Federer and Nadal Down 2-0 Sets

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by McEnroeisanartist, Oct 19, 2012.

  1. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,197
    Anyone else find it interesting that Nadal is often portrayed as this warrior who would die before losing a tennis match, even though statistically Federer is the greater fighter.

    27 times in his career, Federer has lost the first sets of a Grand Slam match. 7 times or 26% of the time he has fought and come back to win.

    15 times in his career, Nadal has lost the first two sets of a Grand Slam match. 2 times or 13% of the time he has fought and come back to win.
     
    #1
  2. zam88

    zam88 Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,341
    how often of those times did nad/fed get straight setted vs. pushing it to 4 or 5 sets?

    federer's record has seemingly gotten better in this scenario of late... 2 of those comebacks have happened recently... 2011 French Open, then again at Wimbledon right?
     
    #2
  3. dhdriver

    dhdriver Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    216
    I think Federer pulled it off against Delpo at this year's French Open
     
    #3
  4. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,036
    OP is that a typo? what does fed's 0-1 record have to do with Nadal's 0-2 record?
     
    #4
  5. El Diablo

    El Diablo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,561
    What makes these threads so lame is that the OP posts statistics, yet seems not to know anything about statistics (statistical significance, that is). If you think there is a statistically significant difference between 13% and 26% with such small sample sizes, then you also believe that if you flip a coin twice and it comes up heads twice, you've proven that a flipped coin will always come up heads. Data without statistical analysis is meaningless and misleading.
     
    #5
  6. El Diablo

    El Diablo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,561
    (and data can be interpreted a variety of ways. One could say, for example, that the data here suggest Nadal is the greater warrior, as he's allowed himself to lose the first two sets in a slam far fewer times. Or that the data speak more to physical conditioning rather than warrior mentallity, with Fed perhaps having the stamina to come back more)
     
    #6
  7. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,197
    Federer
    Lost in 3 15 times
    Lost in 4 4 times
    Lost in 5 1 time
    Won in 5 7 times

    Since winning his first grand slam, Federer is 5-8 in matches when he loses the first two sets.

    Nadal
    Lost in 3 9 times
    Lost in 4 4 times
    Lost in 5 0 Times
    Won in 5 2 Times

    Since winning his first grand slam, Nadal is 2-9 in matches when he loses the first two sets.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2012
    #7
  8. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,197
    Great post. Yes, I do not claim to be a statistics expert. I just think it is interesting that Nadal is portrayed as this fighter by so many when statistically, however, small the sample is, it seems Federer either has the stamina, will, or game to recover from losing the first two sets of a match more than Nadal. Before my analysis, I and am sure many others would have expected Nadal to have more comebacks.
     
    #8
  9. smoledman

    smoledman Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,409
    Location:
    USA
    More important how many times Fed done it against a top 5 player?
     
    #9
  10. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    So much for Nadal being mentally tougher.

    It's an illusion, because those people believe positive h2h define who's mentally tougher when in fact it's about match up issues. When you measure player's results across the field, you see a clearer picture as to who's more tougher.

    BTW, despite having a huge match up advantage over Fed, Nadal almost lost to Fed in '08 Wimbledon after being up 2 sets. If he was mentally tougher, he should have won easily after winning 2 sets.
     
    #10
  11. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    They're both mentally tough. No way they'd get to where they are otherwise.
     
    #11
  12. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    #12
  13. beast of mallorca

    beast of mallorca Legend

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,755
    Are you still butthurt ? Because you're spouting a lot of crap dude. Just stop,
    please :twisted:
     
    #13
  14. smoledman

    smoledman Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,409
    Location:
    USA
    Sounds like to me the only ones "butthurt" these days are Nadal trolls.

    "Nadal will be back for Shanghai!"
    "Nadal will be back for London!"
    "Nadal will be back for Davis Cup final!"
    "Nadal will be back for AO!"
    "Nadal will be back for Acapulco!"
     
    #14
  15. paulorenzo

    paulorenzo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,587
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    mustard's stats are a better measure of a player's fighting spirit in my opinion, while McEnroeartist shows who is more streaky. although personally, i don't think the measure of fighting spirit should be heavily based on match records, but rather how players tend to handle situations, or even specific points, in a match.
     
    #15
  16. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,197
    While I agree that Nadal's record in 5 sets is incredible. I think if you asked most people, if Nadal or Federer is down two sets to love, who would win. They would think Nadal, "he is that fighter, always fist pumping, blah, blah. While Federer statistically is more likely to come back and win the match.

    I think if you asked most people, if Nadal or Federer go into a fifth set, who would win. They would think Nadal, which statically makes sense.
     
    #16
  17. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,825
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and ┼╝eberka
    and against Benneteau at Wimbledon

    he also looked to be in the middle of a comeback against Berdych at the US Open before he finally lost in 4

    the old man still got some fire left in him
     
    #17
  18. paulorenzo

    paulorenzo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,587
    Location:
    Virginia Beach
    that's very true in that sense. people's perception of 'fighter' may not translate in every scenario where, at first glance, it may seem like whether or not being a fighter is pertinent. in a down 2sets-0 scenario, common perception seems to say that a person who is often considered a fighter has a better chance of coming back. to add to that, if the player comes back to win, he would be dubbed a great fighter, further solidifying that, i feel, misconstrued notion. but there are more factors at play coming back from a big deficit than whether the player has strong fighting qualities or not.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2012
    #18
  19. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,899
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    While it is true Nadal's 5 set record is much better, it depends on what you call a "fighter." In general, people look at Nadal, and say he's a fighter, and that's understandable, but often when he loses he loses in 3 or at most 4 sets. He's gotten blown off the court against players like Gonzalez, Tsonga, and Del Potro, and lost in 4 to guys like Soderling, Murray, Youhzny and Ferrer. The opposite is true in some sense for Federer. He often loses the longer matches, but rarely loses in 3 sets. So it all depends on what you call a "fighter."
     
    #19
  20. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,197
    I would define a fighter as a player who makes it very difficult to beat them when they are losing.
     
    #20
  21. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,496
    yes that makes sense.

    What I also find funny, and it doesn't really mean anything, it's just the way things happened - the only time in a match between them that one has come back from 2 sets down, it was Federer beating Nadal in Miami 2005. Of course Nadal has only twice been 2 sets down, but then again I think Federer has been up 2 sets down 3 times, so not a massive difference (first time was RG 2008 I think)

    Also though Nadal has a much better record in a 5th set compared to Federer, vs eachother in a 5th set Nadal only leads 3-2.

    Again I don't thinkit means much, but it's just a stat that seem counter intuitive.
     
    #21
  22. kOaMaster

    kOaMaster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,026
    Location:
    Basel/Switzerland
    I updated your numbers (btw, you were slightly off and forgot some matches I think (masters finals?)

    I'll drop in information from this post here:
    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4895968&postcount=201
    And now new:
    2014 US Open QF: Roger Federer def. Gael Monfils (4-6, 3-6, 6-4, 7-5, 6-2)

    Makes a total of 9 times coming back from two sets down, 8 of those at grand slams.

    Interesting is also the following statistic: Out of all matches Federer and Nadal were 0-2 sets down, the outcome was:
    Credits to McEnroeisanartist, I used his posting here and updated it.

    Winning 26% of ALL matches Federer was 2 sets down is a lot. And we are talking career-overall!
    Nadal on the other hand doesn't seem to be able to fight back that good after two sets down. his three unique times were ljubicic in 2005 madrid/indoor, kendrick 2006 and youzhny 2007 wimbledon (quite a while ago).
    -> Nadal doesn't have the possibilities as Federer to perform comebacks from being way down.

    And we are not going to talk about Djokovic on that topic....
     
    #22
  23. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    That equals Todd Martin. Aaron Krickstein and Boris Becker did it 10 times.
     
    #23
  24. clayqueen

    clayqueen Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2010
    Messages:
    4,835
    Isn't that because Nadal doesn't go 2 sets down as often as Federer?
     
    #24
  25. mike danny

    mike danny Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    5,028
    But when he does, he rarely comes back
     
    #25
  26. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    I don't think that is related to being a warrior. That is due to skills and playing style.

    Rafa when down, he doesn't have variety in his game. But Federer can mix it up and has a plan C, plan D, so he can neutralize god modes with variety.

    Rafa fights more is better warrior, but nothing can help you if you don't have the game.

    My point is that Federer if he is playing badly can bring down opponent who is playing amazing tennis.

    Nadal has less options, so if his opponent is playing god mode, he can't do that much to bring him down.

    Also Rafa tries anything to win. Time wasting, gamesmanship and so on. That is being a warrior.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2014
    #26
  27. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,189
    Federer is the more complete player.
     
    #27
  28. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,044
    I suppose Rafa should let Berdych, Falla, Benneteau and Monfils win the first 2 sets next time he plays them in a major so he can make the "heroic" comebacks like Federer does.
     
    #28
  29. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,044
    Yeah because Nadal rarely goes down 2 sets to 0 against the mugs that Fed does. Darcis is the only one I can remember since 2008 when it hasn't happened against a top player.
     
    #29
  30. Strobe Lights

    Strobe Lights Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    543
    Using 5-set records for this can be misleading. Let's say your opponent is playing better than you and you manage to, primarily through mental strength, take it to a 5th set which you then lose. That is not mentally weak. In fact, it is the opposite.

    Not that I don't believe Nadal is mentally stronger, as I think he is. I think a better way is to look at matches that you feel a player SHOULD have won but did not. For Rafa, there is only really one big match for me and that is the Miami final against Fed where he led by 2 sets and a break. People could argue the 2012 AO final but Novak should have won that in 4 and Rafa managed to take it to a 5th, which he possibly should have then won. Fed has far more matches that I think he should have won but did not.
     
    #30
  31. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Haha, you know what the irony is? That you are absolutely correct. And that you don't see that with h2h with Federer vs Rafa because of your bias.

    So, Fed should have lost in 1st round all those tournaments he lost to Rafa, so he would be 10-0 vs Rafa and the goat?

    Now, I know you are trolling :)

    See this is the problem. You are perfectly capable using your mind and reason, but this goes out of the window when Nadal is involved.

    This argument is called reductio ad absurdum.

    It's like religious people. They are perfectly fine debunking all opposite religions, except their own :).

    That's why all religious people are atheists about all other gods except for their own god.
     
    #31
  32. Fed881981

    Fed881981 Professional

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    952
    Location:
    USA
    We are talking percentage wise.
     
    #32
  33. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,044
    Federer isn't the goat because such a player doesn't exist. Nadal has only lost in the first round of a major once in his career. Fed going out before reaching Nadal has happened at the US Open 3 times and had it happened more often in other majors, it would only strengthen the weaker era argument :lol:

    Fed is supposed to be your goat, but Nadal HAS owned him 23 times and Nadal has NOT gone down 2 sets to 0 against the mugs that Federer did. Reality dude, deal with it.
     
    #33
  34. mike danny

    mike danny Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    5,028
    Who cares? Federer in his prime didn't lose to 3 players ranked in the 100's for 3 years in a row at the same slam. I say that's worse.
     
    #34
  35. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    I only find Boris comeback and win at the slam after being 2 sets down 7 times. I didn't bother to check for Todd and Aaron, so I doubt that you are correct on that one.


    1. US Open 1987
    2. US Open 1989
    3. AO 1990
    4. RG 1991
    5. US Open 1993
    6. AO 1996
    7. Wimbledon 1999

    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Be/B/Boris-Becker.aspx?t=pa&y=0&m=s&e=gs
     
    #35
  36. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    It would be interesting to break it down even further. In what sets do They statistically do well if it Goes to five? If 2-0 down who loses in 5 more, and inn4? Who is blown of the court more often etc?
     
    #36
  37. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,044
    Rafa's been finished on grass for years. I wouldn't be saying he has been playing at his prime level on grass the last 3 years. And no, it's not worse than repeatedly going out in majors in the first round, players need to be judged on their entire career not just their prime.
     
    #37
  38. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,869
    Ok, if there is no goat, then why are any records even important? Why do you then even bring h2h if you assert that there is no goat.

    If you claim that there is no way to determine who is greater or better, then all stats are meaningless. You are wasting your time even bringing them up.
     
    #38
  39. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    All great players have to face the same situation. Between Federer and Nadal, Federer handle better when hanging by a thread. He has the game/skills to comeback.

    Keep in mind Federer almost beat Nadal in 2008 Wimbledon when he was 2 sets down. Had the match was played an hour ahead of scheduled(avoid the darkness), who knows Federer could have won that match.
     
    #39
  40. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    How very convenient. Read my post again. I wasn't only talking about majors.

    Krickstein also won 8 matches from 2 sets down in majors, and at all 4 majors. He was called "Marathon Man" for a reason.

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4816199&postcount=74

    1983 US Open (against Gerulaitis)
    1984 US Open (against Manson)
    1986 US Open (against Novacek and Annacone)
    1989 US Open (against Volkov)
    1992 French Open (against Washington)
    1995 Australian Open (against Edberg)
    1995 Wimbledon (against Bergstrom)


    Todd Martin's 9 wins from 2 sets down were all in majors:

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4922567&postcount=255

    1993 US Open (against Burillo)
    1994 US Open (against Raoux)
    1999 Australian Open (against Meligeni)
    1999 Wimbledon (against Dreekmann)
    1999 US Open (against Rusedski)
    2000 Australian Open (against B. Black)
    2000 US Open (against Moya)
    2001 Wimbledon (against J. Novak)
    2004 Australian Open (against Dupuis)
     
    #40
  41. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    ^
    Did Becker win 10 times from being down 2 sets ?
     
    #41
  42. Djokovic2011

    Djokovic2011 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    17,785
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    What about all the years when Fed was consistently reaching the final at the US Open and Nadal was going out early to lesser players? Roger would have had a great chance of getting more Slam wins over him between 04-07.
     
    #42
  43. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    #43
  44. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    He's just trolling you. Deep down he knows Federer is the goat but doesn't want to admit it in front of Federer fans.
     
    #44
  45. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    When Nadal was age 18-21? What had Federer won at that stage of his life? I can just as easily blame Federer for not reaching major finals in 2001-2002, so Hewitt could beat him more often.
     
    #45
  46. mike danny

    mike danny Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    5,028
    Federer at one point reached 6 consecutive USO finals. Where was Nadal during that time? Losing to other players.

    My point is why was it Federer's duty to reach Nadal? He can't reach finals everytime. He already reached 6 in a row, nobody in the last 15 years did better than that. So he played his part for so many years. Yet Nadal was always bowing out before meeting him.

    Sorry but it is more Nadal's fault than Federer's for not meeting at the USO
     
    #46
  47. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,212
    #47
  48. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    He beat Courier, who was world number 1 at the time. The tour was somewhat different in the 1990s compared to today. Back then, no Super 9 tournaments were compulsory, and you could pick up almost as many points from other tournaments.
     
    #48
  49. tennisfan87

    tennisfan87 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    299
    You know, I have been hearing this argument being made countless of times over the years, but actually it doesn't hold any merit.

    How on earth was Rafa supposed to reach him in 2004 when he was only 18 years old (a teenager), wasn't even a top player and just won his 1st title that year. Where was Federer at 18?

    The 2005 - 2007 period has merit since Nadal became a top 2 player for the 1st time in 2005. But even then, it all balances itself out pretty neatly. Rafa didn't reach him during that period but Federer didn't reach Rafa in 2010, 2011 and 2013.
     
    #49
  50. Nathaniel_Near

    Nathaniel_Near G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    19,944
    Location:
    Relax folks, ...
    Nadal also didn't reach Federer in 2008 or 2009. Perhaps they're destined to never meet there.
     
    #50

Share This Page