Cumulative stats - Wawrinka [3] vs. Nadal [4] - FO 2017 F

[falstaff78]

Cumulative stats for first 6 rounds. Nadal is better in every way that I tried to cut the data
/thread

@Meles @icedevil0289 @Gary Duane @Chanwan @Sysyphus @Red Rick

 

[falstaff78]

Now that I have seen these stats I am having severe reservations about even the Stanimal's ability to make a dent on Sunday. He has overcome 2-4 p.p. differences in total points won in his past major victories. But here it's 7 points. ouch.

% points won from R128 through SF
AO 2014 - Stan 53% Nadal 56%
FO 2015 - Stan 55% Djokovic 57%
USO 2016 - Stan 54% Djokovic 58%
FO 2017 - Stan 55% Nadal 62%

 

[Krish872007]

Thanks for this falstaff! Looks like the stats support the idea that Nadal is a solid favourite heading into this Final. I would ask you for the stats leading up to the AO 2014 final (if you happened to have them), but it's not actually that relevant considering what happened on that day with the injury and the fact that it was a hard court.

The other issue is that clay tends to magnify any statistical differences, so my fear is that it could be a comfortable 3-setter - even though we would love to see a good, competitive match.

 

[Krish872007]

The odds back this up too. Rafael Nadal going at 2/9, Wawrinka the exact reverse at 9/2. I imagine it could swing further as people put more and more money on Nadal tomorrow.

 

[-NN-]

Ironically, Stan will probably put forward a better showing than Thiem.

 

[metsman]

not like stats have ever mattered for Stanimal in slam final mode. Also Nadal has played a bunch of corpses this whole tournament, at least Murray had a pulse today so the slightly larger gap in point stats don't mean anything. I hope we see a competitive match, likely Stan won't be able to beast for 3 sets and fall a bit short but you never know.

 

[Gazelle]

Can we flush stats down the toilet please?

 

[BeatlesFan]

Now that I have seen these stats I am having severe reservations about even the Stanimal's ability to make a dent on Sunday.

You didn't need the stats to know that Nadal will lay the beat down on Stan on Sunday. Stan isn't going to make a dent and will mentally be defeated before leaving the locker room.

Having said that, in all three majors Stan won, I thought the other guy would win.

 

[happyloman]

Nadal is better in every way that I tried to cut the data
/thread

@Meles @icedevil0289 @Gary Duane @Chanwan @Sysyphus @Red Rick

Nice work. Thanks


How does Nadal have a higher 2nd serve points won percentage than first serve?

76 vs 70

 

[Get A Grip]

Nice work. Thanks


How does Nadal have a higher 2nd serve points won percentage than first serve?

76 vs 70

That stat is true, I've seen it elsewhere.
It's somewhat mystifying.

 

[falstaff78]

Nice work. Thanks


How does Nadal have a higher 2nd serve points won percentage than first serve?

76 vs 70

Yeah it's crazy. It's not an error I checked and double checked!

 

[Chanwan]

You didn't need the stats to know that Nadal will lay the beat down on Stan on Sunday. Stan isn't going to make a dent and will mentally be defeated before leaving the locker room.

Having said that, in all three majors Stan won, I thought the other guy would win.

One thing is for sure. Stan will not feel defeated before the match is played. Nor if he goes down a set

 

[icedevil0289]

lot of people keep emphasizing stanimal in finals, idk if it will translate, stanimal also has to do with who opponent is how they play on that surface. plus, and i agree that rafa had a very easy draw, i still dont think stan will do the damage people are thinking.

 

[veroniquem]

not like stats have ever mattered for Stanimal in slam final mode. Also Nadal has played a bunch of corpses this whole tournament.

Rafa will make Wawa look like a corpse too. The "Nadal at RG" magic effect

 

[falstaff78]

I would ask you for the stats leading up to the AO 2014 final

here I put these together. Nadal was doing better but not by nearly as much

 

[JohnnyMac Fan!]

Yeah it's crazy. It's not an error I checked and double checked!

I read elsewhere that it was 77% vs 69/70%. But where I read it scapes me. Probably some article

 

[MichaelNadal]

I read elsewhere that it was 77% vs 69/70%. But where I read it scapes me. Probably some article

They said it on NBC.

 

[BeatlesFan]

They said it on NBC.

If Mary Carillo said it, toss that one out the window.

 

[MichaelNadal]

If Mary Carillo said it, toss that one out the window.

We need a Koenig/Petchey/McEnroe/Roddick dream-team on commentary. No wonder tennis isn't more popular with the corpses that they have doing play by play

 

[JohnnyMac Fan!]

They said it on NBC.

Ah, that's probably where I might have heard it

 

[ComeBackKimiko]

Only one stat you cited matters. It's the row called "Winners."
Stan in 3.

 

[falstaff78]

Only one stat you cited matters. It's the row called "Winners."
Stan in 3.

Hope you're right about the result.

But Stan hit winners on 19.7% of points. Nadal on 18%. Not that big a difference

 

[ComeBackKimiko]

Hope you're right about the result.

But Stan hit winners on 19.7% of points. Nadal on 18%. Not that big a difference

Just to be clear, I didn't mean to denigrate the work you did compiling those stats.
Great job on that!
I was just emphasizing my take on the matchup.

 

[falstaff78]

Just to be clear, I didn't mean to denigrate the work you did compiling those stats.
Great job on that!
I was just emphasizing my take on the matchup.

Thanks. And I hadn't taken it that way.

I just meant to say that I don't see much in the winner numbers