alright here's my dream lineup for game 5 I will not be taking criticism bc I am not sheldon & these are not real lines that will be iced <3

A) nicky - auston - mitch

B) kniesy - john- calle

C) bert - domi - willy

D) dew - kampf - either holmberg or reaves

-

A) 1634 are both defensively responsible meaning they can carry someone who is less so, 3489 both have great shots meaning mitch would have two weapons to deploy, having 34 on the ice is a huge threat and therefore draws less attention to 89 meaning he will have more opportunity

B) this is just a solid line honestly, 1991 are solid and kniesys been really good as well, I would trust them with harder match ups and they (obviously) have scoring ability should they get the chance

C) this was one of my favourite lines from this year. 1188 are both good puck movers and bert works hard and always seems to be right place right time plus obviously willy is great goal scorer AND passer meaning that this line has the opportunity to be unpredictable bc its not always on him to shoot. you don't have to give them third line minutes but having them slightly lower in the line up gives them easier match ups allowing them to focus on where they excel -> offense

D) I liked the fourth line that we started the series with, they were grinding and had a bunch of opportunities and weren't a liability (like they were in the earlier in the year) this one's a little weird bc it kind of depends on the vibe they want. I think kampf stays no matter what while the wings can rotate a bit. Both 2429 pk and have scoring ability so this would be a strong defensive line, meanwhile 2475 are both physical and hard on the forecheck and they may want to keep 75 as a deterrent though it hasn't really been so far

What pilots can teach the world about managing risk

When talk around the dinner table turns to Covid-19 these days (and it seems to quite often), I find myself increasingly using the language of risk management, as if I were evaluating a tricky go/no-go decision in an airplane. If any pilots are around, they usually nod quietly, while non-pilots look mystified or just roll their eyes. I’m certainly not suggesting pilots are experts on infectious diseases or the right people to manage a public health crisis, but I do believe the lessons learned by the aviation industry over the last 50 years have something to offer as we think about life in a world of risk.

But first, let me be clear what I mean by risk management, because that term has become such a buzzword recently that it has lost almost all meaning. In previous articles, I have lamented the “risk management-industrial complex” that has emerged to promote expensive and complicated solutions to non-existent problems. What I’m talking about here is not a document or an app, but a way of thinking, one that most pilots develop during flight training and their initial experience as a private pilot. While you may not realize it, you probably think about potential problems, the probability of those problems occurring, what options you have for avoiding them, and if the end goal is worth it.

That sounds a lot like the decision-making process we are all using right now, whether it’s how to open up a restaurant or whether to go on a vacation. In aviation as in public health, information is never complete and the stakes are high, so decisions are rarely easy. And yet doing nothing is not a long term strategy—staying in bed all day is no way to live life. So how do we balance our impulsive nature and the tendency to fall into analysis paralysis? When making difficult aviation decisions, I think it’s helpful to lean on some core principles of a risk management mindset.

1. Life is not risk-free. This one is obviously true but many people pretend it’s not. The reality is that all of life has risk, even in America in 2020. The chance of being killed by a saber tooth tiger or starving because of a bad harvest are much lower than they were in the past, but you can still get hit by a drunk driver or drown in a bathtub (yes, it happens every year). For pilots, GPS navigators and datalink weather make it very hard to get lost or stumble into a thunderstorm, but flying is certainly not completely safe.

This isn’t a sign of failure. Trying to eliminate all risk is time-consuming, expensive, frustrating, and ultimately impossible. Past a certain point, it’s counterproductive. That doesn’t mean we should all be fatalists and take up BASE jumping, but it does mean we should recognize what success looks like: low risk or managed risk, not zero risk.

2. You can’t reduce risk if you don’t quantify it. Given that life is inherently risky, the key is to think systematically about your exposure, then try to quantify the risks involved. This is much easier said than done, because intuition quickly takes over—we notice headline-making tragedies more than the everyday threats that really kill. You don’t have to spend weeks buried in NTSB reports (or medical journals), but you should try to be specific. “That sounds bad” or “that’s scary” are statements about emotion, not risk. How bad or how scary? For example, your chance of stalling on initial climb may not be exactly 74% higher than losing your engine on takeoff, but it’s worth the effort to calculate a range of probabilities. Which one is really more likely?

You don’t need a formula to know that cloud is trouble.

Just don’t get carried away with the math. In spite of what a Flight Risk Assessment Tool might suggest, risk isn’t an exact science that can be boiled down to an algorithm or a score. As psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer has observed, there’s a difference between risk (“If risks are known, good decisions require logic and statistical thinking”) and uncertainty (“If some risks are unknown, good decisions also require intuition and smart rules of thumb”). Usually it takes both of these approaches to make the best decision.

I think this model works for pilots just as well as it does for doctors or insurance underwriters. Consider which threats are knowable and which ones deserve your attention: the FAA’s well known PAVE checklist is a start but it’s only a start. You know your airplane and your experience level best, so think honestly about what risks might be part of your next flight and remember that the probability of an event happening matters much more than the number of possible events. That is, a high chance of problem happening should count for far more than an extremely low chance of 20 different ones happening.

Having quantified those risks, it’s then much easier to make a game plan to mitigate the ones that matter. Start with the most likely or the most lethal risks, then walk through your available options for avoiding the problem altogether or at least building in some safety margins. This can mean canceling of course, but also altering the route, changing the departure time, reducing the passenger load, or even bringing along another pilot.

3. Habits and systems catch errors. Humans almost never perform flawlessly, so safe pilots (and airlines) expect errors to happen. Likewise, there is no single safety tool that can prevent accidents, so the right answer is an array of procedures and tools to catch those errors before they become a major threat. Belt and suspenders? Yes please.

This is where Gigerenzer’s concept of uncertainty comes in. Hopefully you’ve considered all the obvious risks. But what if you encounter an unforecast gray cloud an hour into your flight? What if your airspeed indicator shows 10 knots fast on final approach, even though everything “feels” normal? You don’t have time to run probabilities and there are no FARs that tell you what to do, but hopefully your own personal rules of thumb kick in: we avoid ugly clouds and we go around if the approach isn’t stabilized on one mile final.

This mindset applies to technology too. Every few years, a new miracle cure is proposed for aviation accidents. Medicine had its hydroxychloroquine moment recently; aviation has had its moments too, from moving map GPS navigators to sophisticated autopilots with a level button to angle of attack indicators. These are wonderful tools (I fly with all of them!) but individually they are merely pieces of the puzzle. Only when combined with good training, thoughtful safety habits, and good maintenance can they can create a safer way to fly.

4. Complacency kills. Richard Collins always said that, no matter how many hours were in your logbook, it was the next hour that counted. That was his way of staying vigilant, because Mother Nature and Murphy’s Law do not care whether you’re a student pilot or an ATP. A threat is a threat.

Experience is certainly valuable for a pilot, but only if you learn the right lessons from your logbook. If you took off 300 lbs. overweight and made it over the fence at the end of the runway, does that mean you can do it again or that you got lucky? Likewise, if you haven’t caught Covid-19 by now, does that mean you never will? Be careful about phrases like, “it worked last time” and “it hasn’t happened yet.”

This brings to mind a great line from the 1995 movie La Haine: “Heard about the guy who fell off a skyscraper? On his way down past each floor, he kept saying to reassure himself: So far so good… so far so good… so far so good. How you fall doesn’t matter. It’s how you land!”

Part of being a professional pilot means having the discipline to use the checklist, every time.

The antidote to this dangerous attitude is a combination of perspective and discipline. The perspective part means staying focused on the ultimate goal. As pilots, our goal isn’t just to fill in the blanks of a weight and balance form or perform a preflight walk around; it’s to complete a flight safely. Going through the motions should be a red flag.

The discipline part means following the rules, even if you’ve done it 1,000 times already. A great example is the near religious use of checklists by pilots (admit it: you use them around the house too). Airline captains most definitely know how to start the engine or configure the airplane for takeoff, but they follow the checklist anyway. They know that routines, while occasionally inconvenient, also keep you safe. After all, those habits and systems mentioned above only work if they are in place for every flight.

5. It’s all about the risk-reward tradeoff. Some people are horrified at the idea of willingly accepting additional risk in life, but we do it every day when we decide to speed by 10 mph or eat sushi. If the reward is valuable enough to offset the increase in risk, the tradeoff is perfectly rational.

The same goes for general aviation. When I fly my family on vacation in a four-seat piston airplane, I am taking on more risk than the same trip on Delta. The numbers show this quite clearly. But I’m hardly a thrill-seeker by nature: I have never been skydiving, I don’t drive motorcycles, and I don’t even like to gamble. I fly myself not because I think I’m invincible but because I believe I can drive down the risk (with good training, equipment, maintenance, and procedures) and maximize the reward (land closer to our destination, have a more flexible schedule, and simply have more fun).

These tradeoffs are what general aviation risk management is all about. Scud running under an 800 foot overcast at night just so I can get a $100 hamburger? That’s a terrible risk-reward equation. Flying to visit family on a clear day over familiar terrain? That’s worth it. We all make these decisions every time we fly; the best pilots are explicit about them.

Humans are not naturally gifted at this type of thinking; most of us hate talk of unknown risks and potentially deadly tradeoffs. That’s because our minds are, in evolutionary terms, still optimized for an agrarian lifestyle of 5,000 years ago. We are well suited to distinguishing a predator from a plant, but none of our human hardware is made for flying airplanes in the clouds at 170 knots. That doesn’t mean our job is hopeless, only that we need to train ourselves to think the right way and then consistently apply this mindset. Gut instincts just aren’t enough.

The post What pilots can teach the world about managing risk appeared first on Air Facts Journal.

from Engineering Blog https://airfactsjournal.com/2020/06/what-pilots-can-teach-the-world-about-managing-risk/

Safeguard your family with #PEMF #Therapy #Machines-- #CORONAVIRUS #Covid -19.

Safeguard your family with #PEMF #Therapy #Machines-- #CORONAVIRUS #Covid -19. IN THE NEW AGE. http://inthenewage.com If you are interested in the #coronavirus #pandemic, also known as #conid -19, after that you ought to discover and also review regarding (pulsed magnetic fields (additionally called #pemf and also the QRS 101 #PEMF #therapy #machine. Coronavirus is an epidemic that has actually been significantly spreading throughout the globe. Many individuals are searching for a remedy to secure themselves as well as their households. Using PEMF, especially the QRS 101 PEMF machine, you can shield your family members by:. - Increasing the Immune System improving your cellular "fight" mode. - Oxygenate the Blood optimizing the shipment of nourishment to your cells. - Energize your cells to operate at complete capability. - Revitalize the organs took part in the battle. #QRS # 101 #PEMF machines have settings that manage the bed mattress circulation of magnetic intensity, on and off timers, rest timers, wellness, as well as vitalization that put you on the offensive, enhancing your immune system, as well as aid you deal with infections such as the SARS-CoV-2, which creates #COVID -19. While you may be defenseless to quit the worldwide spread of the #Coronavirus, you can prepare your family to eliminate on a cellular degree. Need to you contact Coronavirus, you can improve your body immune system's capacity to eliminate it. No one understands exactly how far this infection will spread as well as how many areas it will influence. Provide your household a dealing with chance with the advantage of QRS 101 PEMF machine PEMF. When this pandemic has actually decreased, you will certainly have an effective device to aid you with healthy ageing, boosting your lifestyle. Exactly How does PEMF Aid Battle Infections? As blood cells power down, they lose their positive cost, clumping with each other in something called the Rouleaux result. (See picture revealing live-cell evaluation of blood with the Rouleaux impact). Capillaries are so small that blood cells can only travel through them in single file. The Rouleaux result avoids blood cells from streaming through the fine blood vessels where much of the job of the blood is carried out, such as taking in nutrients as well as oxygen or eliminate toxins or co2. Blood impacted by the Rouleaux result recirculates without having actually done its work. The Rouleaux effect restricts sufficient blood flow throughout the body, dramatically reducing oxygen levels, triggering condition. Infections thrive in anaerobic problems (definition without oxygen). Pulsed Electro-Magnetic Treatment (PEMF) favorably charges the blood cells to ensure that they do not clump with each other, breaking the Rouleaux result. (see the image of blood treated with PEMF). The cells of the defense mechanisms have enhanced ATP production, encouraging them for deployment and makes sure the signaling of immune actions. Exactly How does #Coronavirus Job? The Coronavirus has tough protein spikes on its surface area that appear like grappling crowns or hooks, (which is where words corona originates from, it is Latin for crown). These spikes attach themselves to the cells in the lungs. The Coronavirus pirates the cellular procedure of the lungs and replicates itself rapidly. Eventually, the infected cell explodes, dispersing millions of small viruses. How does the Body fight Viruses? When an infection contaminates the body, the body immune system is activated. Blood cells deliver phagocytes (left), the very first line of protection against the infection. The phagocyte's task is to devour the virus-infected cells, capturing them in a membrane. The phagocyte develops antigen particles on its surface, which identify cells for damage. The lymphatic system deploys Cytotoxic T-cells to seek and also damage those cells determined by the antigens. PEMF improves the body immune system and optimizes blood flow and also oxygenation degrees-- putting your body completely fight mode. Cells involved in the battle with the virus are invigorated with enhanced ATP manufacturing. ATP, the organic fuel cell, powers the cell to full strength in combating infection. Coincidently, we at IN THE NEW AGE have been offering to what is taken into consideration on of the best PEMF (Pulsed electromagnetic treatment) Machines on the marketplace (QRS 101 House System) long before the most recent pandemic episode, the Coronavirus, also known as, Covid-19. Likewise, the QRS 101, in addition to PEMF technology, was as well as is used for the treatment of many undesirable also life-threatening wellness problems, such as the Coronavirus since is not just a technology created to BOOST the body immune system of both humans and also animals, but, to likewise stabilize the body's cells by renewing its molecular cell framework. In addition, it is no coincidence that the first to us PEMF technology were the Russian cosmonauts, and NASA. And to this particular day, NASA's astronauts use (Pulsed Electromagnetic Therapy) PEMF to protect against and also stabilize the astronaut's body immune system, however also to reinforce the astronaut's muscle mass's because of absence of gravity in celestial spaces. To, discover more visit. IN THE NEW AGE. http://inthenewage.com. Coronavirus, #pemf #machines, #coronavirus, #pyroenergen #machine, coronavirus symptoms, #corona #virus, #coronavirus #symptoms, coronavirus china, coronavirus kids, coronavirus children, covid-19, #covid 19, #covid -19, coronavirus updates, #coronavirus #us, #corona #virus, #coronavirus #outbreak.

Furthermore, sold at IN THE NEW AGE are however not limited to; #whole #body #vibration #machines, other #pemf #machines, the #pyroenergen #machines, #arcade #games, #jukeboxes, and #pinball #machines.

Capillaries are so small that blood cells can only pass via them in solitary documents. The Rouleaux result avoids blood cells from moving via the fine capillaries where much of the work of the blood is performed, such as absorbing nutrients as well as oxygen or eliminate toxins or carbon dioxide. Pulsed Electro-Magnetic Therapy (PEMF) favorably bills the blood cells so that they do not glob with each other, damaging the Rouleaux result. Blood cells deliver phagocytes (left), the very first line of protection versus the infection. ATP, the organic fuel cell, powers the cell to complete strength in battling infection.

A MONOPOLY OVER HEARTBREAKS?

by Bert A. Ramirez / September 8, 2018

               Rafael Nadal, defending champion in the US Open, is done without being able to defend his title the way he should, on the finals’ ultimate stage.  He again fell victim not exactly to the man opposite his side of the court but to a nagging, seemingly constant presence in his legendary career: injury.

               Nadal had just engaged Juan Martin del Potro, his semifinal rival, in a scorching first set, losing in the tiebreaker 7-3, but the next set saw him gradually losing that spunk and fortitude that’s been his trademark, eventually offering less and less resistance as Del Potro continued to slam his patended big forehands.  It was clear Nadal’s movement was limited at this point, and that something was wrong with the man known the world over as the toughest competitor in the sport, probably in any sport for that matter.  True enough, after the second set won by Del Potro 6-2, Nadal shook his head and went to the umpire to tell him he’s had enough, the pain in his right knee too searing for him to offer any resistance worthy of a champion that he is.

               "That was not a tennis match at the end.  Just one player playing, the other staying on one side of the court," Nadal said afterwards.  "I hate to retire, but staying one more set out there, playing like this, would be too much for me."

               He was in tears in the postgame conference when asked if playing on hard courts made it harder for his knees, which have a history of tendinitis over the years.  He knew that another heartbreak has come to pass, another opportunity has been wasted. Earlier in the third round, that right knee began to act up when he defeated Karen Khachanov, getting it taped before completing a four-set victory.  His five-set classic win against Dominic Thiem in the quarterfinals, which lasted four hours. 49 minutes, must have surely taken its toll on that knee of his.

               The retirement betrays a pattern in Nadal’s career that has seen him deprived of what could have been at least a very good chance at victory if injury did not rear its ugly head time and again.  Just last January, Nadal was gliding through the Australian Open when he suddenly pulled up lame with a hip injury and retired in the fifth set of his quarterfinal match against Marin Cilic.  In the same event in 2014, he looked all-too-powerful in eliminating old rival Roger Federer in the semifinals before suffering a back injury in the finals and losing to Stanislas Wawrinka, against whom he was 12-0 to that point, in four sets.

               That’s three Grand Slam events lost by retirement, and many more Grand Slams missed or pulled out from through the years because of injury: 2004 French Open due to stress fracture in his left ankle, 2006 Australian Open (foot injury), 2009 Wimbledon (knee injury), 2010 Australian Open (pulled out in the quarterfinals because of a knee injury), 2012 US Open (tendinitis in knee), 2013 Australian Open (stomach virus), 2014 US Open (wrist injury), 2016 French Open (withdrew from the third round due to a left wrist injury), and 2016 Wimbledon (left wrist injury).

               And how about the other ATP Tour events that he also missed due to such injury episodes?  In 2009, he had to take a two-month sabbatical because of tendinitis in both knees.  In 2013, he was sidelined for seven months for a left knee injury that he opted to rest rather than subject to surgery.  Again, in 2014, Rafa had to miss much of the second half of the season because of a right wrist injury and appendicitis, for which he had to undergo an appendectomy.  In 2016, he again suffered through a left wrist injury he sustained in the Madrid Open, and in 2017, Rafa ended the year prematurely with him in pain because of a right knee injury.

               While injuries are, of course, part of any athlete’s career, Nadal seems to have had more share of the injuries – and a seeming monopoly of the ensuing heartbreaks – than any of his contemporaries, or tennis great from any era for that matter.

               Rob Soria of Vavel, an international sports newspaper, precisely pointed to that when he wrote in 2014, “Following the completion of the 2014 US Open, Nadal will have either been hurt during or completely missed out on six different majors since 2009, which have unquestionably been his prime years on tour.  Suggesting that the former No. 1 player in the world could have grabbed an extra two or three of those titles would not have been a stretch in the least and to be quite honest, it would have probably been a pretty safe bet.

               “At the end of the day, none of us can say with any sort of certainty how many more titles Rafael Nadal would have won had he been healthier during his time on the ATP Tour.  While it may ultimately be nothing more than a guessing game, the one thing tennis fans everywhere can agree on is injuries have robbed us of the opportunity of watching one of the finest players to ever grace a tennis court  from doing what he does best on far too many occasions and that my friends is almost criminal.”

               What’s ahead of Rafa now that injury has reared its ugly head again, and deprived him of a possible 18th Grand Slam title?  His retirement against Del Potro was only his fourth loss in 49 matches this year, but it was the second by retirement in a Grand Slam event due to injury.

               Rafa, who turned 32 last June 3, insists he has to constantly manage his body, stressing that the current injury is not one that will need much recovery from, just careful management.  “Just about do treatment,” he said when asked about the recovery process. “It is not an injury that tells you, ‘three weeks off, you are back.  Six months off you are back.’  I know what I have to do to be better as soon as possible.  I am sure it will not be six months off of course, I was just making a comparison.  I know what is going on with the knee.  But the good thing is I know how I have to work to be better as soon as possible because we have a lot of experience on that.”

               Whatever happens, one can expect that Nadal will go about this the way he always has – all out.  One, however, can only wonder how much of the heartbreaks this seemingly indomitable creature can further take.  We know he can endure physically, and will “punish” himself, as he himself puts it, in order to play the game he loves.  As my own wife, however, puts it, there’s got to be a point where Rafa has to pause and think: After having achieved all this legendary status, is it worth to keep sacrificing yourself, and the opportunity to start your own family, the Spaniard having declared he won’t start a family unless he can devote his full time to it away from tennis?

               “I will keep going.  That is all,” Nadal simply said when asked about his plans.  “These moments are tough but I have to keep going and working hard to get more opportunities.  I am having two great years so I just have to enjoy the moments.  This year has been fantastic until this moment.  I am playing the right way and enjoying things.  I am having success at the age of 32.  A lot of people in this room, including me, didn't think I would be at this level at this age.  I still have a passion for the game so I will keep fighting and working hard.”

               That, it seems, gives one a glimpse of the Rafa Nadal spirit and mindset, if he has not finally gotten it yet.

(Photo from EPA)

Latest story from https://movietvtechgeeks.com/novak-djokovic-beats-pavlasek-tomic-fined-wimbledon/

Novak Djokovic beats Pavlasek and Tomic fined at Wimbledon

Unlike his previous game where his opponent retired after 40 minutes, Novak Djokovic played all three sets Wimbledon this time for his win and advancement. The three-time champion advanced to the third round by beating Adam Pavlasek 6-2, 6-2, 6-1 Thursday, two days after his opening match ended early when his opponent retired with an injury. Djokovic won the Wimbledon title in 2011, '14 and '15. But he has not won a major title since completing a career Grand Slam at the 2016 French Open. [pdf-embedder url="https://movietvtechgeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/wimbledon-3rd-round-mens-singles-2017.pdf" title="wimbledon 3rd round mens singles 2017"] In his opening two matches at the All England Club, Djokovic has only lost eight games. "It's perfect. Exactly what I want," Djokovic said. "I don't want to have any five-set matches in there." Djokovic will next face Ernests Gulbis. The unseeded Latvian defeated Juan Martin del Potro 6-4, 6-4, 7-6 (3). Roger Federer and Angelique Kerber were scheduled to play later on Day 4 at Wimbledon. Federer, a seven-time champion at the All England Club, will play on Centre Court against Dusan Lajovic in the second round. The top-ranked Kerber will face Kirsten Flipkens on No. 1 Court. Grigor Dimitrov, Gael Monfils, and David Ferrer also reached the third round. Ferrer advanced when opponent Steve Darcis retired with an injury while trailing 3-0. Darcis is the eighth man to retire during a match this week. The Belgian took a medical timeout after 18 minutes of play and was unable to continue. Two-time major champion Svetlana Kuznetsova, seeded seventh, advanced to the third round in the women's draw along with ninth-seeded Agnieszka Radwanska and 24th-seeded CoCo Vandeweghe. Two players previously eliminated from the tournament were handed fines on Thursday. Bernard Tomic of Australia was fined $15,000 for unsportsmanlike conduct two days after he spoke about feeling "a little bit bored out there" during his match. Daniil Medvedev of Russia, who threw a handful coins in the direction of the chair umpire after a second-round loss on Wednesday, was given three fines totaling $14,500. Bernard Tomic was fined $15,000 at Wimbledon and dropped by his racket sponsor Thursday - not for something he did during his first-round loss, but for what he said during a news conference afterward. The penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct was announced two days after the 24-year-old Australian was beaten by Mischa Zverev 6-4, 6-3, 6-4, then spoke to the media about feeling "a little bit bored out there." Tomic also said Tuesday that he "just couldn't find any motivation" to compete this year and acknowledged that when he called for a medical timeout against Zverev, he did so not because of an injury issue but to "try to break a bit of momentum." Racket maker Head issued a statement via its Twitter feed on Thursday saying: "We were extremely disappointed with the statements made at Wimbledon by one of our sponsored athletes, Bernard Tomic. His opinions in no way reflect our own attitude for tennis, our passion, professionalism, and respect for the game." The statement concluded: "Therefore, we have decided to discontinue our collaboration with Bernard Tomic." The fine amounts to more than a third of Tomic's prize money: First-round losers at the All England Club this year earn 35,000 pounds (about $45,000). Tomic has not reached the quarterfinals at a Grand Slam tournament since losing at that stage at Wimbledon against eventual champion Novak Djokovic in 2011. That year, at age 18, Tomic became the youngest man to reach the quarterfinals at the All England Club since 1986, when Boris Becker won the title. Tomic reached a high of No. 17 in the ATP rankings in 2016; he entered Wimbledon at No. 59. "I feel holding a trophy or, you know, doing well - it doesn't satisfy me anymore," Tomic said Tuesday. "It's not there. I couldn't care less if I make a fourth round (at the) U.S. Open or I lose (in the) first round. To me, everything is the same. I'm going to play another 10 years, and I know after my career I won't have to work again." Daniil Medvedev threw a handful coins in the direction of chair umpire Mariana Alves after his second-round loss at Wimbledon on Wednesday. The 49th-ranked Russian repeatedly apologized during his post-match news conference, saying that he was not trying to imply that Alves was biased. "I was just disappointed and (did) a stupid thing," said Medvedev, who earned headlines for a decidedly different reason Monday, beating three-time major champion Stan Wawrinka in the first round. When his 6-4, 6-2, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3 loss to Ruben Bemelmans ended, Medvedev shook hands with his opponent and Alves. But then he grabbed his wallet from his bag and tossed the coins toward the bottom of the official's chair. He was unhappy with one of the calls early in the fifth set "If he wants to be (peeved) about that, that's his decision," Bemelmans said. "It happens in tennis. You should get over that." Medvedev, who is 21, said he did not immediately apologize to Alves after the match. He said he would accept any punishment handed down. "Maybe in the match, during the match, I thought that it was a bit not in my favor, but right now I can just say that it happens everywhere in every sport," Medvedev said. "There are referees, and they can make some mistakes, but me as a tennis player, I (make) some mistakes, too. One of them was, for example, after the match. I just have to apologize." Victoria Azarenka walked to the baseline, preparing to serve, when a man shouted from the upper reaches of No. 3 Court, "Come on, Mom!" It wasn't her son, Leo, born in December, but it shows the 27-year-old former No. 1's return to competition has caught on among the public. Between Azarenka and Serena Williams, who announced in April she is pregnant with her first child, two former Grand Slam winners will attempt to balance their careers with motherhood. Although Azarenka's second-round victory over Elena Vesnina on Wednesday was only her fourth competitive match since December, she said she has already begun conversations with WTA officials about facilitating arrangements for child care. If needed, the WTA will provide health and wellbeing support to players who are mothers, as well as other physiotherapy and counseling. "From my own power, I'll do anything to make that happen because I think it's really important," Azarenka said. "The guys do have that luxury of having the nurseries and stuff at every event, and I think it's time for women to have the same benefit." The travel has been the most difficult part thus far, Azarenka said. Although Leo is "actually a very good traveler," preparing for flights has been stressful. Carving out time for tennis has also been troublesome. Last week, she posted a photo on Instagram of Leo, lying on a blanket and chewing on a plastic credential while she practiced. To help take care of her son during the tournament, Azarenka has her mother, Alla, and her boyfriend, Billy McKeague, with her. "I have absolutely no idea how it feels to have a baby on tour or how she manages that, you know?" ninth-ranked Dominika Cibulkova said. "It's not easy. It's something - it must be completely different." The last mother to win the singles title at Wimbledon was Evonne Goolagong Cawley, who won her third title at the All England Club when she defeated Chris Evert in 1980. Mandy Minella, who lost in the first round to Francesca Schiavone on Monday but will play in the doubles tournament, is four months pregnant. Azarenka, a two-time Australian Open champion, reached the semifinals at Wimbledon in 2011 and 2012, when she ended the year at No. 1. After defeating CiCi Bellis in the first round, she encountered the 16th-ranked Vesnina, who had not beaten Azarenka in seven previous meetings. The eighth was no different. Azarenka broke her opponent late in the first set and early again in the second, and Vesnina, after taking a medical timeout to address a lingering back injury, double-faulted twice in the deciding game. Azarenka won 6-3, 6-3. "It was not easy," Vesnina said. "I cannot say she is playing now as she was playing when she was No. 1 in the world. She needs some time to adjust, some time to feel her game and where she is right now. It's not easy, but a couple more matches and I'm sure she'll be back." Azarenka, who will face Heather Watson of Britain in the third round, said she has had an ongoing discussion with Williams about her experiences. She also spoke this week to Kim Clijsters, whose third child was born in October. "It wasn't a long conversation," Azarenka said, "but it's nice to see that some of my colleagues have children and we have just much more in common than just tennis." Novak Djokovic attempted to diffuse any tension between himself and John McEnroe after the tennis great compared the world No. 4 to Tiger Woods. The Serb has seen a dip in form over the past year, losing all his Grand Slam titles and slipping from the top of the ATP rankings. McEnroe compared the situation to that of golfer Woods’ and suggested the 12-time Grand Slam champion could go ‘off the rails’ like the American did after being caught up in a marital scandal. But Djokovic refused to hit back at the seven-time Grand Slam champion and insisted he hadn’t taken it personally. ‘I have heard about it today,’ he said. ‘Look, you know, John has a complete right to say – anybody, really, in the world has a right to say what they want, and I respect that right. ‘Especially coming from John, because he’s someone that has earned that right because of who he is and what he has meant to the sport and what he still, you know, is representing as a former player and still being very active on the Tour. ‘And he’s very well known for his, you know, kind of bold comments and not really caring too much about being politically correct but saying whatever is on his mind. ‘That’s all I can say. I really don’t take anything personal. I always got along very well with John. You know, I guess whether that’s his opinion or criticism or something else, I’m not really sure. But in the end of the day, I respect everything he says.’ When pushed on what the reason for the personal attack was, Djokovic was quick to crack a joke that he had hit a serve at the three-time Wimbledon champion during one of his matches at the All England Club. ‘I always got along very, very well with John,’ he added. ‘We even practiced a few years ago before one of my matches in US Open, and was always talking nicely about me. ‘As I said, I really don’t take it in a negative way anyhow. It’s fine. He has his right to say the things he wants to say. I don’t necessarily need to agree with that. But it’s his right. So I don’t know where was the basis, and he was just maybe making a comparison. I’m not really sure. ‘When I was warming up for my first match on the Centre Court, he was giving an intro, talking to the camera, and I served and the serve went straight at him as I was playing. I don’t know. Maybe it’s because of that. Maybe he thought it wasn’t a joke, and I was joking, I was trying to hit him. ‘I don’t know. I take it very lightly. I don’t think there was any kind of really wrong intention from his side towards me.’

Movie TV Tech Geeks News