Laver Cup Included in Official H2H Stats on ATP

Azure

Legend
Not a good idea. For one, it's not a show really run exclusively by ATP officials. The format itself is bizarre to begin with. Europe against the world? There is too much money and favouritism involved for it to be anything more than an exho. Its fun but we have enough tournaments on the calendar as it is. I hope this nonsense is over once Fed retires. I hope that's a long way away from now but I am against the idea of this silly tournament.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
This is pretty big. This change means Isner now officially has a win over Nadal. Rafa previously held a 7-0 H2H against Isner.

Another big inclusion for this is that Anderson would now have 2 wins over Djokovic instead of 1.

Strangely though, it appears the 2017 results have been included on the ATP websites H2H but not the 2018 results. Fed's win over Kyrgios in 2017 is on the H2H but his 2018 win isn't on there. Weird.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
This is pretty big. This change means Isner now officially has a win over Nadal. Rafa previously held a 7-0 H2H against Isner.

Another big inclusion for this is that Anderson would now have 2 wins over Djokovic instead of 1.

Strangely though, it appears the 2017 results have been included on the ATP websites H2H but not the 2018 results. Fed's win over Kyrgios in 2017 is on the H2H but his 2018 win isn't on there. Weird.
They are adding 1 year at a time.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
Hurray !!!
Yes, I completely agree with this move. Last 2 years, I have been watching Laver cup,, I couldn't tell for the life of me if it was real or if it was fake. That really ruined some great matchups for me. Now I know they are playing for real and trying to win. And Federer knew this from the feedback he was getting from the fans, including myself
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
The tournament is played with all seriousness. Why should it not be included ? Is the opposition because it is with retrospective effect or is it because Fed has ownership of LC ?
Should the Hopman Cup be included? That has the proper setting and i'm sure the players are there to win it as well and not just a one set exhibition. Does that mean Tomic has a win over #1 Djokovic then?
 

Backspin1183

G.O.A.T.
It shouldn't have been, especially the ones already played. The players didn't know it would be counted as an official match at the time. It was just an exhibition then. They should count it from this year's edition when it is recognised as part of the ATP tour. That's fair to everyone.

The OP knows this but wouldn't agree only because Roger took it highly seriously and got 2-3 Wins.

I hope the ATP will take this back, at least the results of the last two editions that were played just as exhos. All it would take is a Djokovic to complain and they will reverse the decision, I'm sure.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Should the Hopman Cup be included? That has the proper setting and i'm sure the players are there to win it as well and not just a one set exhibition. Does that mean Tomic has a win over #1 Djokovic then?
Yes, Hopman Cup is played with all seriousness and I would include it . Only true exho's / hit and giggle should be excluded.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
It shouldn't have been, especially the ones already played. The players didn't know it would be counted as an official match a the time. It was just an exhibition then. They should count it from this year's edition when it is recognised as part of the ATP tour. That's fair to everyone.

The OP knows this but wouldn't agree only because Roger took it highly seriously and got 2-3 Wins.

I hope the ATP will take this back, at least the results of the last two editions that were played just as exhos. All it would take is a Djokovic to complain and they will reverse the decision, I'm sure.
I agree the retrospective decision may not be considered fair . But those folks who say Laver Cup should not be included in stats , no matter what - are just jealous of the success of the tournament.

Why should the ATP not include future stats ?
 
F

FRV

Guest
Which singles match played till now was not serious ?

So far the potential reasons listed in the thread :

1. Because it has Fed's involvement
2. No full 3rd set
3. Players may not know ahead of time it is serious
4. The change is with retrospective effect.
I think 2 - 4 are enough to keep past matches out of the official h2h. I'd be all for including future events as long as players knew it would go towards their official h2h. A full 3rd set would just be a preference if players actually knew the matches counted towards h2h. This is just my personal view.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
I think 2 - 4 are enough to keep past matches out of the official h2h. I'd be all for including future events as long as players knew it would go towards their official h2h. A full 3rd set would just be a preference if players actually knew the matches counted towards h2h. This is just my personal view.
That is fair.

The super TB is a variant that will come here to stay sooner than later. So I see that as not a reason to deny the h2h
 
  • Like
Reactions: FRV

Backspin1183

G.O.A.T.
I agree the retrospective decision may not be considered fair . But those folks who say Laver Cup should not be included in stats , no matter what - are just jealous of the success of the tournament.

Why should the ATP not include future stats ?
I'm against them counting the stats of the previous LC editions when it was an exhibition. If it is now recognised as an official ATP tournament, they should include the stats from LC matches as well, but only of the ones after it became an official ATP tournament.
 

Azure

Legend
I agree the retrospective decision may not be considered fair . But those folks who say Laver Cup should not be included in stats , no matter what - are just jealous of the success of the tournament.

Why should the ATP not include future stats ?
I think a simple answer would be that this tournament clearly and blatantly is run by a player rather than officials. Forget the who. Any player who is actively participating in the tournament should not be spearheading the organisation of the event. It's a clear conflict of interests. We are already talking about increasing clout of the big three in draws and organisation of tournaments exclusively handled by ATP or slam officials.
 

Backspin1183

G.O.A.T.
Even though Nadal has won the Mubadala championship 2-4 times, I really hope they do not count them as official ATP matches in the future, even if the tournament becomes a part of the main tour. Not the ones played before its recognition as a part of the ATP.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
I think a simple answer would be that this tournament clearly and blatantly is run by a player rather than officials. Forget the who. Any player who is actively participating in the tournament should not be spearheading the organisation of the event. It's a clear conflict of interests. We are already talking about increasing clout of the big three in draws and organisation of tournaments exclusively handled by ATP or slam officials.
Is your problem just the conflict of interest or something more (format) ?
 

Azure

Legend
Is your problem just the conflict of interest or something more (format) ?
If it is not going to add points to a player, the format does not matter and here I mean the match format. The tournament format is silly to begin with. Players from countries other than Europe are on one half of the draw. How is this a good idea? Fed will never face Rafa in this format. Rafa will never face Djokovic. That means number 1 Vs number 2 is not going to happen if they are from Europe. This is unfair.

If points are going to be added, it should be a proper three setter like every other event bar the slams and the Europe Vs world should be removed. Else, just call it an exhi and watch the fun. Regardless, for any consideration the players playing and the ones organising should not and cannot be the same.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
It's a token gesture by the ATP because they were scared of the profile Laver Cup was getting as an event outside the ATP's auspices. TEAM8 is very powerful, and Tony Godsick is a man with a very long MEMORY. ATP was surely wary of getting him any further offside.

Bringing the LC in as an ATP event in name only is quite a good compromise. By doing this the ATP is giving the LC (and Team8) a pat on the head and stopping the potential agitta that was festering last year from gathering any further steam. The event is also no longer a serious threat to the more important upcoming ATP team events that award points.

For us tennis nerds it's a bit frustrating, as it's another asterix to include when pondering H2h details that we didn't previously have to factor in. But no matter.

If the ATP were genuinely interested in building the event they would inflate the event's profile by awarding it undue ranking points. To their credit, they've stopped short of this.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Terrible idea, you cant have atp points on invitationals, thats why the olympics cannot give pts.

Its an unfair advantage to the rest of the tour.
Actually this is the only credible argument .

It is unfair advantage to those players who get picked up . But what good is the sport if there cannot be a variation for 1 out of 52 weeks

Several sports have changed over time in terms of format , duration, etc . If we cling on to age old traditions and be inflexible you are not going to get the next millennium to embrace tennis
 
Get on board with the Laver Cup, its here and happening. I don't think h2h matters here as do we really care about h2h except big 3? No, we don't. So since they don't play this means nothing.

Not that h2h ever mattered....
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
This was not in the works over 6 months ago, and if so, Djoker and his boys would have stopped it if they had problem with it.
Kermode approved this since he is the ATP President. All you have to do is read his statement after it became an official ATP event. Maybe this is one of the main reasons they wanted him out since I'm sure it's been in the making for a while.
 
Top