Cincy 2010 QF: Rafael Nadal [1] vs Marcos Baghdatis

Who wins?


  • Total voters
    49
  • Poll closed .

namelessone

Legend
Delpo is superior to Nadal on ANY hardcourt.

I wouldn't go that far. Nadal straight setted delpo in IW 09' and had a lot of chances to close out things in their Miami 09' encounter as well, which went to three sets(nadal being up a break in the third) and finished in a tie. Those two are on slow HC. He also led 5-2 in the tiebreaker in the first set in toronto 09' after coming back from injuries so he had to be doing something right. Toronto is also slow.

Obviosly DelPo has a better shot now that he has grown as a player but the only surface on which Nadal has no shot against delpo is fast hc.
 

ballboy48

Banned
I wouldn't go that far. Nadal straight setted delpo in IW 09' and had a lot of chances to close out things in their Miami 09' encounter as well, which went to three sets(nadal being up a break in the third) and finished in a tie. Those two are on slow HC. He also led 5-2 in the tiebreaker in the first set in toronto 09' after coming back from injuries so he had to be doing something right. Toronto is also slow.

Obviosly DelPo has a better shot now that he has grown as a player but the only surface on which Nadal has no shot against delpo is fast hc.

Probably true. And if Delpo stay healthy and being that he's younger, Nadal may never win the USO. At the same age Delpo has accomplished a lot more than Nadal on fast HC.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
I wouldn't go that far. Nadal straight setted delpo in IW 09' and had a lot of chances to close out things in their Miami 09' encounter as well, which went to three sets(nadal being up a break in the third) and finished in a tie.

Nadal was actually up 3-0 (with 2 breaks) in the third set of their 2009 Miami quarter final.
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
Exactly, tennis is not transitive. This isn't math. H2Hs are affected by mathcups, current health, surface, and other factors. Therefore, to me, the only way to determine a player's superiority is by the number of titles he won all things considered.

I just checked back b/c theyre drying the courts in Cincinnati. Saw this, and since it's a little more straightforward than the one I'm already working on, let me ask: What does "tennis is not transitive" mean?

Regarding the bolded statement, the truth of that is only able to be determined after both players have retired, right?

Because the "number of titles" is going to depend on the number of tournaments played, and that depends on how long a player has been playing tournaments professionally.
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
With both Del Potro and Tsonga injured and not playing, this may be Nadal's best opportunity ever to win the US Open. But I don't think it'll happen.

We all know both Del Potro and Tsonga would have spanked Nadal at the USO. :)

Breakpoint, you don't need to hate so much. Nadal would beat Tsonga if they played.

Del Potro, yes, he is a nightmare for him. Thankfully for him, he won't be playing him this year.
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
I wouldn't go that far. Nadal straight setted delpo in IW 09' and had a lot of chances to close out things in their Miami 09' encounter as well, which went to three sets(nadal being up a break in the third) and finished in a tie. Those two are on slow HC. He also led 5-2 in the tiebreaker in the first set in toronto 09' after coming back from injuries so he had to be doing something right. Toronto is also slow.

Obviosly DelPo has a better shot now that he has grown as a player but the only surface on which Nadal has no shot against delpo is fast hc.

I agree with most of what you are saying. But I think that Miami match was the coming of Del Potro, he just became a different player after beating Rafa there. Had his break out at the FO, where he pummelled Federer for most of their five set epic. Also got his first win over Murray, albeit on clay, and then took out all comers, a red hot Cilic, Nadal and Federer at the US Open. Plus he got to the finals of the YEC championship. He became a totally different player mentally as well as physically.
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
3 out of top 4 are out. None of them like playing at Cincy and Nadal looked as if he just wanted out of there ....

And Marcos played an absolutely in the zone match.

This is it.

And, it's going to be a totally different Top 4 in the Big Apple! Bags played well. Nadal was sub par, and the match was still close. Bags held it together and went on to win. It was a fun match, imo.
 

namelessone

Legend
I agree with most of what you are saying. But I think that Miami match was the coming of Del Potro, he just became a different player after beating Rafa there. Had his break out at the FO, where he pummelled Federer for most of their five set epic. Also got his first win over Murray, albeit on clay, and then took out all comers, a red hot Cilic, Nadal and Federer at the US Open. Plus he got to the finals of the YEC championship. He became a totally different player mentally as well as physically.

If Rafa gets his BH into a groove it is a contest on slow HC. On fast HC there is no contest.

Nadal has many issues on HC but missing BH is the main one. Watch highlights of their matches in IW and Miami 09', Nadal is not running away from the BH there and those courts at least take some spin whereas in Cincy and USO the spinny balls sit up. That gives Nadal at least some room to maneuver unlike on fast HC.

Yeah, delpo improved a lot but again, if a utter crap Nadal like in toronto 09' can take delpo to a tiebreaker and lead him by three points than he can win against him from time to time. Even their USO encounter was very surprising. In the first and second a lot of games were 40-30,40-40 on their own serves which really shouldn't have been the case with a big server like delpo and Rafa was passive on BP's. But delpo showed some terrific mental toughness and Rafa's main issue in that match was that he couldn't pull the argie off court and was getting run around instead. But even so, Nadal believed, only early in the third did Rafa see that there was no way around him. DelPo said afterwards that he didn't expect it to be so easy cause he knew his previous encounters with Rafa. In fact only the last two victories over Rafa can be classified as easy.

So to conclude, I would give delpo and 80%-20% shot to beat Rafa on fast but only a 60-40 to beat him on slow. Though I must say that if the Rafa of today would meet before injury delpo it wouldn't be pretty. Rafa is struggling with top30 players right now.
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
YOUR illogic arises from your assumption that 5-4 is cast in stone and that all future matches should be based on that. Ridiculous. 9 matches is hardly a large sample. A better barometer of how most matches would have ended up on HC had they met more in Fed's prime is their overall effectiveness on HC against the field. Moreover, few of those 9 HC meetings were on the fastest surface, eg. Cincy and the most important one USO.

You think I'm illogical? The hardcourt h2h is 4-5, period. You can micro analyze it all you want, but if they met on hard courts more, statistics say Nadal would win his share of those too. Ergo, them meeting more on hc's is not a lock for Fed as many try to suggest. I could see if their h2h was Fed 8-1 and you saying Fed would dominate the h2h, but Fed barely has an edge in their nine meetings as it is, and if they meet again and Nadal wins, the h2h is even on hc's and on grass. So your logic fails on all counts.

In addition, if they met in Fed's "prime", 23-24 you are also suggesting that Nadal should not be in his own prime but should be 19 to 20 years old in order for Fed to gain an advantage. Since they're not in the same age group their primes will never meet.

Basically, these are straw arguments. These two will never be in their "primes" at the same time. Fed was lucky to be in his prime over a young, green, finding his game Nadal. The fact that the h2h is what it is, is due to Nadal's achievements.

Now, don't get it twisted and think I'm saying Nadal is better than Fed. I'm simply saying the h2h is way more valid than others want to believe for the reasons listed. Personally, I don't believe in comparisons until their careers are over, but I do enjoy reading illogical statements and pointing out the errors in faulty logic.

Conclusion?
 

ballboy48

Banned
You think I'm illogical? The hardcourt h2h is 4-5, period. You can micro analyze it all you want, but if they met on hard courts more, statistics say Nadal would win his share of those too. Ergo, them meeting more on hc's is not a lock for Fed as many try to suggest. I could see if their h2h was Fed 8-1 and you saying Fed would dominate the h2h, but Fed barely has an edge in their nine meetings as it is, and if they meet again and Nadal wins, the h2h is even on hc's and on grass. So your logic fails on all counts.

In addition, if they met in Fed's "prime", 23-24 you are also suggesting that Nadal should not be in his own prime but should be 19 to 20 years old in order for Fed to gain an advantage. Since they're not in the same age group their primes will never meet.

Basically, these are straw arguments. These two will never be in their "primes" at the same time. Fed was lucky to be in his prime over a young, green, finding his game Nadal. The fact that the h2h is what it is, is due to Nadal's achievements.

Now, don't get it twisted and think I'm saying Nadal is better than Fed. I'm simply saying the h2h is way more valid than others want to believe for the reasons listed. Personally, I don't believe in comparisons until their careers are over, but I do enjoy reading illogical statements and pointing out the errors in faulty logic.

Conclusion?

You obviously understand very little about statistics. Hint: we're not flipping a coin here.
 

ballboy48

Banned
This is not an answer and doesn't refute one statement that I made. In other words, why even respond?

It is an answer, it negates what you SAID. Namely, that statistics say Rafa will get his fair share of further meetings. Completely wrong. Hence' you're 'ergos' do not follow. Seriously, do you even read before posting?
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
It is an answer, it negates what you SAID. Namely, that statistics say Rafa will get his fair share of further meetings. Completely wrong. Hence' you're 'ergos' do not follow. Seriously, do you even read before posting?

So, in your world 4-5 means the other person who's won 4 out of 9 probably won't win any more, but the person who won 5 out of 9 will?

OK.
 

ballboy48

Banned
So, in your world 4-5 means the other person who's won 4 out of 9 probably won't win any more, but the person who won 5 out of 9 will?

OK.

So in your world if a player leads the H2H 1-0, statistics say that player will all the remaining matches? Unreal. You are most illogical **** poster on here. And don't come back with oh but 1 match is not statistically significant. And 9 matches magically is? Grow up and learn something will ya?
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
So in your world if a player leads the H2H 1-0, statistics say that player will all the remaining matches? Unreal. You are most illogical **** poster on here. And don't come back with oh but 1 match is not statistically significant. And 9 matches magically is? Grow up and learn something will ya?

You have to go to ignore. You make no sense at all, and you're insulting to boot. It's obvious you want to instigate, so instigate by yourself. There are plenty of decent Fed Fans here that one can communicate with, and you are not on that roster. Bye bye.
 

thejoe

Hall of Fame
It is an answer, it negates what you SAID. Namely, that statistics say Rafa will get his fair share of further meetings. Completely wrong. Hence' you're 'ergos' do not follow. Seriously, do you even read before posting?

Do you? TheTruth isn't saying that the stats are the be all and end all. But the fact that he's won 4 of 9 meetings on hard courts says to me that yes, actually Rafa could definitely win more matches if they met on a hard court. It's certainly a significant statistic.
 

ballboy48

Banned
Do you? TheTruth isn't saying that the stats are the be all and end all. But the fact that he's won 4 of 9 meetings on hard courts says to me that yes, actually Rafa could definitely win more matches if they met on a hard court. It's certainly a significant statistic.

No it's not a significant statistic especially given the fact that the majority did not come on fast HC like Cincy or USO.
 

ballboy48

Banned
You have to go to ignore. You make no sense at all, and you're insulting to boot. It's obvious you want to instigate, so instigate by yourself. There are plenty of decent Fed Fans here that one can communicate with, and you are not on that roster. Bye bye.

Haha, that's the second time you've done that. As soon as you're losing you quit :) What doesn't make sense about I said. Now do you see what I mean when I say you are a completely illogical ****?
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Don't worry about stats. Rafa will be 100% focused at USO and I think his game will be in place.
I'm looking forward to it. Great effort by Baghs in this match. He's beaten the #1 twice this year. Impressive stuff even if he hasn't really been able to maintain that level, day in, day out.
 

rovex

Legend
Baghdatis good looking, will beat Federer.

But honestly, i'm watching highlightes of Baggy - Nadal and Nadal seemed like he played well, in the final set at least.
 

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame
Baghdatis good looking, will beat Federer.

But honestly, i'm watching highlightes of Baggy - Nadal and Nadal seemed like he played well, in the final set at least.

Yes. Aside from a few points in the later stage of the final set I'd say Nadal played a fairly decent decider.
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
Yes. Aside from a few points in the later stage of the final set I'd say Nadal played a fairly decent decider.

He did get better in the latter part of the match, but he wasn't the Rafa his fans know and love. But hey, baby steps on the hard court. I like his progress.

Marcos did well to continue competing, something he hasn't done in the past. Baggy won so many fans with that AO performance and his wonderful on court personality, who would begrudge him a win?

I can't pick between him and Fish, because I like Fish too, and a little shakeup is often necessary!
 

ballboy48

Banned
Don't worry about stats. Rafa will be 100% focused at USO and I think his game will be in place.
I'm looking forward to it. Great effort by Baghs in this match. He's beaten the #1 twice this year. Impressive stuff even if he hasn't really been able to maintain that level, day in, day out.

HAhahah, now the stats go out the window. Boy you're something else. :oops:
 

rafan

Hall of Fame
Don't worry about stats. Rafa will be 100% focused at USO and I think his game will be in place.
I'm looking forward to it. Great effort by Baghs in this match. He's beaten the #1 twice this year. Impressive stuff even if he hasn't really been able to maintain that level, day in, day out.[/QUOTE

I wonder sometimes if Rafa hasn't taken a leaf out of Djokovic's book and realized that not being injured/sick is more important than winning on HC - oh well we shall see. I didn't like the look of him at the last tournament against Baghdadis and thought he wasn't there and lacked any real enthusiasm. Then the last time I saw him was at Wimby so it's hard to compare
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
If Rafa gets his BH into a groove it is a contest on slow HC. On fast HC there is no contest.

Nadal has many issues on HC but missing BH is the main one. Watch highlights of their matches in IW and Miami 09', Nadal is not running away from the BH there and those courts at least take some spin whereas in Cincy and USO the spinny balls sit up. That gives Nadal at least some room to maneuver unlike on fast HC.

Yeah, delpo improved a lot but again, if a utter crap Nadal like in toronto 09' can take delpo to a tiebreaker and lead him by three points than he can win against him from time to time. Even their USO encounter was very surprising. In the first and second a lot of games were 40-30,40-40 on their own serves which really shouldn't have been the case with a big server like delpo and Rafa was passive on BP's. But delpo showed some terrific mental toughness and Rafa's main issue in that match was that he couldn't pull the argie off court and was getting run around instead. But even so, Nadal believed, only early in the third did Rafa see that there was no way around him. DelPo said afterwards that he didn't expect it to be so easy cause he knew his previous encounters with Rafa. In fact only the last two victories over Rafa can be classified as easy.

So to conclude, I would give delpo and 80%-20% shot to beat Rafa on fast but only a 60-40 to beat him on slow. Though I must say that if the Rafa of today would meet before injury delpo it wouldn't be pretty. Rafa is struggling with top30 players right now.

I agree with most of what you are saying, but remember that you had a prime Nadal beating pre prime Del Potro before things changed in Miami. What has happened to Nadal V Del Potro match up, is almost the same as what has happened to the Federer v Del Potro match up. Del Potro was getting beat soundly by both players, then he got close, then he started to beat them, and then put together back to back wins against them. Del Potro is a lot more comfortable on hard courts, and barring injuries will get better.

Yes, Rafa will have a better chance on slower hard courts, because he can get to some of those shots, but I see it as a 70-30. Del Potro is just a bad match up for him on hard courts, plus he is mentally very solid.
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Yes. Aside from a few points in the later stage of the final set I'd say Nadal played a fairly decent decider.

Nadal really wanted it, he was pushing for the break at 4-3, but it never came. Kudos to Baggy for staying solid and closing it out. Great win!!!!
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
Originally Posted by P_Agony View Post
Exactly, tennis is not transitive. This isn't math. H2Hs are affected by mathcups, current health, surface, and other factors. Therefore, to me, the only way to determine a player's superiority is by the number of titles he won all things considered.

I just checked back b/c theyre drying the courts in Cincinnati. Saw this, and since it's a little more straightforward than the one I'm already working on, let me ask: What does "tennis is not transitive" mean?

Regarding the bolded statement, the truth of that is only able to be determined after both players have retired, right?

Because the "number of titles" is going to depend on the number of tournaments played, and that depends on how long a player has been playing tournaments professionally.

Over the wkd I realized this is what was missing before: A definition of the word "superior," and it's what caused me to disagree with the statement about: BY FAR superior on HC. Now that we have the definition "number of titles" and are unable to compare on that basis until both their careers are over, I chose to compare their hard court matches won from Juan's rookie year, 2006, through 2009 (b/c Delpo's been out in 2010).

Rafa is currently 24 y/o
Juan is currently 21 y/o

Rafa turned pro in 2001
Juan turned pro in 2005

HC matches won by Rafa 23 years old in 2009, 22 in 2008, 21 in 2007, 20 in 2006
2009 35-7 * 3 of these losses were to the 20-year-old Delpo
2008 39-7
2007 24-8
2006 18-5 * this is the year Rafa was 20 y/o

HC matches won by Juan 20 years old in 2009, 19 in 2008, 18 in 2007, 17 in 2006
2009 31-6
2008 19-5
2007 15-13
2006 First year on World Tour: 8-0 in challengers, 3-3 in majors.

Statistical intersection: Age 20, b/c that's how old Rafa was when Juan turned pro.
When Nadal was 20, he won 18 HC matches.
When Delpo was 20, he won 31 HC matches.

Conclusion:
It may very well turn out to be true that Rafa will have won more hard court titles than Juan by the time their careers are done, but as of now (Nadal age 24 and delPotro age 21), Nadal has beaten Roger on HC two times since 2006 (which is the first year that counts, since Delpo wasn't on the tour until 2006), and delPotro has also beaten Roger on HC twice since 2006.
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
^^^ That sounds true, especially about grass, but the surface PAgony and I are debating about is hard. PA said of delPotro, "as far as results go, Nadal is BY FAR the superior HC player." My argument concludes that that particular statement is not true right now, although it may turn out to be true after they're both retired.
 

PSNELKE

Legend
^^^ That sounds true, especially about grass, but the surface PAgony and I are debating about is hard. PA said of delPotro, "as far as results go, Nadal is BY FAR the superior HC player." My argument concludes that that particular statement is not true right now, although it may turn out to be true after they're both retired.

LG is so wise :)
No seriously, she´s definately right here.
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
yes...there are christian arabs in sweden. Dont know about crosses though. Baggy's mom is christian lebanese.

thx for answering, Champ! :) Just noticed that you had. Were you including a wider spectrum (such as lebanese) when you wrote "arab"? I was assuming that arabs are those from saudi arabia . . .
 

PSNELKE

Legend
thx for your support :D
If anyone could make me like Ljubicic, it's you! :mrgreen:

No problem girl. :)
Doesn that mean you don´t like Ljubo.?
TBH Ljubo isn´t anything close to my favs, but I think his booty shake at RG was just hilarious. :D
Though he seems to be one of the nicest guys on tour.
 

The-Champ

Legend
thx for answering, Champ! :) Just noticed that you had. Were you including a wider spectrum (such as lebanese) when you wrote "arab"? I was assuming that arabs are those from saudi arabia . . .

lebanese are arabs are they not? Although many of them claim to be phoenecians :) LOL. there are no saudis here. Arabs in sweden are mainly from Iraq, lebanon, Palestine, Morocco.
 
Top