Talk:Rafael Nadal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spain Portal This article is part of WikiProject Spain which aims to to expand and organise information better in articles related to the history, languages, and cultures of Spain. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, which collaborates on Tennis related subjects on Wikipedia, such as players, tournaments and rules. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading:

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

• On 1/26/05 added intro and titles
• On 2/21/05 added news, davis cup, Results

--- Very complete, I think the scores are important, but more biographical information might be useful, and links to interviews as well.

This is looking like a webapage/blog rather than an encyclopedia entry. "News" section unnecessary. Scores for every match unnecessary.

"This is looking like a webpage/blog rather than an encyclopedia entry". AGREE. Please look for my comment in "Trivia". --Cristiano

Contents 1 Gasquet 2 About the rankings 3 Career 4 Last Name 5 redundant information 6 Equipment 7 Majorca 8 Trivia 9 Arrogance 10 Time Violations 11 Majorcan Spanish 12 Graph of time 13 Picture? 14 The Spanish doping scandal 15 Catalan player 16 Score Format

[edit] Gasquet

Richard Gasquet: born June 18, 1986

From the ATP profile of Gasquet: "2003- Finished as youngest player (17) in Top 100 INDESIT ATP Entry Ranking"

Source: http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/playerprofiles/Highlights/default.asp?playernumber=G628

Well, if Nadal finished that year in Top 50 and Gasquet didn't, I think it's very simple. Why not to say that Nadal was the youngest player in Top 50? (Nadal finished 2003 number 49 and Gasquet number 93).

Source:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/entrysystem/Default.asp?range=1-50&country=&RankDate=12/15/2003

http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/entrysystem/Default.asp?range=51-100&country=&RankDate=12/15/2003

Barakandu May 31 2006

[edit] About the rankings

Hi. I see that a subdivision has been added to list the "current rankings". Are we sure this is a good idea? This requires constant updating, sometimes weekly, for some of the entries, whereas the "highest ranking" entry is far more stable, changing only every now and then, or never, if the player has once reached the n.1 position. This makes our lives easier and keeps the page from being blatantly outdated periodically. In any case, an entry for his ranking in Wimbledon 2005 (doesn't say the year, but obviously...) seems unjustified by any standards, I'll be removing it. Regards, Redux 8 July 2005 22:39 (UTC)

Hi. Well im not the person who wrote the thing above im just here to talk about Nadal's rankings. Obviously he should be number one in the world above Roger Federer. They have met five times this year and Federer has only one once. Yes i know Nadal has lost other games, but considering he basically beats Roger whenever they meet it only seems right to have him as number one. Rafael Nadal is an amazing tennis player who should be ranked number one. I for one can't wait to see the day (which will be soon) when he is at number one (I mean he's already earned it; he should be there). Anyways I'm sure everyone else in the world feels the same. YOU'RE NUMBER ONE... AND ALWAYS WILL BE.

You are wrong, I don't feel the same. Krajicek has 6-2 vs Sampras (to my liking), they ended up 6-4, but Pete was still one of the greatest. That his game suits to Federer even on hard or grass doesn't change the fact that his game is inferior on fast surfaces against others like Blake or Berdych. A real world no.1 is someone who rather wins 24 finals in a row in two years and reaches 17 consecutive finals. Scineram 12:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Career

There seems to have been ongoing confusion concerning Rafa's debut at Wimbledon. According to the Wimbledon history on the ATP website http://www.atptennis.com/en/tournaments/profile/540.asp and his bio also on the ATP site http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/playerprofiles/default2.asp?playersearch=Nadal,+R his debut was in 2003 at age 17, NOT 2000 aged 13. This information has been changed a number of times on the page, but I have seen no evidence for believing the year 2000 debut. Is there a source I've missed?

-why dont you go look at the draws to see?

[edit] Last Name

Which is the encyclopedic interest of the meaning of the last name in catalan? You notice what would suppose to be adding the meaning of all the last names of all important personages included in an encyclopedia in their respective languages? You they imagine if we dedicated ourselves to expose the meaning of the last name of George Bush or Miguel de Cervantes, or Bob Hope? It would be a stupidity in an encyclopedia

[edit] redundant information

Villas record stands since 1977, which is 29 years.

"which is 29 years" isn't needed, you've already written "since 1977".

Well, no. It is up to the editor to decide whether to spell something like that out for the reader, or to let the reader work it out. It is more important to make sure the editor says what year they are referring to, eg. "Villas's record stood for 29 years from 1977 to 2006." Carcharoth 12:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Equipment

The location of "His current racquet is the Babolat AeroPro Drive" in the first para seems to me to be someone's cheeky attempt at product placement. Maybe this should go further down in the article as it is for other professionals? Also it's "racket" in U.S. English, not "racquet."

[edit] Majorca

I've noticed that someone is constantly reverting the first sentence of the article, where Nadal is described as "a Spanish tennis player", to "Majorcan tennis player." Majorca is in Spain and the province of Spain from which Nadal comes is out of place in the first line in the article. --Burgas00 16:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

I find the "trivia" information absolutely unnecessary and partial and not an encyclopedic information at all. It's not about Nadal, it's just about the non-existent fair play of the French public (not only Nadal was booed) and Guillermo Vilas. The problem for Nadal in Paris is that he's Spaniard and not French. The same problem had earlier Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Pedro Delgado or Miguel Indurain. The problem with Guillermo Vilas is his well known super "ego". --Barakandu, 26 Jun 2006

I don't agree. I have been following the Rolland Garros for some time and I dont remember such a level of hostility by the French public and media towards any other player. Unfounded accusations of doping have also been expressed by French newspapers. What other player has been booed at during his speech after winning the final? And that was not even against a French player! --Burgas00 12:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

-- Don´t forget that Nadal won last year Gasquet and Grosjean and this year Mathieu before winning the titles. Do you remember what happened with Grosjean? Why Nadal is only booed in France? Do you know the rivalry between Spaniards and French in sports? Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario was booed too after winning Roland Garros... -- --Barakandu 27 Jun 2006

True. I agree. But its surprising and worth mentioning. Specially considering that Nadal has managed to win twice at RG while facing such hostility from the crowds.--Burgas00 12:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

-- It`s only worth mentioning if it bothers you. Even though you are a fan, you should try to write objective. If I read your text, I immediately know you are a fan (=subjective). Being objective contains the doping topic. You wrote its unfounded and only in the french newspapers. There has been several articles about it true, but not only in the french media. The last one was in the spanish newspapers (EPO) during the French 06 in conjunction with eufemiano fuentes, the arrested spanish doctor. You use however too often. Once you wrote Fderer`s. Please read it carefully, there are several mistakes. this sentence is just false: "maintaining a dominant winning record against Federer--something that no other player in all of the ATP could accomplish." There were a few. Hewitt was leading 7-2, Nalbandian 5-0, henman 6-1. In RG 06, Nadal was not the clear favorite. Odds were 1.8 Nadal, 2.25 Federer, clear favorite would be 1.1 Nadal, 10 Federer. Consider, Federer had matchpoints in Rome 06 which is played on clay too. -- cristiano, 2 July 2006

Was this last comment directed at me? It doesnt make much sense to me... Please explain yourself more clearly. What do you find NPOV about the article?

Also, I dont know what you mean by the "Doping topic". What is this? All I know about Doping related to Nadal is that during the RG one French Journal (I cant remember which) implied that Nadal could be taking substances, without openly accusing him. This claim is unfounded since all tests taken by Nadal have been negative.

I am not a fan of Nadal, although I do enjoy tennis. What are you on about?

--Burgas00 19:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

This week "le journal du dimanche" has written an article about Nadal being on the black list of Fuentes. "L`equipe" has written already in 2005 about it. Also in RG 06 all the big spanish newspapers spoke about Nadal being on the black list. There has also been trouble because of the withdrawal in Australian Open 06 in conjunction with doping. I think we should write about it, just a sentence or so in the trivia.

This is outright garbage... please provide sources. Well you wont because there arent any.

There are also plenty of faults:

1. maintaining a dominant winning record against Federer--something that no other player in all of the ATP could accomplish." There were a few. Hewitt was leading 7-2, Nalbandian 5-0, henman 6-1.

This is a question of English. Have these players MANTAINED the record? Yes they had.

2. In RG 06, Nadal was not the clear favorite. Odds were 1.8 Nadal, 2.25 Federer, clear favorite would be 1.1 Nadal, 10 Federer. Consider, Federer had matchpoints in Rome 06 which is played on clay too.

I don't know about this...its not that big an issue. Its not, but it should be corrected.

3. At the speech RG 06 when he was mistranslatet, the public didn`t boo because they were thinking he praised himself, they were booing at the translator because he didn´t translate the good words about federer. It was not the french booing, but the spaniards!

This is untrue. We all watched it on TV, no need to argue. Nadal was booed during and after the match by the mainly French audience. I spoke about the speech, not about the match itself. Don`t you get it? They booed at the translator, not at nadal. why should they? -- ¿Because he's Nadal and they can't afford he won a lot of french players in France?

4. you are right, they booed on many other occasions. Why? he took a medical timeout because a banana was struck during the mathieu match at 15-15! Thats when it started, and he also cheered on opponents faults, took too much time during points when he was serving, but also let the opponent wait to serve. so its mostly Nadals fault isn`t it?

Hostility against Nadal started when he started beating French players in 2005, not when he choked on a piece of banana during his match with Mathieu. why didn`t they boo when he played the early rounds against soderling and kim then?

-- To be choked of a piece of banana is Nadal's fault??? He's the only player to cheer his opponent faults? all of them are booed? ¿French players too? Jajajaja. Barakandu ---cristiano, 3.7.06 22.13

--Burgas00 21:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

---cristiano, 4.7.06 08.32

Cristiano,

Barakandu is right here. You seem to show some tendentious hostility against this player....--Burgas00 19:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

--- Much better now. cristiano

Once again, the trivia section is looking very POV. "Nadal has some of the greatest sportsmanship in men's tennis." Unsourced of course, only "it has been noted." It's true he handles himself well winning or losing, but so do people like Federer, Baghdatis, Gonzalez, etc. "Met hostility from the French public." Again: Unsourced. Yes, the French crowd did boo at Nadal during his victory speech (supposedly due to a translation error) but shortly after they cheered for him. Even so, this is not the first time a player has met hostility at a foreign location. Is it really necessary for inclusion? Macbrother 01:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Some of the stuff in the trivia section doesnt really seem like trivia. Things like his going over the limit, the minor steroid allegations leveled against him and the problems with the French Fans might fit better under a new section entitled "controversies" or a title with a similar effect. what do you guys think? Estradak 01:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arrogance

isn't he noted as one of the most arrogant players in tennis? look at his stupid arms! he's blatantly a doper. baghdatis GAVE him that second set on a plate, no worries, all dopers get caught out eventually these days. He will too. It's only a matter of time.

Arrogant? Non, arrogance c'est lorsqu'on se vante de jouer "un jeu presque parfait", quand on dit que ça serait normal de gagner 1 titre du grand chelem par an, quand on joue la fausse modestie disant "que je suis moi même surpris de la façon que je joue", et j'en passe. Nadal est un gars humble et qui reste les pieds sur terre. (Sorry, to write in french). Induru

Je suis d'accord avec Induru. This is not the place to expose your personal issues. If you dont like Nadal please insult him on a sports forum. This is not the place... I am reverting your silly edits (once more).--Burgas00 20:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok I see Induru has already done so...cool.--Burgas00 20:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Just a hint: when Nadal was asked to describe himself in one word, he chose the word "humble"[see his homepage]. And just think about his eulogy for Federer: it's not psychological warfare because everyone does that, right. By the way I'm not a fan of Nadal, but I think he's a good player and deserves fair judgement. And have you seen him training? He trains longer and harder than anyone on the tour. He gets all those muscles because he's been working out since he's 12. He's not a doper but a hard-working guy, although dumber than some players on the tour. --Federer Super Fan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.8.16.93 (talk • contribs) 02:12, March 24, 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Time Violations

Do we really need a quarter of the article to be about how Rafael Nadal takes up so much time before serving? Surely this in information that can be condensed into a few sentences and added to his trivia section. Much of this information seems irrelevant and the person who wrote is obviously very anti-Nadal. The paragraph is littered with the personal opinions of whoever wrote this, claiming Nadal's time stalling tactics are an obvious ploy in order to gain an advantage and cheat. While this may be true this is merely an opinion and should be omitted from the article.

This definitely deserves some mention in the main article, since it's one of the most-discussed aspects of Nadal's game. NBC even popped up a little timer before each of his serves in the semifinals that measured just how far over the allotted twenty seconds. Interpretation of why he does this isn't appropriate, but there needs to be at least a mention. --Dantheox 04:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree a mention is warranted, but I think a few sentences would be more than adequate. To start recalling all the instances that Nadal has done this is excessive, and all the parts where it says that this is a ploy to cheat, should be deleted since this is just an opinion.

My opinion on what should stay...:

Keep and reword

Delete

(Notes)

Nadal’s consistent warnings for time violation (topic sentence) come from his deliberate ploy to hold up time between his own serves. The laws of tennis state that a maximum of 20 seconds is allowed between the time at which the last point in finished to the time at which the next serve is delivered (factual). Some tournaments even allow a maximum of 25 seconds but Nadal’s deliberate delay spans anywhere from 25 seconds to 38 seconds; as he trudges behind to baseline, calls for as many as four balls from the ball kids at which he stares at and return two of them, he evens out the amount of balls each of the ball kids have by calling for a ball and then immediately returning it to the other one, and when he stands to serve he bounces the ball and pauses as many as two times to scratch his nose or brush his hair behind his ears. (wow...nice splurge there...delete) This ploy is especially evident on important points; it’s common for Nadal to spend as much as 38 seconds, 18 over the limit, on his own break points and points where he is behind on his own service. (if there an be facts shown to prove this - otherwise delete) Nadal has picked up several time violations, including grand slams (factual), especially in the 2006 French Open which he eventually won (irrelevant - delete). So frustrating to the opponents in whom he plays, many opponents have been forced to get into their own routine on the Nadal serve. In Wimbledon 2006, Nadal’s round of 16 opponent Irakli Labadze was so frustrated at Nadal’s antics and the umpires’ lack of authorization, that he mocked Nadal and humorously copied his routine and played with his own hair before serving. (if there an be facts shown to prove this - otherwise delete) Due to Nadal’s consistent and obvious ploy to hold up play heavily against the laws of the game, Nadal has been accused by tennis authorities and fans alike as having an unfair advantage. (if there an be facts shown to prove this, especially the tennis authorities bit - otherwise delete)

--Killfest2 07:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Whatever... The section should be scrapped it is clearly NPOV and the person who wrote it has serious issues. Poor kid, Nadal is a really sweet, timid and humble guy actually, as those of us who speak Spanish know. Him not being resident of a fiscal paradise like most other tennis players (including Spanish ones) is enough to win me over. But on this talk page he has been accused by this user of:

1. Taking drugs because his arms are too big and he is too good a player. (Who needs evidence?)
2. Cheating by choking on a banana.
3. Cheating by touching his hair.
4. Cheating by taking long to serve. (Actually when playing against Nadal -ask Hewitt- it is a blessing to have this time to recover)
5. Cheating by chosing the ball he is going to play.
6. Cheating by scratching his nose.

Hey guys. Been looking at this time violation section and the whole thing is pretty messy. Some people thinks it should be deleted entirely while others believe it deserves a mention. I thought Killfest2's comments and editing was useful so I've added his edit to the article, but of course it needs alot of work to sound neutral. It is a bit of an attack on Nadal! Mike

To whoever is insulting Rafael Nadal, do refrain from utilising this page and insult him openly if you dare and by the way...what is wrong with scratching your nose on court? What about Maria Sharapova? Listen to her shrieking and distracting her opponents. 203.221.31.154

I have cut it down to NPOV. Erased all the deliberate ploy stuff.--Burgas00 10:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Ceux qui veulent critiquer allez dans un forum, vous pourrez y passer des heures parlant de fuentes,morceaux de bananes, ses bras d'ouvrier comme dit Guy Forget etc mais ne faites pas chier les autres. Ceci est une encyclopédie au cas où vous l'auriez oublié et elle doit rester neutre et objective. On a tous nos tennistes préférés (le mien c'est Safin), mais perdre son temps à dénigrer l'article d'un tenniste je trouve que c'est bien triste. Induru.

Your trivia point is neutral, I just made some grammar corrections. The first sentence didn't make sense, it opened with how much time Nadal spends but doesn't inform the reader on what it is relating to. I think this edit is very neutral and reasonably short. What do you think Burgas? --Mike10 10:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your edits except for the last half of the last line since Nadal recieved a couple of warnings during rolland garros and was thus obliged to be extra careful not to go over the limit during the final against Federer. Im really excited over today's Wimbledon final. I dont care who wins but I hope it lasts 5 sets!:-) --Burgas00 11:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Any discussion of time violations (including the graphs below), has no meaning whatsoever, unless one is not comparing Nadal's preparation time with a sample of other players. I bet many players violate the time rule now and then (and obviously when the opponent has a break point). So until a comparison with other players are established, i.e., until it is established that Nadal is systematically slower than the average player, then put these speculations to a rest!--HJ 23:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Majorcan Spanish

Look one does not start an article on some Spaniard by stating what Autonomous community he comes from as if he represented some ethnic minority. One does not talk of Majorcan-Spaniards, Valencian-Spaniards (PP minister Zaplana), Galician-Spaniards (Franco was a Galician Spaniard!), Asturian-Spaniards (Fernando Alonso)etc... all of these people come from regions with a distinct language and culture. Spain is a culturally diverse country, thats it.

We cannot define Nadal as a Majorcan Spaniard as if the region of Spain in which he was born was an issue. It is not. --Burgas00 09:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Graph of time

Go here for more details.

--Killfest2 02:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

This is interesting killfest. When I watched the match, I actually thought Nadal was much quicker then I have ever seen him in the last two years! And in seeing this graph where he is probably averaging 25 secs (approx), it really does show that he is spending a terrible amount of time between serves in his average matches. If I was a Nadal opponent, it really wouldnt bother me but I think if theres rules in place and only one guy is breaking them, then he has to be made to follow the rules like everyone else. Anyway, I think it's obvious there have been some words said to him about this matter and I think it will go away by itself, especially as he gets older because he definitely doesn't do it to catch his breath or lower his heartbeat because he's one of the best athletes in tennis. By the way, did you time him yourself throughout the telecast or did you get the times from somewhere?--Mike10 21:23, 10 July 2006 (AEST)

I timed them myself, as per the definition of when a point ends (when the score is announced by the umpire). I certainly thought he was a lot quicker than normal, as well - imagine if I had of timed him at Roland Garros! Feel free to use this however you want, or not at all, and ask any questions here. Killfest2 11:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Please, where can we see the graphics of the other players? I would like to compare. Thank you. Barakandu, 8 Aug 2006

[edit] Picture?

Can we find a picture with a legitimate copyright (that is, free) to include in this article? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I found one. I hope you'll like it.--Aishe 20:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Spanish doping scandal

Wasn't Nadal implicated in the recent Fuentes case alongside those cyclists? --Steerpike 14:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

No.--Burgas00 15:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Not at all.

No. French (big surprise) sports newspaper L'Equipe tried to implicate him, and was woefully unsuccessful. Didn't apologize either for trying to smear his reputation without proof. Then they tried to accuse Spanish Oscar Pereiro (to be named winner of the 2006 Tour de France). Again, they failed (Pereiro is asthmatic, and proved it). L'Equipe doesn't like Spanish sportspeople winning in their territory it would seem... Raystorm 12:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catalan player

I don't understand why it is said that he is a Catalan player. Is Catalonia an empire that reaches to the Baleares?. Nadal speaks catalan but that's it. If we start like that we can say that Andy Garcia or Shakira are Spanish because their native language is Spanish.

[edit] Score Format

I Vote to change the score format because its confusing to show all wins in one category and all losses in another. Also the score format looks like even when he loses "such as wimbledon finals" the score goes 6-0, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3 when he lost that match. That is FEDERERS score NADALS score is 0-6, 6-7, 7-6, 3-6, showing that he LOST the match both players cant have the same score. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.155.113.55 (talk • contribs) 09:02, February 26, 2007 (UTC).

As you know, this has been discussed before. The consensus score format, as used not just here but in most tennis publications, is to put the winning person's score first. Thus, "Federer defeated Nadal 6-0, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3" and "Federer lost to Nadal 6-0, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3." The "lost" language (or the header in Wikipedia articles) indicates who won or lost. The score is simply the score. Another example (since you are from the United States, I am giving you an American football example) would be that the Oakland Raiders lost to the San Diego Chargers 35-10 or that the San Diego Chargers defeated the Oakland Raiders 35-10. Because we are discussing formats, you are also deleting tiebreak scores in several tennis articles without explanation and against community consensus. You also are combining tables in several tennis articles against community consensus. Stop doing these things unless consensus changes. Tennis expert 16:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

you TENNIS EXPERT are wrong. The correct way to show set scores say for Nadal would be He Defeated Federer in the French Open Final 1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6. And he Lost to Federer in the Wimbledon Final 0-6, 6-7, 7-6, 3-6.

Now lets do federers scores for those same exact 2 matches. Federer Lost to Nadal at the 2006 French open Final by a score of 6-1, 1-6, 4-6, 6-7. And he defeated Nadal at Wimbledon 6-0, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3.

Just look at ROGER FEDERES OFFICIAL WEBSITE. (http://www.rogerfederer.com/en/rogers/results/index.cfm you will notice it shows his scores are as I say. Those are HIS SCORES. Now if you want say the scores of the WIMBLEDON FINAL (or any other tournament.) then of course you would put the winners scores as the main score. But not if your doing scores for just 1 single person. you must put the scores as they affect him.

So if Roger Federers OFFICIAL WEBSITE has his scores that way. Then his OFFICIAL WIKIPEDIA PAGE should be exactly the same.

And Also do a little research about what AMERICAN FOOTBALL. You will see that your wrong again.

Here is the schedule from ESPN for the Sandiego Chargers. http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/teams/schedule?team=sdg

And here is the schedule from ESPN for the Oakland Raiders

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/teams/schedule?team=oak

you will notice the raiders lost 0-27 to the chargers and the chargers won by a score of 27-0 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.4.209.194 (talk • contribs) 10:54, February 27, 2007 (UTC).

I agree with the order of the sets (from the perspective of whomever won or lost) but I do not believe that the wins and losses ought to be combined. Supertigerman 14:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)