Mcenroe brothers pick Fed

#1
#2
The reasoning is based on one false premise and one piece of questionable argumentation though:

1. The surface does not favor Federer very much, if at all. It may even favor Nadal, but it is at best fairly neutral between them. This is the false premise.
2. The crowd support will likely not have much impact on Nadal. This is the questionable argument.

On point 2: It would be one thing if the crowd were hostile to Nadal. That might fire him up, but it also might put him off. But the crowd won't be hostile to him. It will be pro-Federer but respectful to Nadal. I don't think that will have an impact on the outcome.

It's actually very rarely a good prediction to pick someone in five. It's almost always better to predict a four-set win.
 
#10
I mean that's the safe bet for sure. This is still a grass court and Fed is the best all grass player. I give Rafa a great shot though, he's played the tougher schedule and looked better of the 2 so far.
 
#16
The reasoning is based on one false premise and one piece of questionable argumentation though:

1. The surface does not favor Federer very much, if at all. It may even favor Nadal, but it is at best fairly neutral between them. This is the false premise.
2. The crowd support will likely not have much impact on Nadal. This is the questionable argument.

On point 2: It would be one thing if the crowd were hostile to Nadal. That might fire him up, but it also might put him off. But the crowd won't be hostile to him. It will be pro-Federer but respectful to Nadal. I don't think that will have an impact on the outcome.

It's actually very rarely a good prediction to pick someone in five. It's almost always better to predict a four-set win.
While the heavy crowd support in Federer's favor may not impact Nadal, it is likely to buoy Federer.

If he experiences flagging spirits, the proverbial "12th man" may will him over the finish line.

Re the bolded, in what way is a prediction of a four-set win a better pick?

You thinking in terms of hedging bets? Four is bookended by three and five, while five is a bookend?

At least it's more precise, and less likely to be a "safe" pick.
 
#17
While the heavy crowd support in Federer's favor may not impact Nadal, it is likely to buoy Federer.

If he experiences flagging spirits, the proverbial "12th man" may will him over the finish line.

Re the bolded, in what way is a prediction of a four-set win a better pick?

You thinking in terms of hedging bets? Four is bookended by three and five, while five is a bookend?

At least it's more precise, and less likely to be a "safe" pick.
The crowd might help Federer, yes. But it could also add to the pressure.

Four set wins are a better pick statistically according to an actuary friend of mine who also did some work as a bookmaker. I think the reasoning is that even if the gap is small, the player who is two sets to one up is in general slightly more likely to win the fourth set than to lose it. You're right that it's a "safe" pick, but the safe pick is the better pick in the long run. It won't always work out, but it will more often than not.
 
#19
John: You could obviously make an argument both ways. To me, because of the surface and, although people around the world respect Rafa, I think the crowd's going to be pretty solidly behind Roger. I would pick Roger in five.

Patrick: I'm going along the same lines and say Roger in four, a very tight four-setter.

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/27169390/federer-vs-nadal-eyes-mcenroe-brothers
JMac said Querrey would take the racquet out of Rafa's hands yesterday. Tracy Austin said Sam would take Rafa out.:cool::D:unsure:
 
#23
#31
JMac said Querrey would take the racquet out of Rafa's hands yesterday. Tracy Austin said Sam would take Rafa out.:cool::D:unsure:
Tracy Austin said no such thing. She was simply asked who she thought had the better chance of creating an upset among the Big 3 and chose Querrey, albeit with a very small chance. It's not like she stated it with huge conviction like you're making out she did lol.
 
#33
Tracy Austin said no such thing. She was simply asked who she thought had the better chance of creating an upset among the Big 3 and chose Querrey, albeit with a very small chance. It's not like she stated it with huge conviction like you're making out she did lol.
I'm not going to argue with you about who said what I know she said the upset would be Querrey beating Rafa and Claire Balding asked her, so you think Querrey will take Rafa out and she said yes.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
#38
Here's SI's predictions, which consists all of Americans making the prediction, but they make some interesting points. 3/4 pick Roger to win. Oddly, some think the pro-Fed crowd will impact the outcome. :whistle::unsure:

Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal: Keys to the Match, Predictions for Wimbledon Semi

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will face off Friday in the semifinals of Wimbledon, marking the first time the two have played each other at the All England Club since their epic 2008 final.

This will be the 40th meeting between them, so there will be little mystery between the two...but every match is different. Our SI Tennis crew breaks down what should be quite the spectacle on Centre Court.

What are the keys to the match for Federer?

Jon Wertheim: Will be able to win points on his second serve? Nadal has done so much right at this tournament, but one thing that sticks out is the way he’s been attacking his opponents when they missed their first ball. Can Fed use the crowd? Can he benefit from his superior use of analytics and data?

Stanley Kay: Grass is Federer’s domain, and tactically he’ll play aggressive by keeping points short and coming to the net. Federer has been broken just three times this tournament, and if he serves well on Friday, it’s hard to see him losing this match. There is, of course, a psychological element to this match—after all, this is tennis—and Federer should forget about his lopsided defeat to Nadal at the French Open and instead recall that he won their previous five meetings, all on hard. Grass should be even more favorable to Federer, and that should give him even greater confidence entering this semifinal.

Jamie Lisanti: I know it’s hard for all of us watching to not think about the monumental, “greatest tennis match ever played” battle between Federer and Nadal in the 2008 Wimbledon final, so there’s no doubt it’s going to be on the minds of both players on Friday—but particularly for Federer. If you remember Federer was facing a pro-Nadal crowd that chanted "Come on, Rafa” during pivotal moments in the match. But this time around, Federer is sure to be playing (on his best surface) in front of an audience that should be squarely in support of him. And this should help, because the match will be so close that the cheers might be what Federer needs to take him past Nadal to major title No. 21.

Daniel Rapaport: Same as always, as far as I'm concerned: who comes out on top of the Nadal forehand-Federer backhand exchanges? Last month in Paris, it was Rafa. Two years ago in Melbourne, it was Federer. Nadal is going to try to attack Fed's one hander, and the efficacy of that strategy will go a long way toward determining who wins this match. He also has to serve at a high percentage and win over half of his second-serve points.

What are the keys to the match for Nadal?
JW: We know he matches up well with Federer and the physics/geometry favor his lefy game and forehand into the Federer one-handed backhand. We know he has momentum, having beaten Federer just a month ago in Paris—in the same round. We know he is leading 24-15 in the head-to-head. He’s also won the previous match he played with Federer here, the classic final in 2008. I think the big question for Nadal is how he deals with the occasion: a sold-out Centre Court crowd that will likely be favoring the other guy, largely for sentimental reasons.

SK: Nadal would prefer to play deep, and he’ll try to keep Federer near the baseline. To push Federer back, Nadal will have to punish Federer when he comes to the net, as he did with Sam Querrey on Wednesday, winning 12 or 27 points in which the American came forward. He’ll also need to put pressure on Federer’s serve; even if it doesn’t result in a break, pushing games to deuce will extend the match and make the 37-year-old’s task more difficult. Querrey, a formidable server, racked up 22 aces against Nadal, but the Spaniard managed six breaks on 16 opportunities. He won 27% of Querrey’s first-serve points and 72% on his second serve. Federer’s game is less reliant on a big serve, but Nadal needs to take advantage of any break chances.

JL: Of course, Nadal was the clear favorite on clay at the French Open but when it comes to the Wimbledon grass, the turf is Federer’s. That being said: Nadal has been in top-form over the fortnight, only dropping one set in the tournament in a second-round match against Nick Kyrgios. His serve will be critical in this match, but so will Federer’s. If I’m Nadal, I’d channel all the vibes I can from 2008 and then continue on the same course. This one will definitely be a battle.

DR: He's got to put pressure on Fed's service games. Part of what makes Federer so dominant on grass is the rhythm with which he plays—those quick, 45-second holds are an absolute essential part of the Federer on Grass experience. Nadal should want Federer to, figuratively of course, come roll around in the dirt with him. Make the games long. Turn it into a physical battle.

Who wins?
JW: Rafa in five? But let’s pause and acknowledge that this is ultimately a toss-up which is just remarkable for two guys at this stage of their careers...

SK: Federer in four sets.

JL: I'm sticking with my original pick from the beginning of the tournament: Roger Federer. BUt the more we discuss this match, the more I realize that it is a pure coin toss. All I know is I can't wait to watch.

DR: All of us, for getting to witness these two legends face off at the sport's most iconic tournament once again. But, seriously, Federer straight sets. Bold!
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
#41
The crowd support will likely not have much impact on Nadal. This is the questionable argument.
The 2017 AO crowd was 85/15 for Fed, as is shown here dramatically at 11:24 when he double faults and the crowd absolutely ERUPTS:


Becker and Wilander both said on Eurosport this morning that the crowd will be a factor and they think it will be 95% for Roger. That can help Roger, never doubt it.
 
Last edited:
#42
The 2017 AO crowd was 85/16 for Fed, as is shown here dramatically at 11:24 when he double faults and the crowd absolutely ERUPTS:


Becker and Wilander both said on Eurosport this morning that the crowd will be a factor and they think it will be 95% for Roger. That can help Roger, never doubt it.
Yes, @FedFosterWallace already pointed out that I only looked at one side of the equation - whether it would harm Nadal - and not whether it would help Federer. You are both right that it could help Federer. I still think, though, that there is a difference between a crowd that supports player A but has nothing against player B (and probably in fact a lot of respect for him) and a crowd that supports player A and is hostile to player B. I think that the latter would be much more helpful because it could intimidate player B. Nadal won't suffer from that disadvantage. The crowd will be pro-Federer but by no means anti-Nadal.
 
#43
not that i ever pay attention to the mcenroes but at this point i do not get crowd support being added as a factor, it never stopped novak from winning it certainly wont stop nadal
 
#44
Yes, @FedFosterWallace already pointed out that I only looked at one side of the equation - whether it would harm Nadal - and not whether it would help Federer. You are both right that it could help Federer. I still think, though, that there is a difference between a crowd that supports player A but has nothing against player B (and probably in fact a lot of respect for him) and a crowd that supports player A and is hostile to player B. I think that the latter would be much more helpful because it could intimidate player B. Nadal won't suffer from that disadvantage. The crowd will be pro-Federer but by no means anti-Nadal.
Yeah, take your point on supportive v. hostile bit.

And we've definitely seen that at USO. Certainly didn't result in the outcome they had hoped for.

Nevertheless...


:)
 
#45
But the crowd won't be hostile to him. It will be pro-Federer but respectful to Nadal. I don't think that will have an impact on the outcome.
I generally agree, except one thing happens: Federer constantly calls Nadal’s time wasting in Kyrgios style and enforces the referee to react. Then I have a feeling the atmosphere could become ugly for Rafa.

If one person can do this and gets supported, then it’s Federer (if he is right, but that shouldn’t be in doubt, because we all know Nadal’s habits).
 
Top