Nadal - Djokovic H2H skewness... numbers

Is Nadal-Djokovic matches surface distribution skewed?

  • Yes, by big margine

  • Yes, a little bit

  • No

  • No, are you crazy

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
beard

beard

Legend
So, almost every day we hear about how Nadal has leading slam H2H with Novak, and very close overall H2H.
It happened today that one poster tried to explain to me their h2h isn't skewed, and another one hoped Nadal and Novak will play a few more clay matches, so Nadal can be able to level h2h...
That is too much...
Let's see what real numbers say... I will go with big titles only (slams, wtf and masters)...

Slams...
Slams distribution on tour is 2 hard court slams (50%), 1 grass slam (25%) and one clay slam (25%)...
H2H at slams is 10:6 for Nadal with this distribution:
- Hard 5 matches or 31.25% (should be 50%)
- Clay 8 matches or 50% (should be 25%)
- Grass 3 matches or 18.75% (should be 25%)
Obviously they played much more on clay, and much less on other surfaces, if we compare to tour structure...
If we say they played the proper number of matches at RG (8), they should play 5 more matches at Wimbledon (to get to same number because distribution is the same - 25%), and should play 11 more hard court slam matches (to get 14 matches - 2*7, because distribution is double - 50%)
So, to get realistic H2H, according to tour surface composition, Nadal and Djokovic overall should play 16 non clay slam matches to even slam distribution....

WTF...
This tournament is once a year, so Nadal and Djokovic should play same number of matches as they played at Rolland Garros, but they played only 5 matches (3:2 for Novak).
So, they need to play 2 more hard court matches to even distribution...

Masters...
Masters distribution on tour is 6 hard court masters (67%) and 3 clay masters (33%)...
H2H at masters is 16:12 for Novak with this distribution:
- Hard 12 matches or 42.86% (should be 67%)
- Clay 16 matches or 57.14% (should be 33%)... Yes they played significantly more clay masters, although there is double more hard court matches... I know... I know...
If we say they played the proper number of matches at clay (16), they should play 20 more hard court masters matches (to get 32 matches - 2*16).
So, to get realistic H2H, according to tour surface composition, Nadal and Djokovic should play 20 hard court matches to even masters surface distribution....



TOTAL NUMBERS:
16 non clay slams matches + 2 WTF hard court matches + 20 Masters hard court matches
That's totally 38 more non clay matches to even H2H according to ATP calendar surface distribution...


Can you guys imagine what would realistically distribute h2h look like? I have some idea...
I might do this calculation for Federer - Nadal too, if this thread shows as interesting...


PS.
I like Nadal very much, but can't stand any more rubbish 10:6 "argument", and "I hope they play at FO" argument...
 
Last edited:
If Djokovic made it to Nadal 8 times at RG, he must be pretty badass on clay :unsure:

breakfast_omelets_philly-steak-and-cheese-omelet.jpg
 
MichaelNadal said:
If Djokovic made it to Nadal 8 times at RG, he must be pretty badass on clay :unsure:

breakfast_omelets_philly-steak-and-cheese-omelet.jpg
Click to expand...
It is not that but the fact they played on 2 times at AO compared to 8 times at RG......

And i reckon Djokovic and Nadal will be more likely to play at RG in the future than AO.
 
It's not skewed.

1) 50% of their Slam meetings occured outside clay. If Djokovic were more all-around than Nadal, he should lead the H2H in Slams or at least have it tied.

2) They are tied 2-2 on grass.

3) Nadal leads Djokovic 2-1 at the US Open (hard).

4) If Novak had reached the AO 2009, AO 2014 and AO 2017 finals, he would have faced Nadal 3 extra times at the AO. Unfortunately, Djokovic is much less consistent at the AO than Nadal at RG. You are penalizing Nadal for being more consistent at RG than Novak at the AO, which makes no sense.

5) Clay is a valid surface. Nadal winning X number of matches on clay does not make the H2H in Slams less valid. I love Djokovic, but I can't stand the clay denialism "argument".
 
Last edited:
ElisRF said:
It is not that but the fact they played on 2 times at AO compared to 8 times at RG......

And i reckon Djokovic and Nadal will be more likely to play at RG in the future than AO.
Click to expand...
Excuses. 50% of their Slam matches were outside clay. Why are they not tied in the H2H in Slams? Because Nadal is more versatile.
 
Sport said:
It's not skewed.

1) They are tied 2-2 on grass.

2) Nadal leqds Djokovic 2-1 at the US Open (hard).

3) Clay is a valid surface.
Click to expand...

1. Since Djokovic won his first Wimbledon, how many times Nadal has beaten him there?

2. Agree. But can't compare AO with USO. When was last Nadal beat him there?

3. Agree. But OP did point out the skewness in terms of number of times they played on other surfaces.
 
Sport said:
It's not skewed.

1) They are tied 2-2 on grass.

2) Nadal leqds Djokovic 2-1 at the US Open (hard).

3) Clay is a valid surface.
Click to expand...
1, 2, 3 ... true... but skewness give you the answer why it's true...
Distribution is skewed as I showed by pure math. If my math is bad, which is possible, please note me where it's wrong...
 
Backspin1183 said:
Whenever Djokovic made a deep run at RG, Nadal was always there for him. Nadal made 5 AO finals and Djokovic could manage to meet him just TWO times!!

I see it more as Djokovic's fault not facing Nadal in AO finals in 2014 and 2017.
Click to expand...
2014 is fair but Djokovic lost to the same player Nadal lost to.
 
Backspin1183 said:
Whenever Djokovic made a deep run at RG, Nadal was always there for him. Nadal made 5 AO finals and Djokovic could manage to meet him just TWO times!!

I see it more as Djokovic's fault that he wasn't. good enough to face Nadal in AO finals in 2014 and 2017.
Click to expand...

Come through and slay! And Nadal made his first AO final when Djokovic was already an AO champ, so I don't wanna hear it :p
 
ElisRF said:
I wouldn't say more but to some degree.
Click to expand...

I agree but just pointing out that saying Nadal didn't go deep on other surfaces to meet Djokovic is false. He actually made as many finals at AO as Novak did at RG. Only difference is that Nadal was there always at RG while Djokovic could only manage to meet him twice at his own pet Slam.
 
beard said:
So, almost every day we hear about how Nadal has leading slam H2H with Novak, and very close overall H2H.
It happened today that one poster tried to explain to me their h2h isn't skewed, and another one hoped Nadal and Novak will play a few more clay matches, so Nadal can be able to level h2h...
That is too much...
Let's see what real numbers say... I will go with big titles only (slams, wtf and masters)...

Slams...
Slams distribution on tour is 2 hard court slams (50%), 1 grass slam (25%) and one clay slam (25%)...
H2H at slams is 10:6 for Nadal with this distribution:
- Hard 5 matches or 31.25% (should be 50%)
- Clay 8 matches or 50% (should be 25%)
- Grass 3 matches or 18.75% (should be 25%)
Obviously they played much more on clay, and much less on other surfaces, if we compare to tour structure...
If we say they played the proper number of matches at RG (7), they should play 5 more matches at Wimbledon (to get to same number because distribution is the same - 25%), and should play 11 more hard court slam matches (to get 14 matches - 2*7, because distribution is double - 50%)
So, to get realistic H2H, according to tour surface composition, Nadal and Djokovic overall should play 16 non clay slam matches to even slam distribution....

WTF...
This tournament is once a year, so Nadal and Djokovic should play same number of matches as they played at Rolland Garros, but they played only 5 matches (3:2 for Novak).
So, they need to play 2 more hard court matches to even distribution...

Masters...
Masters distribution on tour is 6 hard court masters (67%) and 3 clay masters (33%)...
H2H at masters is 10:6 for Nadal with this distribution:
- Hard 12 matches or 42.86% (should be 67%)
- Clay 16 matches or 57.14% (should be 33%)... Yes they played significantly more clay masters, although there is double more hard court matches... I know... I know...
If we say they played the proper number of matches at clay (16), they should play 20 more hard court masters matches (to get 32 matches - 2*16).
So, to get realistic H2H, according to tour surface composition, Nadal and Djokovic should play 20 hard court matches to even masters surface distribution....



TOTAL NUMBERS:
16 non clay slams matches + 2 WTF hard court matches + 20 Masters hard court matches
That's totally 38 more non clay matches to even H2H according to ATP calendar surface distribution...


Can you guys imagine what would realistically distribute h2h look like? I have some idea...
I might do this calculation for Federer - Nadal too, if this thread shows as interesting...


PS.
I like Nadal very much, but can't stand any more rubbish 10:6 "argument", and "I hope they play at FO" argument...
Click to expand...

when we talk about slams we have 4 slams. they have played each other 16 times in slams. so it is to be expected that they have played 4 times (25%) in each of them. but they have played a full 8 times (50%) on RG, which is twice as expected. at the same time they played only 2 times in AO (12.5%) which is only half than expected. and RG is rafas pet slam and AO is noles pet slam.

in WTF the chance of playing each other more times than in RG actually is much greater. first if you are drawn in the same group, you must play the item even if one of the players loses all matches. in RG, a loss of one of the players is enough so that they do not face each other. and secondly, you can play in the group and then in the final again. so they can meet each other twice during the same tournament which is impossible in all other tournaments.
 
Backspin1183 said:
Whenever Djokovic made a deep run at RG, Nadal was always there for him. Nadal made 5 AO finals and Djokovic could manage to meet him just TWO times!!

I see it more as Djokovic's fault that he wasn't. good enough to face Nadal in AO finals in 2014 and 2017.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it's true, but its more Nadals fault not to get deep enough in the draw in non clay tournaments... We should go through hundreds of matches to see a real picture, every particular draw.

But, forget who's fault it is... This thread is about surface skewness, imagine they played 36 more non clay matches....
 
beard said:
Sometimes it's true, but its more Nadals fault not to get deep enough in the draw in non clay tournaments... We should go through hundreds of matches to see a real picture, every particular draw.

But, forget who's fault it is... This thread is about surface skewness, imagine they played 36 more non clay matches....
Click to expand...

You see that's where the problem lies. Novak on any surface just isn't as good as Nadal is on clay. When Nadal goes deep in non RG Slams, Djokovic many times lost to someone else and would not be there to face him. They still did meet 8 times in non RG Slams and Nadal won 3 of those meetings including 2 US Open finals.
 
Backspin1183 said:
You see that's where the problem lies. Novak on any surface just isn't as good as Nadal is on clay. When Nadal goes deep in non RG Slams, Djokovic many times lost to someone else and would not be there to face him. They still did meet 8 times in non RG Slams and Nadal won 3 of those meetings including 2 US Open finals.
Click to expand...
As I said, you explain good, but not totally... It is sometimes Novak guilt they didn't meet at a non clay tournament, but more often its Nadals guilt...
And again, forget guilt. If we want even distribution, they should play 36 more non clay matches...
 
Sport said:
Excuses. 50% of their Slam matches were outside clay. Why are they not tied in the H2H in Slams? Because Nadal is more versatile.
Click to expand...
Nadal edged USO, Djokovic edged Wimbledon.

the difference is AO and RG. 2 meetings vs 7.

Of course Djokovic is partly to blame for not reaching 09, 14 and 17 finals. But Nadal failed to reach in 2011, 2013 (DNP), 2015, 2016, 2020, 2021 finals. 6 times Novak was waiting, 3 times Nadal.
 
Backspin1183 said:
Whenever Djokovic made a deep run at RG, Nadal was always there for him. Nadal made 5 AO finals and Djokovic could manage to meet him just TWO times!!

I see it more as Djokovic's fault that he wasn't. good enough to face Nadal in AO finals in 2014 and 2017.
Click to expand...
I think is more about Djokovic being better on clay than Nadal outside clay, while Nadal being better on clay than Djokovic outside clay... Or in other words Nadal is an one surface specialist, and Djokovic is all around player... News at eleven thing, really... ;)
 
blablavla said:
so you are saying that Nadal is much more efficient player?
more GS titles with less finals?

I think this answers the question why Nole has a losing H2H
Click to expand...

no, I say that nole gets deep in slams much more often than rafa so it is rafa who usually does not get that far in slams to play with nole. except in RG.

and in my book losing 4 times in a row to 100+ opponents instead of getting to SF or F is NOT much more effective!
 
beard said:
So, almost every day we hear about how Nadal has leading slam H2H with Novak, and very close overall H2H.
It happened today that one poster tried to explain to me their h2h isn't skewed, and another one hoped Nadal and Novak will play a few more clay matches, so Nadal can be able to level h2h...
That is too much...
Let's see what real numbers say... I will go with big titles only (slams, wtf and masters)...

Slams...
Slams distribution on tour is 2 hard court slams (50%), 1 grass slam (25%) and one clay slam (25%)...
H2H at slams is 10:6 for Nadal with this distribution:
- Hard 5 matches or 31.25% (should be 50%)
- Clay 8 matches or 50% (should be 25%)
- Grass 3 matches or 18.75% (should be 25%)
Obviously they played much more on clay, and much less on other surfaces, if we compare to tour structure...
If we say they played the proper number of matches at RG (7), they should play 5 more matches at Wimbledon (to get to same number because distribution is the same - 25%), and should play 11 more hard court slam matches (to get 14 matches - 2*7, because distribution is double - 50%)
So, to get realistic H2H, according to tour surface composition, Nadal and Djokovic overall should play 16 non clay slam matches to even slam distribution....

WTF...
This tournament is once a year, so Nadal and Djokovic should play same number of matches as they played at Rolland Garros, but they played only 5 matches (3:2 for Novak).
So, they need to play 2 more hard court matches to even distribution...

Masters...
Masters distribution on tour is 6 hard court masters (67%) and 3 clay masters (33%)...
H2H at masters is 10:6 for Nadal with this distribution:
- Hard 12 matches or 42.86% (should be 67%)
- Clay 16 matches or 57.14% (should be 33%)... Yes they played significantly more clay masters, although there is double more hard court matches... I know... I know...
If we say they played the proper number of matches at clay (16), they should play 20 more hard court masters matches (to get 32 matches - 2*16).
So, to get realistic H2H, according to tour surface composition, Nadal and Djokovic should play 20 hard court matches to even masters surface distribution....



TOTAL NUMBERS:
16 non clay slams matches + 2 WTF hard court matches + 20 Masters hard court matches
That's totally 38 more non clay matches to even H2H according to ATP calendar surface distribution...


Can you guys imagine what would realistically distribute h2h look like? I have some idea...
I might do this calculation for Federer - Nadal too, if this thread shows as interesting...


PS.
I like Nadal very much, but can't stand any more rubbish 10:6 "argument", and "I hope they play at FO" argument...
Click to expand...
Yes its a little bit skewed because of djokovic's Clay consistency being better than that of nadal's HC consistency.
But then again, 7 of djokovic's victories have taken place in 2015-16 when nadal was a mere shadow of himself.
Whereas nadal didn't get so many chances in 2017 (only one at madrid 2017).
 
lucky13 said:
no, I say that nole gets deep in slams much more often than rafa so it is rafa who usually does not get that far in slams to play with nole. except in RG.

and in my book losing 4 times in a row to 100+ opponents instead of getting to SF or F is NOT much more effective!
Click to expand...

according to your post, they both reached 28 finals
which means that one of them is more efficient, and probably another one is a big time choker, no?
 
RF-18 said:
29-27 is all that matters. Even though the skew Djoko leads the h2h. He has a better record also on HC vs Nadal than Nadals record vs him on clay.
Click to expand...

Nadal not having a single victory against Djokovic outside clay for almost a decade now. It's getting ridiculous at this point to be quite honest...
And no, neither Berrettini nor Anderson can save Nadal in this argument. ;)
 
you can even look at it like this. rafa comes deep in slams outside RG almost only when he is in top form while nole comes deep regardless of form. so they usually play in RG and when rafa is at the top of his game!
 
Backspin1183 said:
Whenever Djokovic made a deep run at RG, Nadal was always there for him. Nadal made 5 AO finals and Djokovic could manage to meet him just TWO times!!

I see it more as Djokovic's fault that he wasn't. good enough to face Nadal in AO finals in 2014 and 2017.
Click to expand...
Djokovic was waiting at AO plenty. Not as much as Nadal at RG obviously but it's not his fault he beat Nadal for only 2 of his 9 titles there, whichever round.
 
Djokovic completed the Bull Slam
Djokovic def. Nadal @ US Open​
Djokovic def. Nadal @ Wimbledon​
Djokovic def. Nadal @ Roland Garros​
Djokovic def. Nadal @ Australian Open​
​
1548535031_057643_1548537359_album_grande.jpg


wBt1d0J.jpg


3Hr22A1.png


u8VKlru.jpeg
 
Sport said:
It's not skewed.

1) 50% of their Slam meetings occured outside clay. If Djokovic were more all-around than Nadal, he should lead the H2H in Slams or at least have it tied.
Click to expand...
Are you insane?

They played half of their meetings at one Slam which is clearly Nadal's best and Djokovic's worst Slam. If it was anything near of a balanced distribution of matches (roughly the same number of meetings at each Slam) no way in a billion effing years would Nadal lead Djokovic in the h2h. What is it now - 7 meetings at the FO compared to like 2 at the AO? And that's not skewed?

Edit: make that 8 LMAO

This is Nadalphilia at its finest. The Nadal-Djokovic Slam h2h should be added as a prime example of "skewed" in the oxford dictionary. Nadal piled up a billion wins a the FO (when Djokovic was actually good enough to meet him in the finals) while at the same time losing to 20 thousand different players before meeting Djokovic in the AO finals. Nadal skewed the numbers by sucking at the AO (and other Slams) on a consistent basis and that's why the h2h is 9-5 instead of 9-12 or something. The difference in level between them at the AO is nothing less than the difference between them at the FO. Nadal at his best couldn't even get the job done against Djokovic in average form (after a 5h SF) while having him on the ropes.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

beard
  • Poll Poll
Nadal - Federer H2H clay skewness... numbers
2
Replies
85
Views
5K
mike danny
mike danny
Sport
Nadal-Djokovic H2H in Slams is more one-sised on clay than hard.
Replies
17
Views
1K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
Lew II
Nadal should lead the h2h with Djokovic
2
Replies
64
Views
5K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
SABRvolley
What if Nadal and Federer played more grass court matches?
Replies
14
Views
736
Pheasant
Pheasant
Pfabgon
Nadal/Djokovic win % surfaces
Replies
6
Views
721
mahesh69a
mahesh69a
Back
Top