Why the h2h is unimportant

[RF-17-GOAT]

Oh good we needed another thread of this.

 

[jokinla]

H2H is very important, which is why Hrbaty is up their in the debate fo sho.

 

[YellowBall77]

H2H is very important, which is why Hrbaty is up their in the debate fo sho.

False comparison and very specious logic.

 

[jokinla]

False comparison and very specious logic.

Why, he owns Fed and Nads, if h2h is important, he is the man.

 

[YouCantBeSerious]

H2H is only important if you are getting owned. And even then you can convince yourself it is unimportant through meditation and various psychoactive substances.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

H2H is very important, which is why Hrbaty is up their in the debate fo sho.

Hrbaty, Nadal & Fed are all owned by Corretja...

Corretja = GOAT

 

[Povl Carstensen]

Federer will be remembered as the guy who couldn't beat Rafa on clay.

Actually everyone will be remembered as that guy, since Nadal is the most dominant single surface player ever. But Fed will still go down as the greatest player overall when taking everything into account. That's what rankings are for, to show consistency in results over an 11 month season, something that Nadal has always struggled with, which is why his weeks at #1 are far closer to Djokovic than to Federer and will be even closer by the end of this season, regardless of whether Fed or Djoke comes out on top.

Sums it up pretty good.

 

[Zarfot Z]

Hrbaty, Nadal & Fed are all owned by Corretja...

Corretja = GOAT

But Carsten Arriens has a winning h2h against Corretja, so...

 

[Deleted member 21996]

But Carsten Arriens has a winning h2h against Corretja, so...

the h2h logic has been debunked time and again.... but there is little hope regarding the Nadal fan camp...

 

[ChanceEncounter]

That is the secondary effect. The first affect is the 18-10 H2h record itself. Read the OP LOL.

If you are still not satisfied and want an insurance 3rd effect, then I will say it has also catapulted Nadal into the GOAT discussion as well as opened the door for Djokovic to be an all time legend.

The 18-10 H2H record itself means about as much as Shrichapan's record against Nadal "by itself." The only relevance is what it means to the game. A H2H number by itself means nothing, unless you want to argue that Davydenko and James Blake are on equal footing as Nadal.

The only relevance in H2H is when it actually counts towards something. In this case, Nadal's H2H against Federer counts towards his wins, namely his GS wins.

Thus, when people say 17 to 11, they're ALREADY factoring in his H2H. If you fail to understand such a simple point, please stop wasting my time. If you would like to argue why this is the case, please produce solid sentential logic, of which your post is completely absent.

 

[gennosuke]

Nor Monte Carlo.

Wow. Nadal must be a genius to be such a "joke", and yet beat Federer 8 times out 10 matches in majors. Wow, just wow.



But Nadal did beat him. We can play what ifs all day.

You are silly aren't you.

1. Nadal's achievements from 2004 to 2007 were, by a large margin, inferior to Federer's. He would ROUTINELY lose to guys that Federer absolutely owned. (Roddick, Hewitt, Blake, Youzhny, Gonzalez, Ferrer etc. seriously, the combined H2H of those guys against Federer is something like 10 - 70 :lol Yet he had a winning record over Federer.

This is undeniable evidence that Nadal never even needed to be close to Federer to edge the H2H.

2. He didn't win those titles because of Nadal. Nadal's repeated victories over Federer are THE CAUSE of him not having those titles. Hence, we already include those victories when we look at Federer's resume and see no Monte Carlo/10 slams in a row. We also include the fact that he has beaten him that many times if we call Nadal the 7 times RG champion. (would be 2 times champion if not for his wins over him)

When will you not realize that these people's resumes already tell us all we need to know about these guys?

It amazes me to see people miss such a basic point.

His point is that the H2H is already factored into their overall resumes. This means when people say that Federer "has 17 grand slams", they're already taking into account that he's won 17 despite Nadal's lopsided H2H, especially on clay where he's denied Federer numerous FO's.

So if you try to bring up H2H again, you're basically double-counting H2H. Once where the H2H already influenced the overall results, and then once again just for giggles.

This guy gets it.

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

If Federer led Rafa 18-10, the title would be "Why the h2h is important".

 

[ktid]

If Federer led Rafa 18-10, the title would be "Why the h2h is important".

Or it would be you making this thread