Why does Djokovic always draw Federer?

jm1980

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
15 times out of the last 18.

2008 AO: #1 Federer - #3 Djokovic; #2 Nadal - #4 Davydenko
2008 RG: #1 Federer - #4 Davydenko; #2 Nadal - #3 Djokovic
2008 W: #1 Federer - #3 Djokovic; #2 Nadal - #4 Davydenko
2008 USO: #1 Nadal - #4 Ferrer; #2 Federer - #3 Djokovic

2009 AO: #1 Nadal - #4 Murray; #2 Federer - #3 Djokovic
2009 RG: #1 Nadal - #3 Murray; #2 Federer - #4 Djokovic
2009 W: #1 Nadal - #3 Murray; #2 Federer - #4 Djokovic
2009 USO: #1 Federer - #4 Djokovic; #2 Murray - #3 Nadal

2010 AO: #1 Federer - #3 Djokovic; #2 Nadal - #4 JMDP
2010 RG: #1 Federer - #4 Murray; #2 Nadal - #3 Djokovic
2010 W: #1 Federer - #3 Djokovic; #2 Nadal - #4 Murray
2010 USO: #1 Nadal - #4 Murray; #2 Federer - #3 Djokovic

2011 AO: #1 Nadal - #4 Murray; #2 Federer - #3 Djokovic
2011 RG: #1 Nadal - #4 Murray; #2 Djokovic - #3 Federer
2011 W: #1 Nadal - #4 Murray; #2 Djokovic - #3 Federer
2011 USO: #1 Djokovic - #3 Federer; #2 Nadal - #4 Murray

2012 AO: #1 Djokovic - #4 Murray; #2 Nadal - #3 Federer
2012 RG: #1 Djokovic - #3 Federer; #2 Nadal - #4 Murray
 
E

EndLy

Rookie
the possible lure of a nadal federer final, primetime Sunday afternoon is too great.
I was honestly surprised federer and nadal were on the same side of the draw for tue Australian Open.

I'm sure Djokovic will draw Federer for Wimbledon too.
 
Frying Pan Forehand

Frying Pan Forehand

Rookie
Damn this conspiracy theory lunatics. Right now Fed isn't making finals so if the organizers want profit they would have Fed vs Nadal because that is the most popular match possible in today's tennis and then even get a nice match Nadal vs Djokovic which is becoming even more popular than Fed vs Djokovic.

Take your pills.
 
A

Arafel

Professional
Well, it seems odd, but if you look at the breakdown, it's because their rankings keep changing and have not been static. Put it this way: in every year except 2011, the split has been 50/50 over the Slams between a 1/4 and 2/4 pairing of the seeds for the semis. In 2011, there were 3 1/4 parings and one 1/3. If the rankings had been the same over that period, it would argue for something more in terms of organizers fixing it.
 
jm1980

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Arafel said:
Well, it seems odd, but if you look at the breakdown, it's because their rankings keep changing and have not been static. Put it this way: in every year except 2011, the split has been 50/50 over the Slams between a 1/4 and 2/4 pairing of the seeds for the semis. In 2011, there were 3 1/4 parings and one 1/3. If the rankings had been the same over that period, it would argue for something more in terms of organizers fixing it.
Click to expand...

This doesn't mean they couldn't have been rigged. Here's what I think the train of thought was last year:

jm1980 said:
AO: We have to draw Federer and Djokovic together... #2 vs. #3 it is.
RG: Again, Fed must draw Djokovic. Nobody will notice if we put #2 vs. #3 again, right?
W: This is getting a little suspicious, but f*** it. Let's go with #2 vs. #3 again.
USO: Oh thank God Djokovic got #1! Now we can have a #1 vs. #3 to even out the numbers a little bit.
Click to expand...
 
Evan77

Evan77

Banned
It is very strange ... I thought about it too ... conspiracy, so Nudall can get anywhere, unlcle Tony is really good, lol
 
Lemoned

Lemoned

Rookie
Frying Pan Forehand said:
Damn this conspiracy theory lunatics. Right now Fed isn't making finals so if the organizers want profit they would have Fed vs Nadal because that is the most popular match possible in today's tennis and then even get a nice match Nadal vs Djokovic which is becoming even more popular than Fed vs Djokovic.

Take your pills.
Click to expand...
Last time they got what they wanted, even though Federer hadn't been able to make a final four times in a row prior to RG 2011. So why change a winning formula when it's proved it's still working for them.
icon10.gif
 
kishnabe

kishnabe

Talk Tennis Guru
Rickenbacker4003 said:
French Open 2007 and 2008.
Click to expand...


Nadal needs to go through Grampa Freds, and Djokovic 2.0

Before it was okay when Nadal went through Djokovic 1.0 to Prime Federer.

It impossible to face Prime Federer and Djokovic 2.0 since they both have appeared in different times. If Nadal did he would not have 10 but rather 4 slam titles.
 
WhiskeyEE

WhiskeyEE

G.O.A.T.
Arafel said:
Well, it seems odd, but if you look at the breakdown, it's because their rankings keep changing and have not been static. Put it this way: in every year except 2011, the split has been 50/50 over the Slams between a 1/4 and 2/4 pairing of the seeds for the semis. In 2011, there were 3 1/4 parings and one 1/3. If the rankings had been the same over that period, it would argue for something more in terms of organizers fixing it.
Click to expand...

That means absolutely nothing. Fed and Joker switching seeds allowed the number pairings be more balanced. That doesn't mean they aren't rigging the draws.

From chance alone, both the number and Joker-Fed pairings should be balanced, regardless of whether they changed seeds or not. That is, they should have met half the time while seeds 1 and 3 AND half of the time while 2 and 3, or whatever. This would make both the number and player pairings balanced.

The fact that one is extremely skewed suggests that they are rigging them.
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Because tio Toni owns tennis.

Soon we will see higher net, only one serve allowed, all HC tournaments switched to (red) clay and a two year ranking system.
 
S

sunof tennis

Professional
Perhaps one of the tennis historians can answer this question, have the slams always completed their draws with random selections in the semis?
Not sure why tennis doesn't do what other sports do and have 1 play 4 and 2 play 3 at all times if all make it to the semis. That would certinaly eliminate the conspiracy theories:)
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
I think TPTB still hold out hopes for Federer-Nadal finals and the only way that is possible is for them not to play in the semis.

Then going back in time when Djokovic was #3 he seemed to usually end up in Nadal's half at Roland Garros, but Federer's in the other slams, which was kind of funny. Maybe they figured there was no chance of him beating Nadal at RG, and not much chance of him beating Federer at Wimbledon or the U.S Open, so that was the safest draw to almost guarantee the desired Federer-Nadal final as well.
 
WhiskeyEE

WhiskeyEE

G.O.A.T.
NadalAgassi said:
I think TPTB still hold out hopes for Federer-Nadal finals and the only way that is possible is for them not to play in the semis.

Then going back in time when Djokovic was #3 he seemed to usually end up in Nadal's half at Roland Garros, but Federer's in the other slams, which was kind of funny. Maybe they figured there was no chance of him beating Nadal at RG, and not much chance of him beating Federer at Wimbledon or the U.S Open, so that was the safest draw to almost guarantee the desired Federer-Nadal final as well.
Click to expand...

This is what I think as well. But who's TPTB?
 
PCXL-Fan

PCXL-Fan

Hall of Fame
The Djokovic-Federer semi pattern thing stopped recently when various academic and journalistic bodies drew attention to this issue, which coincided with the ending of this pattern. Also a weird coincidence that the pattern stops after media and academic attention is drawn to this suspicious pattern. The Djokovic-Federer semi pattern thing changed when various academic and journalistic bodies did drew attention to this issue which coincided with the ending of this pattern.


http://essentialtennis.com/tournews/2011/06/the-strange-odds-of-federer-vs.-djokovic/
http://www.b92.net/sport/tenis/vesti.php?yyyy=2011&mm=10&dd=20&nav_id=550938
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kR1DPVj3DAlkq880NDIt4K7Kyrk8I0iF48-rEKBJ3S0/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/6854000/how‐espn‐lines‐analyzed‐us‐open‐tennis‐
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...nds‐top‐seeds‐tennis‐us‐open‐had‐easier‐draw‐
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=6861149&categoryid=2378529
http://www.playthegame.org/fileadmi..._Pijetlovic_-_6_Oct_at_PLAY_THE_GAME_2011.pdf
http://www.livestream.com/playthegame_dshs/video?clipId=pla_44809e94-aa04-46c7-9f1e-35b212ba9d46 <- this link gives estonian researchers lecture to the press on these's statistical improbabilities (starts at 14:00)

Investigators also found that relative easiness USO for the opening rounds for the top 2 men over the last 10 years happened with a probability of 1 in 333. They also found that in WTA it was even worse, that the top 2 seeds relative easiness of 1st round opponents using computer probility simulations was reproduced 0 in of 1000 attempts.
 
Last edited:
Evan77

Evan77

Banned
PCXL-Fan said:
The Djokovic-Federer semi pattern thing stopped recently when various academic and journalistic bodies drew attention to this issue, which coincided with the ending of this pattern. Also a weird coincidence that the pattern stops after media and academic attention is drawn to this suspicious pattern. The Djokovic-Federer semi pattern thing changed when various academic and journalistic bodies did drew attention to this issue which coincided with the ending of this pattern.


http://essentialtennis.com/tournews/2011/06/the-strange-odds-of-federer-vs.-djokovic/
http://www.b92.net/sport/tenis/vesti.php?yyyy=2011&mm=10&dd=20&nav_id=550938
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kR1DPVj3DAlkq880NDIt4K7Kyrk8I0iF48-rEKBJ3S0/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/6854000/how‐espn‐lines‐analyzed‐us‐open‐tennis‐
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...nds‐top‐seeds‐tennis‐us‐open‐had‐easier‐draw‐
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=6861149&categoryid=2378529
http://www.playthegame.org/fileadmi..._Pijetlovic_-_6_Oct_at_PLAY_THE_GAME_2011.pdf
http://www.livestream.com/playthegame_dshs/video?clipId=pla_44809e94-aa04-46c7-9f1e-35b212ba9d46 <- this link gives estonian researchers lecture to the press on these's statistical improbabilities (starts at 14:00)

Investigators also found that relative easiness USO for the opening rounds for the top 2 men over the last 10 years happened with a probability of 1 in 333. They also found that in WTA it was even worse, that the top 2 seeds relative easiness of 1st round opponents using computer probility simulations was reproduced 0 in of 1000 attempts.
Click to expand...
yeah, I read so much about it and I find it really odd ... not sure what to make out of it ...
 
WhiskeyEE

WhiskeyEE

G.O.A.T.
Evan77 said:
yeah, I read so much about it and I find it really odd ... not sure what to make out of it ...
Click to expand...

The probability of them meeting as often as they have is a fraction of a percent (I calculated it). It's ridiculous.

Anyone know if a similar thing occurred with Sampras and Agassi?
 
Evan77

Evan77

Banned
WhiskeyEE said:
The probability of them meeting as often as they have is a fraction of a percent (I calculated it). It's ridiculous.

Anyone know if a similar thing occurred with Sampras and Agassi?
Click to expand...
good question. I'm going to try to look it up. As for Djoko and Fed it's so crazy (I had to learn some statistics at the university, and I can only scratch my head)...

look, love watching 2 great champions (Rog and Nole) but it's so strange :confused:
 
WhiskeyEE

WhiskeyEE

G.O.A.T.
Mustard said:
Look at the seeding numbers and not the names of the players.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. Statisically, they should have met half the time while seeds 1 and 3 and half the time while seeds 2 and 3, which would still be half the time overall. But it isn't.

They changed rankings, which evened out the number pairings a bit since they went from rigging 2 and 3 to 1 and 3. That doesn't mean it isn't rigged.
 
D

Daized

Rookie
The seeding itself is irrelevant because in each slam they had a 50% chance of meeting. The chances Fed and Djokovic met this many times is just statistically not very plausible (It can happen, but so so so unlikely).
 
D

Deleted member 22147

Guest
kishnabe said:
Nadal needs to go through Grampa Freds, and Djokovic 2.0

Before it was okay when Nadal went through Djokovic 1.0 to Prime Federer.

It impossible to face Prime Federer and Djokovic 2.0 since they both have appeared in different times. If Nadal did he would not have 10 but rather 4 slam titles.
Click to expand...

I don't see much of a difference between 2008 Djokovic to 2012 Djokovic, in ability. I just think that the competition was better in 2008. Djokovic is certainly fitter now than in 2008 but his game has been more passive as a result, in my opinion.
 
jm1980

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Ocean Drive said:
I don't see much of a difference between 2008 Djokovic to 2012 Djokovic, in ability. I just think that the competition was better in 2008. Djokovic is certainly fitter now than in 2008 but his game has been more passive as a result, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Djokovic hasn't been the same this year, not just his game but also his head.

Been seeing shades of Djokovic 1.0, who would lose his cool when facing adversity.

I want Djokovic 2.0 back, that one who remained calm no matter what happened on court and found a way to win.
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
kishnabe said:
Nadal needs to go through Grampa Freds, and Djokovic 2.0

Before it was okay when Nadal went through Djokovic 1.0 to Prime Federer.

It impossible to face Prime Federer and Djokovic 2.0 since they both have appeared in different times. If Nadal did he would not have 10 but rather 4 slam titles.
Click to expand...

Sure, and how many slams would Fed have if he had faced both prime Nadal and Djokovic...

:roll:
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Because draws are probably to some extent predetermined.
 
B

bullfan

Legend
Rickenbacker4003 said:
Nadal got a dream draw. No Fed, Berdych, Delpo or Tsonga. So much for the French hating him.
Click to expand...

Nadal doesn't need a dream draw for clay.

Fed.... Hasn't beat him at RG yet, and won't start now.

Berdych..... Nadal took him to the cleaners at Rome, although that was Rafa's best match during the tournament. Berdych is a mental midget and it doesn't matter who's side of the draw Berdych is in. Berdych should have beat Fed and Djokovic on clay this year and blew it both times. Didn't come close to beating Rafa. Won't come close to beating Fed or Novak if he should face either.

Delpo.... is most not a clay court challenge for Rafa. Delpo couldn't prepare for DC while Rafa was wiped out after a busy season, and didn't challenge Rafa much, why would he now? Besides I see Delpo as possibly injured, he started wearing a brace and didn't look good in Rome. I don't think it matters which draw Delpo is in, he isn't going to hurt any of the top 3.

Tsonga..... who Rafa wiped off clay in DC right after USOpen, when Rafa was beat. Tsonga is so hit or miss that unless it's hard court, he's a total miss, it doesn't matter who's draw he's in.

Bottom line.... None of those 4 can hurt any of the top 3 on clay.
 
Bobby Jr

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
This is one slam where I'm happy for Federer and Djokovic to be on the same side. My reasoning is I think Djokovic has little chance of beating both Federer and Nadal at the FO.

My preference is that Djokovic does not win four slams on the trot - basically because we'll be subjected to even more "goat" arguments forever as if he achieved the same as Laver of Graf - who did it in a calendar year (it would still be a great achievement no doubt - I just don't want Djokovic to do it).

For once we're entering a slam where I don't wanting any particular player to win, rather I want a particular player to not win.
 
Last edited:
jm1980

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Bobby Jr said:
This is one slam where I'm happy for Federer and Djokovic to be on the same side. My reasoning is I think Djokovic has little chance of beating both Federer and Nadal at the FO.

Since my number one wish at this even is that Djokovic does not win four slams on the trot - basically because we'll be subjected to even more "goat" arguments forever as if he achieved the same as Laver of Graf - who did it in a calendar year.

For once we're entering a slam where I don't wanting any particular player to win, rather I want a particular player to not win. Sad I know...
Click to expand...

What if Djokovic wins all 4 slams this year?
 
Evan77

Evan77

Banned
Bobby Jr said:
This is one slam where I'm happy for Federer and Djokovic to be on the same side. My reasoning is I think Djokovic has little chance of beating both Federer and Nadal at the FO.

My preference is that Djokovic does not win four slams on the trot - basically because we'll be subjected to even more "goat" arguments forever as if he achieved the same as Laver of Graf - who did it in a calendar year (it would still be a great achievement no doubt - I just don't want Djokovic to do it).

For once we're entering a slam where I don't wanting any particular player to win, rather I want a particular player to not win.
Click to expand...
disagree, my dream is to see Novak and Roger in the final of RG. also it would be awesome if Novak could win RG and hold all 4 slams ... sure I'd be perfectly happy if Roger wins another one but don't see it happening ... I'd be happy if Joan Rivers wins RG, anybody but that pusher Nadal :)
 
T

Tony48

Legend
Arafel said:
Well, it seems odd, but if you look at the breakdown, it's because their rankings keep changing and have not been static. Put it this way: in every year except 2011, the split has been 50/50 over the Slams between a 1/4 and 2/4 pairing of the seeds for the semis. In 2011, there were 3 1/4 parings and one 1/3. If the rankings had been the same over that period, it would argue for something more in terms of organizers fixing it.
Click to expand...

I already looked at 3 other groups of tennis players:

1. McEnroe-Lendl-Connors-Wilander ERA (1983-1985)
2. Endberg-Becker-Lendl-Agassi ERA (1988-1991)
3. Edberg-Courier-Becker-Sampras ERA (1991-1994)

....and their rankings kept changing but they didn't show anything NEAR the kind of outrageous pairing that we see with Fed-Djokovic/Nadal-Murray
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Tony48 said:
I already looked at 3 other groups of tennis players:

1. McEnroe-Lendl-Connors-Wilander ERA (1983-1985)
2. Endberg-Becker-Lendl-Agassi ERA (1988-1991)
3. Edberg-Courier-Becker-Sampras ERA (1991-1994)

....and their rankings kept changing but they didn't show anything NEAR the kind of outrageous pairing that we see with Fed-Djokovic/Nadal-Murray
Click to expand...

I think it revolves around TPTB that be wanting Federer-Nadal finals at all costs. The only way that is possible if Djokovic is #1 or #2 is if Federer plays Djokovic in the semis, as obviously if there is a Federer-Nadal semi there can be no final. Then when Djokovic was #3 putting Djokovic in Nadal's half at RG and Federer's half at the U.S Open was the safest way to ensure him not making the final of either, thus preserving the chance of the likely Fedal final (Wimbledon I dont think they worried what half he was in pre 2011, and Australian they were worried about him whichever half he was in).

I have some friends who dont follow tennis very closely, and they complained to me last year when they bought tickets to the Canadian final and neither Federer or Nadal made it. They didnt even care about Djokovic or "that other guy", which was their exact words. I have a feeling that is representative of many of the casual fans thoughts even today. It isnt fair, but it is how it is. Even after his amazing 2011, Nadal and Federer are still the big drawing cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mehdimike
Big Titles won by beating at least 2 top-10 seeded players (Djokovic Vs Nadal)
Replies
12
Views
679
ADuck
ADuck
lud
Top 5 All Time Performances of Big 3.
Replies
10
Views
481
SonnyT
S
Lew II
Sets dropped by Big3 before playing each other
Replies
36
Views
1K
SonnyT
S
Hitman
The Big 3 and the different combos of consecutive slam wins as it stands
2
Replies
70
Views
2K
Fiero425
Fiero425
D
Most GS wins by four players
2 3
Replies
127
Views
3K
Deleted member 307496
D
Top