Nadal v Thiem final would be farcical

Beckerserve · Nov 21, 2020

As a Nadal fan 2020 has been blissful. Job done. 20Club admission obtained.
If the WTF is going to have any credibility Medvedev should beat Nadal later. At least a Thiem v Medvedev final will have th 2 grouo winners in final. A Thiem V Nadal final means nothing if Rafa wins as he lost to same guy in RR. It is this scenario that makes this event so insignificant for me. Not the idea behind it, the format. I am in favour of a YEC, calling it a World Championship. But it has to be knockout.
Does anyone agree with a RR format?

TheNachoMan · Nov 21, 2020

I’m impressed. Despite RAFA potentially winning you are still persistent in your hatred of the WTF

Nadal>>>>>Federer · Nov 21, 2020

TheNachoMan said:
I’m impressed. Despite RAFA potentially winning you are still persistent in your hatred of the WTF

it would give Rafa's resume the bump that Fed got in 2014 from the davis cup

ADuck · Nov 21, 2020

Not that I agree with OP, but incorporating the top 16 instead of just the top 8 would increase the value of the tournament imo.

FrontHeadlock · Nov 21, 2020

I wholeheartedly agree with OP and I like Nadal.

It’s a bit ridiculous for 2 players to go 4-1, split matches with each other, and yet one be the champion. It is a big mental disadvantage to have to beat the same player twice in one event when you know he only has to beat you 1/2 times.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

Nope...

Sampras lost to Agassi in the RR stage in 99 and then beat him in the final, Nalbandian lost to Federer in the RR stage in 05 and then beat him in a final that will be long remembered. Neither one of those wins took away any creditibilty from the event, and this isn't going to either.

TheNachoMan · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Nope...

Sampras lost to Agassi in the RR stage in 99 and then beat him in the final, Nalbandian lost to Federer in the RR stage in 05 and then beat him in a final that will be long remembered. Neither one of those wins took away any creditibilty from the event, and this isn't going to either.

Novak lost to Fed in 2015 too

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Nope...

Sampras lost to Agassi in the RR stage in 99 and then beat him in the final, Nalbandian lost to Federer in the RR stage in 05 and then beat him in a final that will be long remembered. Neither one of those wins took away any creditibilty from the event, and this isn't going to either.

Ditto Sampras-Becker, not sure which year...

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

RR was made even worse by giving H2H leverage over set score.

This allowed for TWO dead rubbers on Thursday, and on Friday. Two matches that changed absolutely nothing in the group standings.

Thiem-Rublev and Medvedev-Schwartz.

Absurd.

BackhandDTL · Nov 21, 2020

WTF is in fact a meme trophy. Round robin, these arbitrary nonsense rules in place about who advances, garbage surface, sponsor-happy venue.

Its like a 3 on3 basketball tournament some high school kid organized.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

UnderratedSlam said:
Ditto Sampras-Becker, not sure which year...

96

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
96

Right, of course, the first Hannover finale.

Arak · Nov 21, 2020

Well this does happen also in football (soccer) tournaments and I’m sure in other sports as well. Never thought about it before but indeed the team that lost in the RR has the advantage in the final. This is to say if Nadal wins tonight he will have the advantage over Thiem.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

UnderratedSlam said:
Right, of course, the first Hannover finale.

If anything, that is probably the greatest WTF final of them all, and in no way brought the event down.

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
If anything, that is probably the greatest WTF final of them all, and in no way brought the event down.

Well...

It was a 5-set finale unlike in last 15 years.

Back then servebotting was normal, especially indoors. The fact there were great rallies doesn't diminish the huge number of blasting service winners and aces.

But I agree that repeat match-ups have zero to do with how good a tournament is, it's completely irrelevant. In fact, a repeat match makes things interesting since it doesn't exist in other events.

But WTF will always be a glorified M1000 to me. Winner should get maximum 1200 points.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

UnderratedSlam said:
Well...

It was a 5-set finale unlike in last 15 years.

Back then servebotting was normal, especially indoors. The fact there were great rallies doesn't diminish the huge number of blasting service winners and aces.

But I agree that repeat match-ups have zero to do with how good a tournament is, it's completely irrelevant. In fact, a repeat match makes things interesting since it doesn't exist in other events.

But WTF will always be a glorified M1000 to me. Winner should get maximum 1200 points.

You are entitled to your opinion of course.

To me, it was and always will be the biggest event outside the slams. Worth 1500 points.

The Blond Blur · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Nope...

Sampras lost to Agassi in the RR stage in 99 and then beat him in the final, Nalbandian lost to Federer in the RR stage in 05 and then beat him in a final that will be long remembered. Neither one of those wins took away any creditibilty from the event, and this isn't going to either.

Can't forget PETE losing to Becker in the RR stage in 96, only to beat him in the most epic match in finals history.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

The Blond Blur said:
Can't forget PETE losing to Becker in the RR stage in 96, only to beat him in the most epic match in finals history.

One of the greatest matches of all time. There is no doubt about it.

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

The Blond Blur said:
Can't forget PETE losing to Becker in the RR stage in 96, only to beat him in the most epic match in finals history.

Sampy servebotting from well inside the court.

Was allowed in the 90s.

Servebots were a privileged elite class in the 90s.

weakera · Nov 21, 2020

Nadal is GOAT either way

tudwell · Nov 21, 2020

Round robin is a very common sports format. Funny how many tennis fans can tolerate the exceptionally bizarre scoring system where one player can win significantly fewer points than his opponent and still win the match but can’t tolerate a simple round robin – for one tournament!

alexio · Nov 21, 2020

weakera said:
Nadal is GOAT either way

it's quite uncertain right now at the moment

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

tudwell said:
Round robin is a very common sports format. Funny how many tennis fans can tolerate the exceptionally bizarre scoring system where one player can win significantly fewer points than his opponent and still win the match but can’t tolerate a simple round robin – for one tournament!

Or tournaments where the top players receives byes in the first round...

alexio · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Or tournaments where the top players receives byes in the first round...

will give you some interesting stuff if med will win tonite.. continuing this theme about sampras and agassi..

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

Bamoos said:
Disagree bud. RR works for plenty of sports and is a legit format.

I will say that a YEC with a RR loss has less value than a 5-0 record.

tudwell said:
Round robin is a very common sports format. Funny how many tennis fans can tolerate the exceptionally bizarre scoring system where one player can win significantly fewer points than his opponent and still win the match but can’t tolerate a simple round robin – for one tournament!

Because we're not used to nonsense formats?

Certainly the World Cup never has any issues with its RR system...

... except when the best team ends 2nd.

Or when players stare at the scoreboard to find out what the result is in the OTHER match that's being played at the same time - so they can alter their strategy accordingly.

Yup, RR is perfect.

Bamoos · Nov 21, 2020

Beckerserve said:
As a Nadal fan 2020 has been blissful. Job done. 20Club admission obtained.
If the WTF is going to have any credibility Medvedev should beat Nadal later. At least a Thiem v Medvedev final will have th 2 grouo winners in final. A Thiem V Nadal final means nothing if Rafa wins as he lost to same guy in RR. It is this scenario that makes this event so insignificant for me. Not the idea behind it, the format. I am in favour of a YEC, calling it a World Championship. But it has to be knockout.
Does anyone agree with a RR format?

Disagree bud. RR works for plenty of sports and is a legit format.

I will say that a YEC with a RR loss has less value than a 5-0 record.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

alexio88 said:
will give you some interesting stuff if med will win tonite.. continuing this theme about sampras and agassi..

Cool.

abmk · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
If anything, that is probably the greatest WTF final of them all, and in no way brought the event down.

I heard the Becker-Sampras 96 RR match was just as good in quality, if not a tad better. Haven't watched it yet though. On my to-watch list.

Interesting though: Sampras crushed Agassi in RR, Agassi crushed Becker in RR.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

abmk said:
I heard the Becker-Sampras 96 RR match was just as good in quality, if not a tad better. Haven't watched it yet though. On my to-watch list.

Interesting though: Sampras crushed Agassi in RR, Agassi crushed Becker in RR.

It's a good event in general. I haven't seen the RR in years for 96.

tudwell · Nov 21, 2020

UnderratedSlam said:
Because we're not used to nonsense formats?

Certainly the World Cup never has any issues with its RR system...

... except when the best team ends 2nd.

Or when players stare at the scoreboard to find out what the result is in the OTHER match that's being played at the same time - so they can alter their strategy accordingly.

Yup, RR is perfect.

Of course it’s not perfect, but every format has its issues. I’m glad most tennis tournaments are single-elimination but there’s nothing wrong with having one round-robin affair.

Arak · Nov 21, 2020

tudwell said:
Of course it’s not perfect, but every format has its issues. I’m glad most tennis tournaments are single-elimination but there’s nothing wrong with having one round-robin affair.

RR format generally avoids big upsets in early rounds. Not a bad thing.

UnderratedSlam · Nov 21, 2020

tudwell said:
Of course it’s not perfect, but every format has its issues. I’m glad most tennis tournaments are single-elimination but there’s nothing wrong with having one round-robin affair.

I'd have no issue with it if it didn't award so many points.

1000-1200 would be more realistic and fair.

tonylg · Nov 21, 2020

The format is exactly as it should be.

The problem right now is there isn't enough depth in men's tennis to have a decent 8 man round robin.

Weakest era ever.

ibbi · Nov 21, 2020

I mean that's the way round robin tournaments work, dude. It's just a different format. Is the World Cup farcical? No.

alexio · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Cool.

by the way, funny fact that..from the moment this tourney ain't called masters cup anymore if both players playing in the final were in the same group before that it's alternating (1-1 or 2-0):
2011 fed-tsonga 2-0
2015 fed-djo 1-1
2017 dimitrov-goffin 2-0
2018 zverev-djo 1-1...
also each time if nadal managed to lose in the semifinal, a player he lost to, then became the champion (3-0)

...
and another cool factor, first 2 nadal's semifinals in this tourney he successfully lost, then next 2 he won, and now it has been turn again to lose his semifinal number 6 (number 5, btw, he lost-2015-to djo)

..worth mentioning also is 8-match med' streak,now it's 9-(and quite risky go against it),..adding to this another factor i.e. 'the revenge time' (look, both med and thiem lost their lone grand slam hardcourt final to djo and nad respectively and now they both avenged those painful losses successfully. besides, if we look more closely at the list of winners in last years we'll see that from 2010 to 2015 the player from big 3 won this tourney (6 in a row) but then this trend has changed and starting from 2016 (5 in a row now) a player not from big 3 won it (under different angle it's a guy born in 80s and then a guy born in 90s)..so the overall conclusion of all of it: everything was against nadal before this match against danila, and he lost it sucessfully.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

alexio88 said:
by the way, funny fact that..from the moment this tourney ain't called masters cup anymore if both players playing in the final were in the same group before that it's alternating (1-1 or 2-0):
2011 fed-tsonga 2-0
2015 fed-djo 1-1
2017 dimitrov-goffin 2-0
2018 zverev-djo 1-1...
also each time if nadal managed to lose in the semifinal, a player he lost to, then became the champion (3-0) ...
and another cool factor, first 2 nadal's semifinals in this tourney he successfully lost, then next 2 he won, and now it has been turn again to lose his semifinal number 6 (number 5, btw, he lost-2015-to djo)..worth mentioning also is 8-match med' streak,now it's 9-(and quite risky go against it),..adding to this another factor i.e. 'the revenge time' (look, both med and thiem lost their lone grand slam hardcourt final to djo and nad respectively and now they both avenged those painful losses successfully. besides, if we look more closely at the list of winners in last years we'll see that from 2010 to 2015 the player from big 3 won this tourney (6 in a row) but then this trend has changed and starting from 2016 (5 in a row now) a player not from big 3 won it (under different angle it's a guy born in 80s and then a guy born in 90s)..so the overall conclusion of all of it: everything was against nadal before this match against danila, and he lost it sucessfully.

Interesting info.

Steve0904 · Nov 21, 2020

TheNachoMan said:
I’m impressed. Despite RAFA potentially winning you are still persistent in your hatred of the WTF

Which is all a facade really. And that goes for any Nadal fan that says the same about the WTF. Deep down the fans that hate the WTF also hate the fact that he lost here. Essentially they are lying to themselves to make it all better in their own minds.

PilotPete · Nov 21, 2020

This is what makes WTF tougher than slams in many cases. You may have to beat a top player TWICE to win it all.

alexio · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Interesting info.

yea, was a bit surprised why you had been so confident about nadal..a great form was the reason of that?

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

alexio88 said:
yea, was a bit surprised why you had been so confident about nadal..a great form was the reason of that?

I didn't think his physical level would drop like a stone mid way during the match. Had he physically stayed the course, I still believe he would have won. His form was good, despite not even close to his best, he still took that first set from a GOATing Med 6-3, so I know his game was there when he needed it. His body betrayed him, and I didn't see him dropping so much so quickly.

Sabrina · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
I didn't think his physical level would drop like a stone mid way during the match. Had he physically stayed the course, I still believe he would have won. His form was good, despite not even close to his best, he still took that first set from a GOATing Med 6-3, so I know his game was there when he needed it. His body betrayed him, and I didn't see him dropping so much so quickly.

He had a full day of rest and the match was not even reached 3 hours yet. Maybe age finally catches up with him now. I haven't seen Rafa that tired in a very long time (Us 2019 was a 5 sets match so it can't be compared).

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

Sabrina said:
He had a full day of rest and the match was not even reached 3 hours yet. Maybe age finally catches up with him now. I haven't seen Rafa that tired in a very long time (Us 2019 was a 5 sets match so it can't be compared).

Exactly, the scheduling favored him a lot more than Med, since Med had to play yesterday also. He played a couple of two set matches, then a three set with Tsitisi, that is really nothing. It is without a doubt his age that caused this massive drop in his physical level, he had bad footwork at the start which I pointed out, he adjusted and he got better, but then as he got tired, he could not move his feet so he started to net rush. It was over at that point.

MeatTornado · Nov 21, 2020

Steve0904 said:
Which is all a facade really. And that goes for any Nadal fan that says the same about the WTF. Deep down the fans that hate the WTF also hate the fact that he lost here. Essentially they are lying to themselves to make it all better in their own minds.

It's just the way of things. All the fan bases are extremely biased.

Large swaths of the Fed & Djoker fan bases discredit the Olympics the exact same way ("meaningless exo"). Fed fans talked sh*t about RG until he won it ("you don't need it for GOAThood, Pete never won it!"). A lot also pretend Monte-Carlo not being a "mandatory" Masters somehow makes it better that Fed never won it, despite the top of the field always being there. In a similar but different vein, Nadal fans often make the AO sound less important as they lean against total "hard court major" success instead, choosing to lump in the USO to hide his poor record Down Under. It's just the way it goes, unfortunately.

Beckerserve · Nov 21, 2020

abmk said:
I heard the Becker-Sampras 96 RR match was just as good in quality, if not a tad better. Haven't watched it yet though. On my to-watch list.

Interesting though: Sampras crushed Agassi in RR, Agassi crushed Becker in RR.

Becker v Sampras late1996 had three matches from another planet. You must watch them.

Steve0904 · Nov 21, 2020

MeatTornado said:
It's just the way of things. All the fan bases are extremely biased.

Large swaths of the Fed & Djoker fan bases discredit the Olympics the exact same way ("meaningless exo"). Fed fans talked sh*t about RG until he won it ("you don't need it for GOAThood, Pete never won it!"). A lot also pretend Monte-Carlo not being a "mandatory" Masters somehow makes it better that Fed never won it, despite the top of the field always being there. In a similar but different vein, Nadal fans often make the AO sound less important as they lean against total "hard court major" success instead, choosing to lump in the USO to hide his poor record Down Under. It's just the way it goes, unfortunately.

Agree 100%. I just think it’s unfortunate that people hide it to hide their disappointment.
I can only speak for myself here but I was firmly on the ABN train this WTF and will be until he retires. And it’s because it’s the one thing that tops off Nadal’s career once and for all. I have no problem admitting that.

I just wish the Nadal fans on the opposite side of the argument could do the same. It shouldn’t really be seen as a terrible thing that you hate to see your favourite player lose at an important tournament.

Beckerserve · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Exactly, the scheduling favored him a lot more than Med, since Med had to play yesterday also. He played a couple of two set matches, then a three set with Tsitisi, that is really nothing. It is without a doubt his age that caused this massive drop in his physical level, he had bad footwork at the start which I pointed out, he adjusted and he got better, but then as he got tired, he could not move his feet so he started to net rush. It was over at that point.

Nonsense lol. He was just playing awful stuff as he is mediocre in those conditions so he tried something different.
Not a shocker unlike Djokovic loss.

Beckerserve · Nov 21, 2020

Steve0904 said:
Agree 100%. I just think it’s unfortunate that people hide it to hide their disappointment.
I can only speak for myself here but I was firmly on the ABN train this WTF and will be until he retires. And it’s because it’s the one thing that tops off Nadal’s career once and for all. I have no problem admitting that.

I just wish the Nadal fans on the opposite side of the argument could do the same. It shouldn’t really be seen as a terrible thing that you hate to see your favourite player lose at an important tournament.

The WTF is insignificant for Nadal. Always has been. Read his book.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

Beckerserve said:
Nonsense lol. He was just playing awful stuff as he is mediocre in those conditions so he tried something different.
Not a shocker unlike Djokovic loss.

Nah.

Beckerserve · Nov 21, 2020

Hitman said:
Nah.

Nadal's worse event. Djokovics best outside Australia. You do the math bud.
Only two players had a memorable year for the right reasons. Nadal and Thiem.
For Djokovic it was a horror show i am afraid bud.

Hitman · Nov 21, 2020

Beckerserve said:
Nadal's worse event. Djokovics best outside Australia. You do the math bud.
Only two players had a memorable year for the right reasons. Nadal and Thiem.
For Djokovic it was a horror show i am afraid bud.

Nah bud.

Nadal v Thiem final would be farcical

Legend

TheNachoMan

Guest

Professional

Legend

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

TheNachoMan

Guest

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Legend

Bionic Poster

Legend

Bionic Poster

Similar threads