If Zverev defeats Medvedev, Nadal is out of the ATP finals

an scandal, undoubtedly :mad:

#ToastedFakingBull

We were one point away from a 0-3 run for Nadal becoming likely. Given that he's going to end the year as #1 anyway, most likely, that would have been the ultimate in "moral victories" - clinching #1 on the back of three defeats. Of course, they are not really defeats, as he would have won under fair conditions and were he not so grievously injured.
 

Nagal_fan

Rookie
Is anything in this thread right?
I don't think OP considered games won percentage, which have to be considered before H2H in case of a 3-way tie.

These are the scenarios i can think of:
1. Zverev wins , Nadal loses - Nadal is out due to having worse record with tsitsipas taking 1st and Zverev taking 2nd.(regardless of the scoreline in both matches.)

2. Zverev wins in 2, Nadal wins - Nadal is out regardless of scoreline, 1st position for tsitsipas if nadal wins in 3, but it will depend on aggregate ratio of no. of games won by tsitsipas and zverev if Nadal wins in 2.

3. Zverev wins in 3, Nadal wins - if Nadal wins in 3, he is out with tsitsipas taking 1st and Zverev taking 2nd. If Nadal wins in 2, he has a chance to qualify in 2nd poition ahead of Zverev based on aggregate ratio of no. of games won after 3 matches.

4. Medvedev wins , Nadal wins - Nadal and tsitsipas qualify with Nadal taking 1st position and tsitsipas 2nd(regardless of scoreline).

5. Medvedev wins in 2, Nadal loses - Medvedev takes 2nd position regardless of the scoreline.

6. Medvedev wins in 3, Nadal loses - Zverev qualifies in 2nd position regardless of scoreline.


Currently, games win/loss for Nadal and Zverev is - 25/28 and 17/18 respectively, for tsitsipas it is 25/15 , so I would say tsitsipas has practically qualified but it can get really close between Zverev and Nadal
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
Placing all your hopes on Zverev, yikes....

Flip a coin for this match jfc, Zverev looking crap in his last match, Medvedev with one of the chokes of his career, interesting to see what they bring form wise....
 
Nadal shouldn't have won today anyway. I'd be happy as a Nadal fan that he's even in the picture anymore. Consider yourselves lucky instead of whining.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
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.
Which proves once again that it is a joke. Zverev got destroyed today (just like last year by the way) and he is still a big favorite to reach the semifinals. On the other hand Nadal lost one match and nothing depends on him anymore.
 

TripleATeam

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.
The only match Nadal has won so far is against the #4 in the groups in 3 sets. He's also won 0 sets against the #1 in the groups.

Djokovic, on the other hand, beat the #4 in straights and won 1 set against the #1 in his group.

Now Djokovic just needs to win another match to move on, because by winning it, he keeps the other contender from winning 2 matches.

Conversely, Nadal cannot stop the other contenders from winning 2 matches. He already had that chance against Zverev and lost in straights. If Nadal had beaten or lost to Zverev in 3 sets, this would be different, but he didn't.
 

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
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.

Oh, come on!

Stop being intentionally obtuse.

International football tournaments have used group stages since their inception.

Tennis never does this, unless there are some snouts which need new feeding troughs.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Oh, come on!

Stop being intentionally obtuse.

International football tournaments have used group stages since their inception.

Tennis never does this, unless there are some snouts which need new feeding troughs.
Hasn’t the ATP finals had a round robin format ‘literally’ since they started back in 1970?

Don’t act like this is some new thing.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Placing all your hopes on Zverev, yikes....

Flip a coin for this match jfc, Zverev looking crap in his last match, Medvedev with one of the chokes of his career, interesting to see what they bring form wise....

I think Nadal still has a pretty good chance of going through. I'd bet on Medvedev winning this match who still has a chance to go through. Zverev is just a mess. But Nadal is gonna have to beat Tsitsi, that itself will be tough considering Tsitsis form and how subpar Nadal has been. And even if Nadal goes through, he will play Federer or Djokovic in the SF. His situation could have been better to say the least..
 

StrongRule

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
Djokovic's results in WTF 2011:
Win against Berdych 3-6 6-3 7-6(7-3)
Lose against Ferrer 3-6 1-6
Lose against Tipsarevic 6-3 3-6 3-6

And with these results (worse than Nadal this year, as Nadal still didn't lose to Tsitsipas) he was extremely close to reaching the semifinals, Ferrer was a few points from beating Berdych and letting Djokovic get through. If that's not a joke then I don't know what is. Good that Berdych made that comeback...
 

Street

Semi-Pro
This tournament will stop being an exhibition when Rafito wins it. Unfortunately, it seems it will stay an exhibition forever. Sad.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
I think Nadal still has a pretty good chance of going through. I'd bet on Medvedev winning this match. Zverev is just a mess. But Nadal is gonna have to beat Tsitsi, that itself will be tough. And even if Nadal goes through, he will play Federer or Djokovic in the SF. He is in a nightmare spot.

They are both a mess as of now. Lol. Medvedev is shattered and probably beating the walls in with his fists right now. Zverev is just a sloppy mess as usual who plays great one day and like #97 in the world the next. Should be an interesting match.
 
Djokovic's results in WTF 2011:
Win against Berdych 3-6 6-3 7-6(7-3)
Lose against Ferrer 3-6 1-6
Lose against Tipsarevic 6-3 3-6 3-6

And with these results (worse than Nadal this year, as Nadal still didn't lose to Tsitsipas) he was extremely close to reaching the semifinals, Ferrer was a few points from beating Berdych and letting Djokovic get through. If that's not a joke then I don't know what is. Good that Berdych made that comeback...

That was totally different situation
Murrays withdrawal made it a three-horse race
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
They are both a mess as of now. Lol. Medvedev is shattered and probably beating the walls in with his fists right now. Zverev is just a sloppy mess as usual who plays great one day and like #97 in the world the next. Should be an interesting match.

I don't know I just find Medvedev more reliable at this moment. I believe in the midst of the major disappointment today he will get some motivation knowing he still miracolously has a chance of going through. Also he trashed Zverev couple of weeks ago.

But let's see what happens. You never know with Zverev, as you said one day he could play out of his mind almost like a #1 and the next like a #97.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't know I just find Medvedev more reliable at this moment. I believe in the midst of the major disappointment today he will get some motivation knowing he still miracolously has a chance of going through. Also he trashed Zverev couple of weeks ago.

But let's see what happens. You never know with Zverev, as you said one day he could play out of his mind almost like #1 and the next like a #97.
I doubt Medvedev is even going to try. He will probably tank it.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
And did anyone at the time think of that tournament as anything other than a bountiful exho?

I doubt it.
Considering the 1970 tournament was played by Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Stan Smith, Arthur Ashe AND MORE I’d say they did care.

How embarrassing for you to even try to suggest otherwise.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Which proves once again that it is a joke. Zverev got destroyed today (just like last year by the way) and he is still a big favorite to reach the semifinals. On the other hand Nadal lost one match and nothing depends on him anymore.
Zverev getting destroyed today is balanced by him destroying Nadal in 1st match. Nadal barely squeezed through in the match he didn't get destroyed in, that's the difference.
 

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
Could you explain the difference between using round robin system in a team sport and using it in an individual sport?

The difference is that team sports are primarily based around leagues, whereas individual sports are based around bettering your opponent in a one-off match.
 

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
Considering the 1970 tournament was played by Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Stan Smith, Arthur Ashe AND MORE I’d say they did care.

How embarrassing for you to even try to suggest otherwise.

Don't be silly, mate. It's unbecoming of you.

1970? That was like the "wild west" of tennis!
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
The difference is that team sports are primarily based around leagues, whereas individual sports are based around bettering your opponent in a one-off match.
Nothing really precludes team sports from being a knockout (as some of them are), or individual sports from being based around a round robin (as some of them are).

If you beat an opponent in a one-off match then it just means you were better than that particular opponent on a given day. Specially in a sport like tennis, where match-ups are a big factor, you can get lucky with a draw and not have to play someone you'd normally struggle with. Round robin formats highlight consistency against the field and mitigate the luck factor
 

megamind

Legend
This is the info. Don’t debate it.

EJSNxBmWwAASis0.jpg

give this guy a Grammy

he even printed out a table and took a photo

legit
 

megamind

Legend
Medvedev's so pissed right now at Rafa that he'll tank the match or Kyrgios has transferred all his career earnings to Med just to see this happen.


Meddy likes to troll. I could legit see this happening.

Though I think/hope he wants to win more than he wants to troll
 

Sephiroth

Hall of Fame
Can you guys image if Kyrgios was at the WTF and the power was in his hands to save RAFA?

Biggest tank performance in the history of sport.

mjlol.png
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
We were one point away from a 0-3 run for Nadal becoming likely. Given that he's going to end the year as #1 anyway, most likely, that would have been the ultimate in "moral victories" - clinching #1 on the back of three defeats. Of course, they are not really defeats, as he would have won under fair conditions and were he not so grievously injured.
A moral victory would be Djokovic classifying with 2 victories and Nadal getting eliminated with 2 victories. Same merits, different benefits. Which prove the rules of this tournament are completely unfair.

It should be:

Same merits = same benefits.

I am sure some years a player in group A may have classified with only 1 victory while a player in group B has not classified with 2 victories.
 

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
Nothing really precludes team sports from being a knockout (as some of them are), or individual sports from being based around a round robin (as some of them are).

If you beat an opponent in a one-off match then it just means you were better than that particular opponent on a given day. Specially in a sport like tennis, where match-ups are a big factor, you can get lucky with a draw and not have to play someone you'd normally struggle with. Round robin formats highlight consistency against the field and mitigate the luck factor

Every team sport is based around a league system.

Every individual sport is either based around a knockout system and/or being better than the field in a one-off competition.

The fact that people in a tennis tournament have to worry about "goal difference" just shows how painfully absurd the London exho is.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
A moral victory would be Djokovic classifying with 2 victories and Nadal getting eliminated with 2 victories. Same merits, different benefits. Which prove the rules of this tournament are completely unfair.

It should be:

Same merits = same benefits.

I am sure some years a player in group A may have classified with only 1 victory while a player in group B has not classified with 2 victories.
Djokovic in 2011 was extremely close to reaching the semifinal with 1 victory. (and his victory was a very close match while in one of his losses he was totally destroyed). Good that Berdych beat Ferrer and didn't let it happen.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Every team sport is based around a league system.
Again, untrue because there are team competitions that are either partially or entirely knockout-based (all American Big Four sports, FIFA World Cup, UEFA Champions League, have knockout stages)

Every individual sport is either based around a knockout system and/or being better than the field in a one-off competition.
Most chess tournaments are based on a round-robin system. The most important Badminton competition (the Olympics) has a round robin prior to the knockout system. PSA Tour Finals (Squash) has a round robin preceding the knockout.

Sports where you compete against the whole field are much easier to sort out. Can't really do that with tennis and other head-to-head competitions.
 

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
Again, untrue because there are team competitions that are either partially or entirely knockout-based (all American Big Four sports, FIFA World Cup, UEFA Champions League, have knockout stages)

I said based around. Any knockout competition in a team sport always has a league foundation. The only exceptions to this are historic competitions -which now run alongside the more popular league system - such as the FA Cup.

jm1980 said:
Most chess tournaments are based on a round-robin system. The most important Badminton competition (the Olympics) has a round robin prior to the knockout system. PSA Tour Finals (Squash) has a round robin preceding the knockout.

Sports where you compete against the whole field are much easier to sort out. Can't really do that with tennis and other head-to-head competitions.

So are you advocating that major tennis tournaments should regularly utilise a league system?
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
Tsitsipas is 2-0 in the ATP finals, with a perfect 4-0 in sets. Even if he loses to Nadal tomorrow, he would still be 4-2 in sets and would classify to the semifinals.

If Zverev defeats Medvedev tomorrow in 2, he would be 4-2 in sets and would classify to the semifinals, as Nadal can only be 4-3 in sets.

If Zverev defeats Medvedev in 3, he would be 4-3 in sets and would classify to the semifinals because he leads the H2H over Rafa in the tournament.


Short explanation: regardless of Rafa's result with Tsitsipas, Zverev will reach the semifinals if he defeats Medvedev.


SEMI-FINAL QUALIFYING PROCEDURE

a) Greatest number of wins;
b) Greatest number of matches played;
Comment: 2-1 won-loss record beats a 2-0 won-loss record; a 1-2 record beats a 1-0 record.
c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied,


Comment 4: 3 players have 2 wins and the other player has 0 wins. The player with 0 wins is eliminated. Of the 3 players with 2 wins, 1 player’s sets won-loss is 5-2 for 71.43%; the other 2 players both have a 4-3 record in sets for 57.14%. In this case there is 1 superior player (71.43%) and the remaining 2 players are tied; it now reverts to the head to head result of the 2 remaining players with the winning player advancing as group runner-up.

And the Mad Lad needs Tsitsipas to beat Nadal to make it.:-D:-D:-D
giphy.gif
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
With the Mad Lad's intellect he will follow TTW logic.
giphy.gif

Given Tsitsipas will spite him and tank to Nadal, Medvedev must tank to get some semblance of revenge on Nadal.

Thiem right now trying to pass Fed/Med in rankings
Wb8RxD.gif
 
Top