TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Some enjoy working through the math themselves so they can understand it. Why not?
If Zverev defeats Medvedev, Nadal is out of the ATP finals
- Thread starter Sport
- Start date
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal should withdraw from this joke of a "tournament" and start getting prepared for AO where he doesn't have to depend on anybody, all players have to win 7 matches in order to win it. Let Djokovic have this YE#1, it means more than slams for him and his fans.
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
Alright, the post by @helixx had it right. I'm going to go through this and try to clear it up.
Correct. We would have N&T on 2 wins; Z&M on 1 each. So Nadal and Tsitsipas qualify; order is determined by H2H, and therefore Nadal first.
Nadal, Tsitsipas and Zverev all go 2-1, and set percentage counts. This was already analysed in the OP. Indeed, Nadal's set win percentage cannot reach Tsitsipas's (best case Nadal 4-3 Tsitsi 4-2 if he wins in straights). Zverev can be either 4-2 or 4-3, in latter case there is a tie with him and Nadal that is broken by H2H. So this is correct.
Correct. We would have N&T on 2 wins; Z&M on 1 each. So Nadal and Tsitsipas qualify; order is determined by H2H, and therefore Nadal first.
Nadal, Tsitsipas and Zverev all go 2-1, and set percentage counts. This was already analysed in the OP. Indeed, Nadal's set win percentage cannot reach Tsitsipas's (best case Nadal 4-3 Tsitsi 4-2 if he wins in straights). Zverev can be either 4-2 or 4-3, in latter case there is a tie with him and Nadal that is broken by H2H. So this is correct.
Tsitsi 3-0; all others 1-2. Again, sets won percentage counts. We have Nadal at best 3-5; Med 3-4; Zverev 2-4. Med's percentage is best.
As above, except we now have Med 3-5 and Zverev 3-4. Zverev is better than Med & Nadal so goes through.
Tsits 3-0, Zverev 2-1, Nadal 1-2, Medvedev 0-3; the easiest scenario of all.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
Every single time was by me
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
On comment 1: The reason for this is that the player who has played in only two matches is structurally speaking in the position of a lucky loser. He didn't originally qualify for the tournament and only got in because another player was injured. Really, he shouldn't be in the tournament at all, but not allowing him in would reduce the number of matches, so he gets in to fill up the matches. In these circumstances, it is a good thing that they put the player who played more matches at a premium, as he is a real qualifier for the event.
It is comment 4 that I wish were different. Better to go to games won after the first player has qualified and distinguish the other two that way. In comment #5, game percentage should also distinguish the first two, rather than head to head. But it is what it is.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
It was quite simple for Nadal - if he won all of his 5 matches, he would have won it. There was no need to be at the mercy of other results. That went out the window when he got shellacked by Zverev
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
They shouldn't use head to head. It's like the away goals rule, which also shouldn't be used, in that it distinguishes according to an arbitrary criteria that is no part of the general scoring system, thus making some points count more than others, whereas in the general scoring system all points count equally.
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
In other words, it's 1. Tsitsipas 2. Zverev, UNLESS:
Nadal & Medvedev win: 1. Nadal 2. Tsitsipas
OR
Tsitsipas wins and Medvedev wins in straight sets: 1. Tsitsipas 2. Medvedev.
In particular, Zverev can ensure qualification by beating Medvedev.
Nadal & Medvedev win: 1. Nadal 2. Tsitsipas
OR
Tsitsipas wins and Medvedev wins in straight sets: 1. Tsitsipas 2. Medvedev.
In particular, Zverev can ensure qualification by beating Medvedev.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
To the haters of this tournament, is the FIFA World Cup a farcical exhibition because it also has a round robin/group stage format?
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
Every single time was by me
I think the link must not have displayed properly for me, because I was looking for this.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic also lost a match in this tournament, yet everything still depends on him. And no, don't tell me he won a set against Thiem. Had he lost 6-0 6-0 everything would still depend on him.
tennismex123
New User
Sorry English is not my native language.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
All these scenarios are neatly summarized in this tableOh my gosh. All these different scenarios you guys are listing are making my head spin.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm not watching this sport. The talk is about tennis anyway. Yes, this tournament is a joke. Say whatever you want, I'm not going to change my mind.
J
joohan
Guest
All the way down to yellow/red cards and FIFA rankings...
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
To save you time, just direct them to this image
Yeah that image doesn't show for me in my browser.
Street
Semi-Pro
Do you think nadal in this form would beat federer or djokovic even if he qualified for the semis?
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Right, but it also would mean that he beat Federer and Berrettini.
Nadal himself wouldn't be in this situation if he beat Medvedev in straights.
Djokovic's situation is less precarious than Nadal's because he's 3-2 in sets while Rafa is 2-3. Why is this so hard to understand?
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
To save you time, just direct them to this image
Also, I think it is worthwhile spelling out the working, for those who are not sure where these results come from.
At least games percentage doesn't enter into it this year, regardless of the permutations.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
All these scenarios are neatly summarized in this table
Yea I saw it after I read all these different breakdowns and contradictions. Lol.
TimHenmanATG
Hall of Fame
Stop using a strawman argument. Tennis fans who strongly dislike the format of the London exho aren't inherently Nadal fanbois and fangurlz. I'm neutral on Rafa, Roger, and Novak, myself.
I understand the maths perfectly. The fact that there are even maths to "understand" should tell you everything which you need to know about this shameful exho event.
Druss
Hall of Fame
Doesn't Nadal get the YE#1 if he makes the SF?
tennismex123
New User
We have this paper that summarizes everything we need to know LOL, so what do you think will happen? My pick is Nadal wins in 2 and Medvedev wins also in 2, if Medvedev wins it in 2 Tsitsipas will be sure he is qualified and he will prefer as number 2 to face Thiem
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Why wouldn't he? He just routined Z (who is having a hideous season) in Shanghai. You'd better bet he'll believe in his chances to qualify.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
They are right though. So Djokovic can classify winning 2 group matches but Nadal can't classify winning 2 group matches? The tournament is a joke.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
Do you say the same of the FIFA World Cup? Even if you don’t watch it surely you know about it and know that it also has a similar format. Just because maths isn’t your strong suit doesn’t make this tournament any less important.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
Every situation here
gotta say i'm a bit confused... here's the result of my own state-of-the-art calculations:
| the nadal in2 | the nadal in 3 | vlogman in 2 | vlogman in 3 | the nadal withdraws | |
| BS russian in 2 | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal |
| BS russian in 3 | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal |
| the letsgoyelling zviraffe in 2 | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal |
| the letsgoyelling zviraffe in 3 | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal | moral victor: the nadal |
can anybody help me to spot where i got it wrong?
(i'm sure it's again because of that bloody hyperbolic cotangent)
thank you / muchas gracias
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Welcome to almost every sport in the world that uses round robin in some form... And those far outnumber sports that use a pure single-elimination knockout format
Street
Semi-Pro
No.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
No, but if Thiem would have a bad day then who knows. And reaching the final would give him the YE#1. But now he somehow either loses or takes the first place in the group.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic's situation is better than Nadal's because Novak is 3-2 in sets while Rafa is 2-3
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
I read the first line and thought oh lord am I going to have to post the image again and then read it and burst out laughing. Kudos.gotta say i'm a bit confused... here's the result of my own state-of-the-art calculations:
the nadal in2 the nadal in 3 vlogman in 2 vlogman in 3 the nadal withdraws BS russian in 2 moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal BS russian in 3 moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal the letsgoyelling zviraffe in 2 moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal the letsgoyelling zviraffe in 3 moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal moral victor: the nadal
can anybody help me to spot where i got it wrong?
(i'm sure it's again because of that bloody cosinus......)
thank you / muchas gracias
Sport
G.O.A.T.
What a joke of tournament rules.
if Djokovic wins 2 matches in his group he can classify. If Nadal wins 2 matches in his groups, he can fail to classify.
That is not fair at all, it creates a double standard by which 2 players, despite having made the same merits, do not receive the same benefit.
if Djokovic wins 2 matches in his group he can classify. If Nadal wins 2 matches in his groups, he can fail to classify.
That is not fair at all, it creates a double standard by which 2 players, despite having made the same merits, do not receive the same benefit.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
No.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
That is not true, he is in no better situation for the number of sets won. If Djokovic wins in 3 sets to Federer, he will classify. Even if Nadal defeats Tsitsipas in 2 sets, he can fail to classify. That is to say, in an scenario of Nadal with 5-3 in sets and Djokovic with 5-3 in sets, Djokovic would classify while Nadal may not.
That is not fair at all, it creates a double standard by which 2 players, despite having made the same merits, do not receive the same benefit.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal should withdraw and never play this "tournament" again.
Street
Semi-Pro
Well, yeah, but this isn't some conspiracy against Nadal. The rules were written before the tournament started and this format is used in a lot of other sports. I get it that you're angry that your favourite isn't in a good position but that is not the tournament's fault.No, but if Thiem would have a bad day then who knows. And reaching the final would give him the YE#1. But now he somehow either loses or takes the first place in the group.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Again, the difference is Djokovic won his match in straights and lost his in a three-setter. Nadal on the other hand got straight setted in his loss, and needed three sets in his win
Had Nadal gone 1-2 against Zverev and beaten Medvedev 2-0, he would be in a much better position
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
This is true in all round robin events. It often happens in the World Cup that one team goes out with five points while another team in another group goes through with four points. Indeed, it can happen in theory that a team goes out with six points and that another team in another group goes through with two points.
Are the rules for the World Cup a joke?
Note: there is a good reason for starting with a round robin, which is to make sure that each team gets a few matches. You could argue certainly that that rule is more applicable in the case of a team event held every four years than an individual event held every year, especially because of the fans who travel with the team.
TimHenmanATG
Hall of Fame
“Farcical exho” Nadal fights from 5-1 match point down to win and keep his hopes alive but yeah it’s an exhibition tournament
What a joke.
The ATP have to "bribe" the participants with obscene amounts of prize money and ranking points.
Of course a player is going to be committed when there are 100s of ranking points and 1000s of pounds at stake.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Tournament rules have been clear from the start, not just this year, but for so long. Nadal got destroyed by Zverev in straights, that's his own fault and the reason why he is in this position. Also he won his match in 3, while Djokovic won his in 2.
Italian Stallion
Rookie
Presumably you'd have preferred a straight knock-out tournament, in which case Nadal would already be out.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
This is the only tournament that allows you to lose a match and win the title. The drawback is if you lose that match, you still are not guaranteed to advance but there is a chance you will. The only thing guaranteed is if you win all your matches, you win the title. So to guarantee the title, don't lose a match. Sounds like riddles but it's pretty true. They all know the rules at the end of the day.
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
Thanks - although I don't actually find that one more helpful.
Similar threads
- Poll
