Red Group scenarios: Federer in SF, Roddick out, Ljubicic must beat Federer. [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Red Group scenarios: Federer in SF, Roddick out, Ljubicic must beat Federer.

FedererGrandSlam
11-14-2006, 04:49 PM
A. Federer def. Ljubicic

Federer 1st
Nalbandian 2nd

----------------------------------------

B. Ljubicic def. Federer

Ljubicic 1st
Federer 2nd

Denaon
11-14-2006, 04:53 PM
wow thx for the data :) :yeah:

R.Federer
11-14-2006, 04:55 PM
Thank you! I was just about to post and ask how Roger and andy can get into the SFs

Thanks.

croat123
11-14-2006, 04:56 PM
ljubo has to win at least a set

ajmo

R.Federer
11-14-2006, 04:56 PM
Wow, so there is a chance that Roger doesn't even go to the semi finals! This place will erupt if that happens

ChinoRios4Ever
11-14-2006, 04:56 PM
woooow, so many scenarios :eek:

mickymouse
11-14-2006, 04:58 PM
Wow...didn't occur to me that there's a possiblity that Federer wouldn't advance to the semis. Ljubicic will be the new hero of MTF if he pulls that one off.

VamoDavid
11-14-2006, 05:05 PM
Well, I'm cheering for Nalbandian but I'd surely have a really fun time seeing David and Roger out of the cup :devil:

Yappa
11-14-2006, 05:12 PM
Thx for this thread. :yeah: Very interesting scenarios. For example 2.4. Roddick possibly making the SF although he loses the match against Nalby.

R.Federer
11-14-2006, 05:19 PM
The one very nice feature of these scenarios is that except for very very few scenarios (2.4 in A and B only I think), the route to the semi finals lies on each individual player's own rackets! That's the way it ought to be.

Apemant
11-14-2006, 05:26 PM
Amazingly well done, covered all the different scenarios I could think of. :worship:

Must say that scenarios labeled 'B' seem pretty unlikely, hehehehe

If Ivan loses in 3, and David wins in 3, it will be reeeeaaaly interesting.... count the number of games won! Crazy heheheheh, I really want to see that happen :devil:

Sunset of Age
11-14-2006, 05:26 PM
Very interesting, thanks a lot for posting!

Wow... so there still is a chance Fed won't make it to the semis...

enzogiovanni
11-14-2006, 06:04 PM
Wow...didn't occur to me that there's a possiblity that Federer wouldn't advance to the semis. Ljubicic will be the new hero of MTF if he pulls that one off.

If Ljubo manages such a monumental achievement (beating Roger in 2 sets) I think he will instantly become the most loved spanish player after Nadal :D

bluefork
11-14-2006, 06:14 PM
[B][COLOR="Red"]
2.1 Ljubicic def. Federer in two sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in two sets

Roddick 1st
Ljubicic 2nd

2.2 Ljubicic def. Federer in two sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in three sets

Ljubicic 1st
Roddick 2nd



So Roddick has to throw a set to move on if Ljubicic beats Federer in 2?

Net Cord
11-14-2006, 06:16 PM
So Roddick has to throw a set to move on if Ljubicic beats Federer in 2?

I don't think so. If Ljubicic beats Federer in 2, Roddick is 1st in the group if he beats Dave in 2, 2nd in the group in he beats Dave in 3.

bluefork
11-14-2006, 06:20 PM
I don't think so. If Ljubicic beats Federer in 2, Roddick is 1st in the group if he beats Dave in 2, 2nd in the group in he beats Dave in 3.

Oops. I see where I got confused. Never mind.

FedererGrandSlam
11-14-2006, 06:21 PM
A Great example to the WTA of how to organise a year end championships

By pairing the two winners in the second matches

we have a final day in this group where

ALL FOUR players can still qualify

and

ALL FOUR players can still go home
Sure.

But the WTA - with its 3-matches-per-day system - believes for some reason that it's bad having one group with four matches played and one group with two matches played after two days so they make it 3 and 3, with horrific results. :o

Net Cord
11-14-2006, 06:22 PM
A Great example to the WTA of how to organise a year end championships

By pairing the two winners in the second matches

we have a final day in this group where

ALL FOUR players can still qualify

and

ALL FOUR players can still go home

I think it will be the same with the other group unless Blake beats Davydenko and Nadal beats Robredo tomorrow. In that scenario, Blake would be 1st in the group no matter what happens in the last 2 matches.

Deboogle!.
11-14-2006, 06:24 PM
2.2 Federer def. Ljubicic in two sets, Nalbandian def. Roddick in three sets

Federer 1st
Nalbandian 2nd (tied in sets w/l with Roddick, ahead because of winning direct match)I'm confused. Is this one definitely correct? Because then you have 3 people all with 1-2, so how can you make the determination based on direct head-to-head? head-to-head comes before sets in the determination, so because of the A beat B who beat C who beat A problem, how can you make a determination based on head to head? What I quoted above is saying that Ljubicic would be eliminated first based on sets and then the determination based on head-to-head AFTER a determination based on sets??

Argh, I am confused :(

Katastrophe
11-14-2006, 06:27 PM
This is just like being in math class all over again. Deb, you are not the only one who is confused! I need an Advil. :p

FedererGrandSlam
11-14-2006, 06:46 PM
What I quoted above is saying that Ljubicic would be eliminated first based on sets and then the determination based on head-to-head AFTER a determination based on sets??
That is correct. :)

Judio's posting of the rules is incomplete.

Read the Official Rulebook:

3) The final standings of each group shall be determined by the first of the following methods that apply:
a) Greatest number of wins;
b) Greatest number of matches played;
c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied, or if three (3) players are tied, then:
i) If three (3) players each have one win, a player having played less than all three (3) matches is automatically eliminated and the player advancing to the Single Elimination competition is the winner of the match-up of the two (2) players tied with 1-2 records; or
ii) Highest percentage of sets won; or
iii) Highest percentage of games won.
iv) If (i), (ii) or (iii) produce one superior player (first place), or one inferior player (third place), and the two remaining players are tied, the tie between those two players shall be broken by head-to-head record.
4) If ties still exist after the above procedures, the Steering Committee shall make the final determination.

So they will look at H2H whenever possible.

No offense but I wouldn't have made the initial post if I wasn't 100% sure that it's correct. :)

revolution
11-14-2006, 06:48 PM
deb has such a good Flashness :p :D

Deboogle!.
11-14-2006, 06:56 PM
That is correct. :)

Judio's posting of the rules is incomplete.

Read the Official Rulebook:

3) The final standings of each group shall be determined by the first of the following methods that apply:
a) Greatest number of wins;
b) Greatest number of matches played;
c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied, or if three (3) players are tied, then:
i) If three (3) players each have one win, a player having played less than all three (3) matches is automatically eliminated and the player advancing to the Single Elimination competition is the winner of the match-up of the two (2) players tied with 1-2 records; or
ii) Highest percentage of sets won; or
iii) Highest percentage of games won.
iv) If (i), (ii) or (iii) produce one superior player (first place), or one inferior player (third place), and the two remaining players are tied, the tie between those two players shall be broken by head-to-head record.
4) If ties still exist after the above procedures, the Steering Committee shall make the final determination.

So they will look at H2H whenever possible.

No offense but I wouldn't have made the initial post if I wasn't 100% sure that it's correct. :)okay, thanks :) I don't really have the energy to load up the rulebook and search through it and obviously this was a little technicality you could only know about if you'd read it, so thanks for your time spent :) I'll delete my posts so as to not confuse people further.

Apemant
11-14-2006, 07:00 PM
So they will look at H2H whenever possible.


Whenever there are just 2 people tied in any respect, be it matches W/L, sets W/L or games W/L. Makes sense, why go deeper into the less relevant statistics (total games W/L for example) if only 2 players are tied at higher level - just look who won between the two. Only if 3 are tied, H2H is obviously meaningless, and you have to go deeper. Perfectly understandable and logical.

DrJules
11-14-2006, 07:06 PM
That is correct. :)

Judio's posting of the rules is incomplete.

Read the Official Rulebook:

3) The final standings of each group shall be determined by the first of the following methods that apply:
a) Greatest number of wins;
b) Greatest number of matches played;
c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied, or if three (3) players are tied, then:
i) If three (3) players each have one win, a player having played less than all three (3) matches is automatically eliminated and the player advancing to the Single Elimination competition is the winner of the match-up of the two (2) players tied with 1-2 records; or
ii) Highest percentage of sets won; or
iii) Highest percentage of games won.
iv) If (i), (ii) or (iii) produce one superior player (first place), or one inferior player (third place), and the two remaining players are tied, the tie between those two players shall be broken by head-to-head record.
4) If ties still exist after the above procedures, the Steering Committee shall make the final determination.

So they will look at H2H whenever possible.

No offense but I wouldn't have made the initial post if I wasn't 100% sure that it's correct. :)

iii) Highest percentage of games won.

Roddick has significant advantage over Nalbandian and Ljubicic if Nalbandian won in 3 sets and Federer won in 3 sets.

adee-gee
11-14-2006, 07:28 PM
2.1 Ljubicic def. Federer in two sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in two sets

Roddick 1st
Ljubicic 2nd

2.2 Ljubicic def. Federer in two sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in three sets

Ljubicic 1st
Roddick 2nd

2.3 Ljubicic def. Federer in three sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in two sets

Roddick 1st
Ljubicic 2nd (tied in sets w/l with Federer, ahead because of winning direct match)

2.4 Ljubicic def. Federer in three sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in three sets

Games w/l decide about 1st and 2nd position between Federer, Roddick and Ljubicic

:)
:bounce:

I never thought I'd say this but.....

:singer: come on Ljubicic (you arsehole) :rocker2:

FedererGrandSlam
11-14-2006, 08:03 PM
okay, thanks :) I don't really have the energy to load up the rulebook and search through it and obviously this was a little technicality you could only know about if you'd read it, so thanks for your time spent :) I'll delete my posts so as to not confuse people further.
Your question was a good one :) but you shall not doubt my words :p

mangoes
11-14-2006, 08:16 PM
Is there a gold group scenario??

Deboogle!.
11-14-2006, 08:19 PM
iii) Highest percentage of games won.

Roddick has significant advantage over Nalbandian and Ljubicic if Nalbandian won in 3 sets and Federer won in 3 sets.Yep. Because they both lost set(s) 1-6. Your question was a good one :) but you shall not doubt my words :pI didn't doubt, I was just confused. And normally Judio is very trustworthy with the rankings/rules stuff, so I accepted what he posted. It's cleared up now so no harm done:)Is there a gold group scenario??Kinda hard since they've only played one match. Look at all the scenarios we have for the red group after they've played 2 matches :lol:

Net Cord
11-14-2006, 08:24 PM
Is there a gold group scenario??

I'm sure there is, but it would be very complicated because each player in that group still has 2 matches to play. I think that the only thing that can be clinched tomorrow is that Blake can clinch 1st in the group by beating Davydenko and Nadal beating Robredo.

mangoes
11-14-2006, 08:26 PM
True.........silly me :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Thanks Deb, Net Cord.

enzogiovanni
11-14-2006, 08:49 PM
Hi.
I would like to dig into the most complicated outcomes in here, those where the number of games are involved, and for this purpose I have uploaded an Excel Spreadsheet on Google which anyone can edit and "play" with it to generate different outcomes.... Here's the link:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pnm_W48DVzv4BCL00Fu-fDA

The game-decided outcomes are these 2:
A. Federer def. Ljubicic

2.4 Federer def. Ljubicic in three sets, Nalbandian def. Roddick in three sets

Federer 1st
Games w/l decide about 2nd position between Ljubicic, Nalbandian and Roddick
In this scenario Roddick is in the most favorable position. As of today the standings are like this:

Ljubicic games won-lost: 31-36
Roddick games won-lost: 34-29
Nalbandian games won-lost: 26-34


The most Ljubicic can improve his game score while losing 2 sets to 1 is by losing 6-0 6-7 6-7 which would improve his game score by 4 games thus making it a total of -1 game (49-50). In order for Ljubicic to pass to the SF Nalbandian has to beat Roddick by 2 sets to 1 and with a surplus of 6 games for example a result of 6-2 6-7 6-3 for Nalbandian would qualify Ljubicic. (nalbandian would have a 44-46 total of -2 game score and roddick an 46-47 total -1 game score but I suppose Ljubicic would advance because has won more games - or does in this case the direct match Roddick-Ljubicic count??? Someone can clarify this rule?)
In such a case Ljubicic can advance even if Nalbandian beats Roddick by 7 games...if Nalbandian beats Roddick by 8 games: Nalbandian goes to the semi-finals.

All of this is possible if Ljubo looses with the result 6-0 6-7 6-7 which is highly unlikely. It is much more plausible that ljubo loses with a game deficit and thus he is out of the semis. In such a case Nalbandian has to pull out a 2-1 set victory with a surplus of 7 games to go to the semis.

Roddick is the heavy favorite in this combination.



and this one:



[B][COLOR="red"]B. Ljubicic def. Federer

2.4 Ljubicic def. Federer in three sets, Roddick def. Nalbandian in three sets

Games w/l decide about 1st and 2nd position between Federer, Roddick and Ljubicic

:)
As of today the standing are:

Ljubicic games won-lost: 31-36
Roddick games won-lost: 34-29
Federer games won-lost: 32-24

Federer should lose the match by at least a -7 game deficit to lose his spot to Ljubicic in the semifinals. A result of Ljubicic winning 6-2 6-7 6-2 would give the total result for Ljubicic 49-47 compared to Federer's 43-42.
Again Ljubicic is in the most difficult position here as Federer and Roddick have a higher percentage of making it...

We'll enjoy day 3 of the Masters!

crouching
11-14-2006, 09:00 PM
Read the Official Rulebook:

3) The final standings of each group shall be determined by the first of the following methods that apply:
a) Greatest number of wins;
b) Greatest number of matches played;
c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied, or if three (3) players are tied, then:
i) If three (3) players each have one win, a player having played less than all three (3) matches is automatically eliminated and the player advancing to the Single Elimination competition is the winner of the match-up of the two (2) players tied with 1-2 records; or
ii) Highest percentage of sets won; or
iii) Highest percentage of games won.
iv) If (i), (ii) or (iii) produce one superior player (first place), or one inferior player (third place), and the two remaining players are tied, the tie between those two players shall be broken by head-to-head record.
4) If ties still exist after the above procedures, the Steering Committee shall make the final determination.

So they will look at H2H whenever possible.

No offense but I wouldn't have made the initial post if I wasn't 100% sure that it's correct. :)

You need to read the rules again.

If there are two, and only two players tied, then the head-to-head matters.

If three players have won one and lost two matches, or if three players have two wins and one loss, then they look at the sets then the games won.

The most important part of the rule is actually the comma in (c).

c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied, or if three (3) players are tied, then:
i) If three (3) players each have one win, a player having played less than all three (3) matches is automatically eliminated and the player advancing to the Single Elimination competition is the winner of the match-up of the two (2) players tied with 1-2 records; or
ii) Highest percentage of sets won; or
iii) Highest percentage of games won.

Deboogle!.
11-14-2006, 09:14 PM
You need to read the rules again.

If there are two, and only two players tied, then the head-to-head matters.

If three players have won one and lost two matches, or if three players have two wins and one loss, then they look at the sets then the games won.

The most important part of the rule is actually the comma in (c).

c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied, or if three (3) players are tied, then:
i) If three (3) players each have one win, a player having played less than all three (3) matches is automatically eliminated and the player advancing to the Single Elimination competition is the winner of the match-up of the two (2) players tied with 1-2 records; or
ii) Highest percentage of sets won; or
iii) Highest percentage of games won.But the part he(she? sorry) bolded makes it pretty clear, and that iv) subsection is included in the part that comes after the comma you highlighted.

iv) If (i), (ii) or (iii) produce one superior player (first place), or one inferior player (third place), and the two remaining players are tied, the tie between those two players shall be broken by head-to-head record.

So if Ljubicic were to lose to Roger in straight sets and Andy in 3, you have all the guys at 1-2. ii) would eliminate Ljubicic under iv) because that would produce one inferior player, Ljubicic would've won one fewer set. So then you have Andy and Nalbandian who have won the same number of sets, so iv) would theoretically kick in and the head-to-head would apply. Nalbandian has won their match, so he qualifies under iv) and moves to the semifinal. The only way I could see your interpretation of the rule (which was Judio's initial interpretation of the rule and it made sense to me) is if by the "tied" that I underlined in iv) meant that the two remaining players are tied all the way down to having the exact # of games.

Andy can make this a lot less confusing by winning ;)

NyGeL
11-14-2006, 09:19 PM
we are all waiting for OOP for Thursday xD

they should play at the same time, in the same court... one match in the advantage side, and another in the deuce...

mini tennis to decide!

Apemant
11-14-2006, 10:15 PM
Hi.
I would like to dig into the most complicated outcomes in here, those where the number of games are involved

Awesome job. :worship:

Apemant
11-14-2006, 10:30 PM
The most Ljubicic can improve his game score while losing 2 sets to 1 is by losing 6-0 6-7 6-7 which would improve his game score by 4 games thus making it a total of -1 game (49-50). In order for Ljubicic to pass to the SF Nalbandian has to beat Roddick by 2 sets to 1 and with a surplus of 6 games for example a result of 6-2 6-7 6-3 for Nalbandian would qualify Ljubicic. (nalbandian would have a 44-46 total of -2 game score and roddick an 46-47 total -1 game score but I suppose Ljubicic would advance because has won more games - or does in this case the direct match Roddick-Ljubicic count??? Someone can clarify this rule?)


Differential doesn't matter, but winning percentage, and with the same differential, percentage is higher if numbers are higher so that would indeed give Ljubo the edge. H2H wouldn't matter since percentages wouldn't be the same.

But, that particular situation hardly has any practical value since the odds of Ljubo bageling Federer (and then losing 2 tiebreaks) converge to zero. :)

Pea
11-14-2006, 10:48 PM
David just has to win and I'm happy.:angel:

Loremaster
11-14-2006, 11:19 PM
Sorry but it is only scenario here,

Fed def Ljubicic in straights sets
Andy def Fat Dave no maater in many sets, but after today and Sunday "GREAT" matches I would pick Andy in two

Peacemaster
11-15-2006, 03:49 PM
Amazingly well analyzed. Kudos.

The fact that the second part of the B.1 scenario is not guaranteed and B.2.4 does not assure passage to the knockout round, it can be safely said that Roger will not tank the match vs Ivan (not that he's the kind of player who would ever do that anyway).

Pfloyd
11-15-2006, 05:02 PM
I'm not good with math so...some help here please. If Ljubicic beats Federer what can happen?

R.Federer
11-15-2006, 05:03 PM
There is an entire thread devoted to this!
It's called "Red Group Scenarios" (short answer-- then Ljubicic goes to the sf, and david and andy fight it out for the last spot)

Maybe Mods can delete this thread

smucav
11-15-2006, 08:57 PM
Here's the official ATP take on the red group:

http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/media/currentweekevent.asp
(PDF uploaded here soon)• All four singles players in the Red Group can still qualify for Saturday’s semifinals, with world No. 1 Roger Federer in the strongest position having won his first two round-robin matches.

RED GROUP QUALIFICATION SCENARIOS

Roger Federer will definitely qualify if:
• Federer defeats Ljubicic
• Nalbandian defeats Roddick

Roger Federer could still qualify if:
• Federer loses to Ljubicic in three sets and Roddick defeats Nalbandian in three sets (three-way tie between Federer, Ljubicic and Roddick decided on percentage of games won)

Andy Roddick will definitely qualify if:
• Roddick defeats Nalbandian in straight sets
• Roddick defeats Nalbandian in three sets and Federer defeats Ljubicic
• Roddick defeats Nalbandian in three sets and Ljubicic defeats Federer in straight sets

Andy Roddick could still qualify if:
• Roddick defeats Nalbandian in three sets and Ljubicic defeats Federer in three sets (three-way tie between Federer, Ljubicic and Roddick decided on percentage of games won)
• Roddick loses to Nalbandian in three sets and Federer defeats Ljubicic in three sets (three-way tie between Ljubicic, Nalbandian and Roddick decided on percentage of games won)

Ivan Ljubicic will definitely qualify if:
• Ljubicic defeats Federer in straight sets
• Ljubicic defeats Federer in three sets and Roddick defeats Nalbandian in straight sets
• Ljubicic defeats Federer in three sets and Nalbandian defeats Roddick

Ivan Ljubicic could still qualify if:
• Ljubicic defeats Federer in three sets and Roddick defeats Nalbandian in three sets (three-way tie between Federer, Ljubicic and Roddick decided on percentage of games won)
• Ljubicic loses to Federer in three sets and Nalbandian defeats Roddick in three sets (three-way tie between Ljubicic, Nalbandian and Roddick decided on percentage of games won)

David Nalbandian will definitely qualify if:
• Nalbandian defeats Roddick in straight sets and Federer defeats Ljubicic
• Nalbandian defeats Roddick in three sets and Federer defeats Ljubicic in straight sets

David Nalbandian could still qualify if:
• Nalbandian defeats Roddick in three sets and Federer defeats Ljubicic in three sets (three-way tie between Ljubicic, Nalbandian and Roddick decided on percentage of games won)

El Legenda
11-15-2006, 09:59 PM
Fat Dave at 0-2 is really not in that bad of spot.

K-Dog
11-15-2006, 10:40 PM
So basically, Roger MUST win tomorrow and there is a chance a player with a record of 2-1 will be replaced in the semis by a player with a record of 1-2.

FedererGrandSlam
11-15-2006, 10:47 PM
So basically, Roger MUST win tomorrow and there is a chance a player with a record of 2-1 will be replaced in the semis by a player with a record of 1-2.
No.

R.Federer
11-15-2006, 11:43 PM
So basically, Roger MUST win tomorrow and there is a chance a player with a record of 2-1 will be replaced in the semis by a player with a record of 1-2.

No.
The win loss in the series of round robins comes FIRST. A 2-1 guy cannot be replaced by a 1-2 guy. Only ties are broken by looking further within the matches (ie, win loss of games, % won etc- - see the first post)

ThePunisher23
11-16-2006, 07:03 AM
I have a question...in section A. 2.3: If Federer beats Ljub in 3 sets and Nalbo beats Roddick in 2 sets, why isn't it Federer and Ljub that advance...

in this case Ljub and Nalbo would both have won 4 sets...so wouldn't Ljub advance because he won the H2H versus Nalbo??

R.Federer
11-16-2006, 07:19 AM
I have a question...in section A. 2.3: If Federer beats Ljub in 3 sets and Nalbo beats Roddick in 2 sets, why isn't it Federer and Ljub that advance...

in this case Ljub and Nalbo would both have won 4 sets...so wouldn't Ljub advance because he won the H2H versus Nalbo??

In this scenario, roddick will also be at 1-2, tying Ljubicic and Nalbandian in W/L.
In the official rules, "c) Head-to-head results if only two (2) players are tied"-- thus, they won't look at the head to head between Lj and Nalbandi.

In this scenario, therefore, they will go to highest PERCENT of sets won and then highest percent of games won (if the preceding produces a tie).

But if David wins in straights, then he would have played 8 won 4 and if Ivan loses in 3, then he would have played 9 won 4. Ivan would lose, because David's 4/8 > Ivan's 4/9.

In this scenario, they will not need to go to the % of games won at all.

niko
11-16-2006, 10:04 AM
I'd like to see David move on, that be great!:)

FedererGrandSlam
11-16-2006, 12:47 PM
It's a little easier now. :p

El Legenda
11-16-2006, 12:48 PM
i guess h2h means nothing ;)

Seneca
11-16-2006, 12:53 PM
Even better, has anyone ever advanced with only one win?

RonE
11-16-2006, 02:14 PM
So by losing to Ljubo Roger could knock Fat Dave out of the mix AND avoid a semifinal clash with Nadal.

Sounds almost too tempting but we know he won't be going out tanking on purpose :p

JustmeUK
11-16-2006, 02:17 PM
well considering he's a set and a break up there's no question about fed tanking :P

Voo de Mar
11-16-2006, 02:20 PM
Even better, has anyone ever advanced with only one win?

In doubles Masters a couple of times, even today duo Damm/Paes but in singles I don't know :confused: