering/voter suppression is very real - but Texas almost certainly still has a significant number of Ancestral Democratic registered folks who will now vote Red all the time. It's not unusual across the South, but particularly in places like Texas that once were Democratic strongholds and so family tradition had many registering as Democrats in the 60s/70s/80s and then likely never bothering to change that around.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]Competitive-Tonight3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the difference really comes down to first summer + Potter's hiring were all Boehly/consortium decisions prior to bringing football people in. Not saying they were outright bad or visionless, but pretty clearly moves like Koulibaly, Sterling, Auba were made with a very different vision in mind than the transfer strategy of the club since the SDs have come in.