View Single Post
Old 11-21-2012, 01:23 PM   #54
sureshs
Bionic Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 31,104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
The head to head is actually not "simple". It takes takes some understanding of tennis to grasp it, which some people like yourself don't understand.

Playing a match on clay is not the same as hardcourt or indoor. You understand this much, right?

Therefore, the head to head will be different according to surfaces. They have played the vast majority of their matches on clay, Nadal's BEST SURFACE, Federer's WORST.

Nadal was not good enough to even reach Fed in many hardcourt or indoor tournaments where he would have been beaten.

If you don't grasp these things then you just don't understand tennis very well.

Think of it like this:

Right now you, surehs, have an EVEN head-to-head with Federer, the possible greatest player ever. Pretty awesome right? Not really, because its not that simple. You aren't good enough to qualify and make the first round of an ATP event where you would be destroyed by Federer 1st round, should you draw him. It's the exact same with Nadal, he failed to make later rounds in tournaments on Fed's best surface whereas Fed advanced to meet Nadal on Nadal's best surface.

Take some time to think about it, maybe you'll understand it at some point
Neither Fed nor Nadal orchestrated their meetings on specific surfaces. It just happened. There was no power up above manipulating their meetings.

Talking about my head-to-head with Federer shows that you still haven't understood the meaning of statistically significant sample set. It is precisely for that reason that I warned about it in my previous post. 0 is not a statistically significant number. Both Fed and Nadal have played a large number of tournaments and met a large number of times, for the results to be statistically significant.
sureshs is offline   Reply With Quote