The rules of the ATP finals are completely unfair

If Djokovic is to win the YE #1, he is going to have to win the whole tournament. Certainly would make him a worthy YE #1 considering he is tied with Nadal in Slams and M1000, no?
Same number of slams, same number of masters and the whole difference is Nadal being robbed due to the stupid rules of WTF. You can talk about the number of sets as much as you want, but reality is that Djokovic is lucky that Thiem won against Federer, while Zverev failed to win his second match. If Zverev won against Tsitsipas then Nadal would be exactly at the same position as Djokovic, the match against Tsitsipas would be a match for the second place in the group.
 

tudwell

Legend
All Nadal had to do was beat a guy he was 5-0 against and he wouldn’t be in this situation.

I like the round robin. It’s a nice change of pace. It’s the only tennis tournament with that format and it adds some drama while allowing us to watch more tennis between all the top players.
 
All Nadal had to do was beat a guy he was 5-0 against and he wouldn’t be in this situation.

I like the round robin. It’s a nice change of pace. It’s the only tennis tournament with that format and it adds some drama while allowing us to watch more tennis between all the top players.
This guy beat Federer and Djokovic in this tournament last year. Stop acting like he is always an easy opponent. 3 of their first 5 meetings were VERY close by the way.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Same number of slams, same number of masters and the whole difference is Nadal being robbed due to the stupid rules of WTF.
How are the rules stupid when they are the same for every player, and known ahead of time, and unchanged for years?

Nadal only has himself to blame here: if he had even taken a set against Zverev, he would be in a better position.

You can talk about the number of sets as much as you want, but reality is that Djokovic is lucky that Thiem won against Federer, while Zverev failed to win his second match. If Zverev won against Tsitsipas then Nadal would be exactly at the same position as Djokovic, the match against Tsitsipas would be a match for the second place in the group.
That is not entirely true. If Federer beat Thiem, then everything changes because Djokovic would have played Fed in his second match
 
How are the rules stupid when they are the same for every player, and known ahead of time, and unchanged for years?

Nadal only has himself to blame here: if he had even taken a set against Zverev, he would be in a better position.


That is not entirely true. If Federer beat Thiem, then everything changes because Djokovic would have played Fed in his second match
What would change if he won a set against Zverev? Zverev would still have the advantage due to winning their match, so it would be the same thing. Really, I hope Nadal never plays this "tournament" again.
 

tudwell

Legend
This guy beat Federer and Djokovic in this tournament last year. Stop acting like he is always an easy opponent. 3 of their first 5 meetings were VERY close by the way.
I’m not saying he’s an easy opponent, but Nadal clearly knows how to beat him.

Nadal’s fate is in his own hands here, is all I’m saying. Do better than everyone else in your group and you’re guaranteed to advance. So far, he hasn’t.
 

tudwell

Legend
Well it depends on how other players in the group did too, as well as each of the scorelines.

Djokovic got knocked out of round robin with a 2-1 record a decade ago. It was quite frustrating but stuff like that happens...
The other group was the same that year, with Fed and Delpo just edging out Murray in the final match of round robin play. Lot of drama. Lot of fun.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
What would change if he won a set against Zverev? Zverev would still have the advantage due to winning their match, so it would be the same thing. Really, I hope Nadal never plays this "tournament" again.
Incorrect. If he won one set against Zverev, he would have qualified with a straight sets win over Tsitsipas, regardless of the Med/Zed match. This is because he would win the sets won/lost tiebreaker, which is used before the H2H tiebreaker
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Pathetic tournament. I really hope Nadal never plays it again. And yeah, now haters will come saying I hate it because Nadal never won it. That's not true. I never had anything against Miami or Shanghai. But WTF is a joke, and for sure it should never be compared to a slam.
LOL, Nadal has more than 1 chance to actually advance into the tournament than he would have in a knock-out event. The fact that he still has not won it is on him really and the blame can't be put on the rules.
 

TimHenmanATG

Professional
And it shouldn't be a realistic consideration because...?
Because, firstly, the London exho is morally indefensible. It's the top players leveraging their dominance through obscene amounts of ranking points. It's anti-tennis, anti-sport, and the antithesis of Corinthian spirit.

Secondly, the format of serious tennis tournaments has been long-established. The entire season is played through this format. Which makes the London exho seem even more like a ridiculous pantomime than it already is.

I honestly don't have any horse in the race, and never even watch the tournament.

I only look at the results because (unfortunately) there are a disgustingly corrupt number of ranking points at stake.
 

zipplock

Rookie
But they CAN have the same merits, and still Nadal can fail to classify while Djokovic would classify, which would be unfair.

If Djokovic defeats Federer 2-1 and Nadal defeats Tsitsipas 2-0, Djokovic would end up with 2 victories and 5-3 in sets while Nadal would end up with 2 victories and 5-3 in sets.

That is to say, same merits, but not the same benefits.
Wrong, because they are in DIFFERENT groups. They cannot be compared to players in other groups. This is very simple to understand. A child would understand this.
 
LOL, Nadal has more than 1 chance to actually advance into the tournament than he would have in a knock-out event. The fact that he still has not won it is on him really and the blame can't be put on the rules.
I don't care if he won it or not. I never liked this tournament, and after this year I hope he never plays it again. Nadal rarely plays it anyway, and I have no doubt he would skip it this year if he didn't try to get the YE#1. But now it's over. He isn't getting it. As always, Nadal ends the season as the loser.
 

ghostofMecir

Hall of Fame
If Djokovic wins 2 matches in his group he can classify. If Nadal wins 2 matches in his group, he can fail to classify.

That is not fair at all, it creates a double standard by which 2 players, despite having made the same merits, do not receive the same benefit.
Did you say it was “unfair” when this summer, Djokovic won 14 fewer points than Federer, 15 fewer return points, broke 3 times to 7 for Federer, didn’t even have a break point u til the end of the 4th, hit half the amount of winners, fewer baseline winners....and “won”?

I’m thinking no, no?
 

Fairhit

Semi-Pro
What would change if he won a set against Zverev? Zverev would still have the advantage due to winning their match, so it would be the same thing. Really, I hope Nadal never plays this "tournament" again.
Sooo, it's "unfair" because Nadal does not get advantage and the guy who beat him is ahead?
 

ghostofMecir

Hall of Fame
If Djokovic wins 2 matches in his group he can classify. If Nadal wins 2 matches in his group, he can fail to classify.

That is not fair at all, it creates a double standard by which 2 players, despite having made the same merits, do not receive the same benefit.
Also, do you say the same thing when Nadal takes 45 seconds to serve, receives coaching from the stands (Tio said he does)?

Any problems there?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I don't care if he won it or not. I never liked this tournament, and after this year I hope he never plays it again. Nadal rarely plays it anyway, and I have no doubt he would skip it this year if he didn't try to get the YE#1. But now it's over. He isn't getting it. As always, Nadal ends the season as the loser.
Why should he never play it? I don't see why it's worse than a knock-out event.
 
Pathetic tournament. I really hope Nadal never plays it again. And yeah, now haters will come saying I hate it because Nadal never won it. That's not true. I never had anything against Miami or Shanghai. But WTF is a joke, and for sure it should never be compared to a slam.
Because you have to actually beat atleast 4 top eight players in the world?!!!
 
Why should he never play it? I don't see why it's worse than a knock-out event.
Because in a normal event (like a slam) you have to win all matches in order to win the tournament. It's that simple. You don't need to depend on the matches of others. Current Nadal isn't beating Tsitsipas anyway. But if he somehow does and still fails to reach the semifinal then why the hell should he ever play that "tournament" again?
 

mika1979

Professional
If Djokovic wins 2 matches in his group he can classify. If Nadal wins 2 matches in his group, he can fail to classify.

That is not fair at all, it creates a double standard by which 2 players, despite having made the same merits, do not receive the same benefit.
You are on another planet
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
What would change if he won a set against Zverev? Zverev would still have the advantage due to winning their match, so it would be the same thing. Really, I hope Nadal never plays this "tournament" again.
Given his track record in this tournament, it doesn't matter if he ever plays it again.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Pathetic tournament. I really hope Nadal never plays it again. And yeah, now haters will come saying I hate it because Nadal never won it. That's not true. I never had anything against Miami or Shanghai. But WTF is a joke, and for sure it should never be compared to a slam.
So if Nadal wins it you will continue to hate it and not count it as one of his great achievements?
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
Pathetic tournament. I really hope Nadal never plays it again. And yeah, now haters will come saying I hate it because Nadal never won it. That's not true. I never had anything against Miami or Shanghai. But WTF is a joke, and for sure it should never be compared to a slam.
it is a joke.
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
So if Nadal wins it you will continue to hate it and not count it as one of his great achievements?
if he won it it would mean less to me than his olympic singles gold and his 35 masters 1000s.

it's an exho. best of 3. only 8 players. in theory a player can go 1-2 in the round robin and win the tourney.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Because in a normal event (like a slam) you have to win all matches in order to win the tournament. It's that simple. You don't need to depend on the matches of others. Current Nadal isn't beating Tsitsipas anyway. But if he somehow does and still fails to reach the semifinal then why the hell should he ever play that "tournament" again?
Or, in case you haven't noticed, Nadal actually has a chance to still stay in the tournament thanks to the format. If he wins the same number of matches as Djokovic, but still doesn't qualify, it is because he has simply not been as good as Djokovic.

Blame the player, not the game.

You already think Nadal would have lost to every player in this event, so what difference does it make in which group he landed?
 
So if Nadal wins it you will continue to hate it and not count it as one of his great achievements?
Why should I? I don't count his Olympic gold as a great achievement, and I will not consider WTF as a great achievement. 1 title doesn't worth much anyway. 12 RG titles, now THAT is a great achievement.
 
Or, in case you haven't noticed, Nadal actually has a chance to still stay in the tournament thanks to the format. If he wins the same number of matches as Djokovic, but still doesn't qualify, it is because he has simply not been as good as Djokovic.

Blame the player, not the game.

You already think Nadal would have lost to every player in this event, so what difference does it make in which group he landed?
Djokovic lost a match and he still depends only on himself. This is clearly not how it should be. And as I mentioned earlier in 2011 Djokovic had 1 win (a very close win, lost the other two matches, totally destroyed in one of them) and still didn't reach the semifinal only by a miracle, because Berdych managed to come back and beat Ferrer. For sure something is wrong with this format.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
if he won it it would mean less to me than his olympic singles gold and his 35 masters 1000s.

it's an exho. best of 3. only 8 players. in theory a player can go 1-2 in the round robin and win the tourney.
Who all just happen to be the best players of the season.

Incidentally, nobody has ever won it after going down 1-2 in the round robin.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Why should I? I don't count his Olympic gold as a great achievement, and I will not consider WTF as a great achievement. 1 title doesn't worth much anyway. 12 RG titles, now THAT is a great achievement.
It's not all about the Slams. If it were, we would only be watching tennis for 8 weeks a year and the tour couldn't survive.
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
Who all just happen to be the best players of the season.

Incidentally, nobody has ever won it after going down 1-2 in the round robin.
or players who play the most tournaments of the season mixed with the best players.

dimitrov, davydenko and zverev winning this shows how meaningless it is. none of them have ever sniffed a slam.
 

TripleATeam

Legend
Wrong. This is no double standard.

#1: Djokovic is 3-2 in sets, Nadal is 2-3 in sets. Even with a 3 set win over Federer and a straight set win over Tsitsipas, Djokovic ends up with a better set record than Nadal - 5-3 vs 4-3.

#2: Nadal faces the #1 in his group on Friday, whereas Djokovic faces the #3 in his group on Thursday. Nadal already lost to the #2 and beat the #4, and Djokovic lost to the #1 and beat the #4. If Nadal beat Zverev in 3, he could lose to Tsitsipas and get through without a problem, similar to what Djokovic will do if he beats Federer. But he didn't.

#3: Groups are set fairly. Not much complaining when the draw came out because no one expected Zverev to actually be good. If someone complains about Zverev suddenly being good, they should also mention how Medvedev is suddenly choking and how Thiem is the best player in the whole WTF right about now.

#4: Everyone knew the rules heading into it. If you don't want the possibility of being eliminated, then don't lose. Simple as that. If you lose, your success is no longer in your hands - it's up to the other members of your group.

It's fair. Even if Djokovic loses tomorrow and Nadal makes it to the semifinals, it will still be fair. Nadal is in contention even by losing in straights and barely winning a 3-setter. Hell, he can even be #1 in the group if he beats Tsitsipas in 3 sets and Medvedev wins in 3. How is that fair?

Nadal could go 4-4 in sets and still be #1 in his group, while Tsitsipas could go 5-2 and end up #2. Is that fair? Yes. Because they all had the info going into the tournament. No one rigged anything. They just played and won or lost.
 

TripleATeam

Legend
Djokovic lost a match and he still depends only on himself. This is clearly not how it should be. And as I mentioned earlier in 2011 Djokovic had 1 win (a very close win, lost the other two matches, totally destroyed in one of them) and still didn't reach the semifinal only by a miracle, because Berdych managed to come back and beat Ferrer. For sure something is wrong with this format.
The only reason Djokovic still relies on himself is because he hasn't played the other person in contention for the semi. Djokovic lost to the #1, beat the #4. Nadal lost to the #2, beat the #4. In case you didn't notice, he should have beaten Zverev if he wanted to win a 2-way tie with him.

If Nadal lost to Tsitsipas and beat Zverev, he would advance the same way Djokovic might advance tomorrow. He just lost to the wrong guy.
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
Gaudio and Costa won Roland Garros, Korda and Johansson won the AO, none of them ever sniffed another Slam. Does that devalue those events?
they WON A SLAM with 127 other people. not a best of 3 round robin tourney with 7 other players. lmao
 
Top