Nadal's finals record at the French Open

[Zain786]

Dude has a 9-0 record in finals, can you believe that...no one else even comes close to that.

1) Nadal - 9-0 at FO
2) Sampras - 7-0 at WIMB
3) Bjorg - 6-0 at FO
4) Djokovic - 6-0 at AO
5) Agassi - 4-0 at AO
6) Kuerten - 3-0 at FO

These players were and are very clutch in the finals when it matters at their most successful slam.

 

[Krish872007]

Yes, I can believe it. Because I've seen it.

 

[Noleberic123]

Will be hard to catch that's for sure

 

[tennisaddict]

7-0 is inferior to 7-3.

 

[Krish872007]

7-0 is inferior to 7-3.

Not in isolation.
7-0 = 7/7 = 100%
7-3 = 7/10 = 70%

 

[tennisaddict]

Not in isolation.
7-0 = 7/7 = 100%
7-3 = 7/10 = 70%

Are we discussing tennis or mathematics ?

 

[Krish872007]

Are we discussing tennis or mathematics ?

The thread title implies that we are discussing the mathematics of tennis.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Yes, I can believe it. Because I've seen it.

You've also seen the forehand DTL that gave RAFA such an incredible record in the first place!

 

[tennisaddict]

The thread title implies that we are discussing the mathematics of tennis.

In that case, original post holds good. 7-0 is inferior to 7-3

 

[MichaelNadal]

You've also seen the forehand DTL that gave RAFA such an incredible record in the first place!

Shall I post a gif?

 

[Krish872007]

You've also seen the forehand DTL that gave RAFA such an incredible record in the first place!

Oh yes, I've had many a dream about the Forehand DTL. And as for my buddy tennis_commentator...

 

[Krish872007]

In that case, original post holds good. 7-0 is inferior to 7-3

Interesting.
7-0 = 7
7-3 = 4 another way of looking at those numbers

 

[Djokovic2011]

Oh yes, I've had many a dream about the Forehand DTL. And as for my buddy tennis_commentator...

HE'S BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[tennisaddict]

Interesting.
7-0 = 7
7-3 = 4 another way of looking at those numbers

Has as much relevance as
7 raised to the power 0 = 1.
7 raised to the power 3 = 343.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Shall I post a gif?

I'm good thanks mate.

 

[Krish872007]

HE'S BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!

And he seems to have taken all of RAFA's confidence - as if it's all been transferred to him

 

[Krish872007]

Has as much relevance as
7 raised to the power 0 = 1.
7 raised to the power 3 = 343.

Of course. They are just numbers.

 

[Djokovic2011]

And he seems to have taken all of RAFA's confidence - as if it's all been transferred to him

That's no surprise. After all, we know that he feels what RAFA feels.

 

[Krish872007]

That's no surprise. After all, we know that he feels what RAFA feels.

You're on fire today. Are you peaking or am I just off form?

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

You're on fire today. Are you peaking or am I just off form?

How is the eye? Somebody noticed your poast quality increased incredibly after that injury.

 

[Krish872007]

How is the eye? Somebody noticed your poast quality increased incredibly after that injury.

It has healed up now - but then that means no more top notch poasting...

 

[Service Ace]

Interesting.
7-0 = 7
7-3 = 4 another way of looking at those numbers

One of the great failures of the english language. It really should be written as 7+0 or 7+3 as phonetically written it spells out "7 AND 0", "7 AND 3" but as it's written, "7 SANS 0" "7 SANS 3" doesn't accurately reflect what the stat is supposed to represent, hence this delusion people have that it is better to be 7-0 when 7-3 is actually the superior statistic.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Losing in fourth round instead of final is another way to be "very clutch" in finals.

 

[Zain786]

Losing in fourth round instead of final is another way to be "very clutch" in finals.

hahah, come back to me when Federer wins 9 Wimbledon trophies, hasn't he had multiple chances already.

 

[timnz]

7-0 is inferior to 7-3.

No it's inferior. Because a slam is 7 matches not 1. Hence Federer's 7-3 actually is (7x7) + (3x6) = 67 match wins, Sampras 7-0 is (7x7) + (3+4+5 - Sampras best 3 wimbledons outside of his 7 wins) = 61 match wins.

The only way that 7-0 is better than 7-3 is if you believe it is better to lose a 4th round , quarter final or semi-final than make a final (Sampras 8th, 9th, 10th best placings at Wimbledon)

 

[marc45]

Dude has a 9-0 record in finals, can you believe that...no one else even comes close to that.

1) Nadal - 9-0 at FO
2) Sampras - 7-0 at WIMB
3) Bjorg - 6-0 at FO
4) Djokovic - 6-0 at AO
5) Agassi - 4-0 at AO
6) Kuerten - 3-0 at FO

These players were and are very clutch in the finals when it matters at their most successful slam.

it seems like they have.....better thread might have been what made these particular players so good at that specific tournament...all great records, 35-0

 

[djokerer]

Dude has a 9-0 record in finals, can you believe that...no one else even comes close to that.

1) Nadal - 9-0 at FO
2) Sampras - 7-0 at WIMB
3) Bjorg - 6-0 at FO
4) Djokovic - 6-0 at AO
5) Agassi - 4-0 at AO
6) Kuerten - 3-0 at FO

These players were and are very clutch in the finals when it matters at their most successful slam.

Where is Federer?
#weakeramug

 

[The Green Mile]

Federer's 7-0 in Cinci Finals beats all of them.

 

[Man of steel]

7-0 is inferior to 7-3.

And 7 finals is also inferior to 10 finals.....
And 14 is inferior to 17
And 286 is inferior to 302
.....but then who's the hell is counting

 

[RF-18]

I think people misunderstood the purpose of this thread.. I think he just wanted to discuss Nadals Clean record vs other guys who has a Clean record.

Now it has become about something else.

 

[Russeljones]

Dude has a 9-0 record in finals, can you believe that...no one else even comes close to that.

1) Nadal - 9-0 at FO
2) Sampras - 7-0 at WIMB
3) Bjorg - 6-0 at FO
4) Djokovic - 6-0 at AO
5) Agassi - 4-0 at AO
6) Kuerten - 3-0 at FO

These players were and are very clutch in the finals when it matters at their most successful slam.

Not to be pedantic but 7-0 is close to 9-0.

 

[heninfan99]

My non-tennis fan friends ask me sometimes "How many French Opens has Nadal won?" I'm always shocked to tell them.
It's a crazy number.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

the additional finals thing has been debated ad infinitum, the truth is both sides are right in theory, it's similar to the H2H debate where context is needed.

 

[Russeljones]

I have to check and see it is not 10, sometimes.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Novak has a puncher's chance to reach 9 AO's

 

[Tenez!]

Not in isolation.
7-0 = 7/7 = 100%
7-3 = 7/10 = 70%

There is a very simple way to rank elements of R^2 in maths, it's called lexicographic order and involves only looking at the second elements when the first ones are equal.
In no universe is 7-0 superior to 7-3. Percentages are worthless here, as your 70% refer to 10 finals, and your 100% refer to 7 finals.
Whether you like it or not, there is no reasonable way to contrive that 7-0 is better than 7-3.

the additional finals thing has been debated ad infinitum, the truth is both sides are right in theory, it's similar to the H2H debate where context is needed.

No, both sides are not "correct". Sampras is inferior to Federer in Wimbledon finals.
The only remaining question that could legitimately be asked is: has Federer done better at Wimbledon (viz. 10 finals, 7 titles) than Nadal at Roland Garros (9 finals, 9 titles)?
For most people the answer is negative, but that is the only possible question remaining.