Early Roland Garros thread

[Moxie]

I didn't want anyone to miss Mrzz's 9th option of Buddy Guy. Great improvisation is the hallmark of clay tennis. And secretly imbedded is Mrzz's love of blue clay.

 

[mrzz]

I didn't want anyone to miss Mrzz's 9th option of Buddy Guy. Great improvisation is the hallmark of clay tennis. And secretly imbedded is Mrzz's love of blue clay.

We need a "Love" button here... tried to click "Like" a thousand times but it doesn't work...The blue clay connection!! Great! I own you a few beers just because of that.

There should be another hidden reference in "Some other guy", but I confused the name of the album. Buddy's brother Phil Guy has an album called "Another Guy" (that's what made me do the connection). I only realised my mistake now, by the way.

 

[Moxie]

So someone voted for Buddy Guy's brother. Probably a long-shot, since even I didn't know Buddy had one until today. Still, likely better odds than GSM is currently giving Rafa.

PS: I'll be holding you to those beers.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

In the "sense" of wishful thinking. I know you didn't include other players' histories, such as Stan's, but a better way of looking at stats is by a player's history, tournament to tournament, and you know that. You're never going to get anyone to agree with you that Rafa would enter RG with 0% chance of winning it this year, regardless if he goes into it with no titles on clay. Fair enough? Or is anyone else here willing to give him 0% chance at RG, if he doesn't win Madrid/Rome?

Nobody would give Rafa 0% chance even if he loses all four tourneys. You know what was my claim. Based purely on stats, Rafa has won RG 0% of time when he entered in it without winning any warm-ups. That is a fact. That's all I was pointing out.

Of course, I can (and have already told you) tell you the weakness there. That is extremely small sample size. If Rafa had entered RG 10 times without winning any of the four and then lost RG in all ten times, then it would be significant stat (but then we would not be talking about Rafa anymore).

While you are thinking of it as belittling Rafa, I was actually pointing out something very strong for Rafa. Even after losing three warm-ups he has won RG. That is really amazing.

Let me put it this way, the only possible way he won't be considered a favorite at RG is if he lost all four warm-ups.

Also, not withstanding what happened in the past so many years, if he goes to RG after losing four tourneys, the chances of him winning is lesser than you imagine especially considering Rafa is a "confidence player" and that confidence is derived from winning recent tourneys.

 

[Moxie]

Nobody would give Rafa 0% chance even if he loses all four tourneys. You know what was my claim. Based purely on stats, Rafa has won RG 0% of time when he entered in it without winning any warm-ups. That is a fact. That's all I was pointing out.

Of course, I can (and have already told you) tell you the weakness there. That is extremely small sample size. If Rafa had entered RG 10 times without winning any of the four and then lost RG in all ten times, then it would be significant stat (but then we would not be talking about Rafa anymore).

While you are thinking of it as belittling Rafa, I was actually pointing out something very strong for Rafa. Even after losing three warm-ups he has won RG. That is really amazing.

Let me put it this way, the only possible way he won't be considered a favorite at RG is if he lost all four warm-ups.

Also, not withstanding what happened in the past so many years, if he goes to RG after losing four tourneys, the chances of him winning is lesser than you imagine especially considering Rafa is a "confidence player" and that confidence is derived from winning recent tourneys.

You make a great dance out of backing off of saying that Rafa has zero chance of winning RG if he fails to win Madrid and or Rome. That doesn't really make up for your manipulating of stats, or making the puniest of stats to that end. Of everything you've said, the only statement that makes sense is what I bolded above. Sure, if he enters RG w/o a title on clay, he has "less" chance of winning RG. That's it, and it doesn't take a statistician or an oracle to proclaim that.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK.Let us include all players and the entire history. May be let us confine our attention to Open Era. I wonder in how many years some one won RG without winning any of the above four warm-ups in question. We can recruit Dude to do the stat.

But, I doubt it will be more than say five times since the beginning.

 

[Moxie]

OK.Let us include all players and the entire history. May be let us confine our attention to Open Era. I wonder in how many years some one won RG without winning any of the above four warm-ups in question. We can recruit Dude to do the stat.

But, I doubt it will be more than say five times since the beginning.

It's very late and I'll give it some thought tomorrow, but without trying very hard, I got 4: Stan, as I mentioned. Albert Costa 2002 (his only title of the year.) Gaston Gaudio 2004 (his only title of the year.) Gustavo Kuerten, 1997 (his only title of the year.) I haven't got the 5th yet, but Carlos Moyà only won +MC when he won his lone RG. If I had a little more imagination, I'm sure I'd come up with many more, since this was so easy.

EDIT: Oh, and Agassi. That's 5, and I hardly even tried.

 

[Moxie]

@GameSetAndMath: turns out there are others: Ken Rosewall 1968, Michael Chang 1989 (his only other title was indoor HC Ivan Lendl 1984. Jim Courier in 1991. That's a solid 9 players winning RG w/o any other clay title in that year. Kafelnikov was a +1 if you consider Prague, whenever that was. Can I quit looking now? I'm pretty sure it doesn't need a graph, though.

 

[mrzz]

Federer, 2009.

 

[Front242]

Federer, 2009.

Nah. He won Madrid also in 2009.

 

[mrzz]

Nah. He won Madrid also in 2009.

For some reason I was sure it was 11 or 12.

[EDIT] Just checked the tournament's draw, very peculiar list of players that Federer played -- all of them important names in his career: Soderling, Blake, Roddick, del Potro, Nadal.

 

[Front242]

For some reason I was sure it was 11 or 12.

[EDIT] Just checked the tournament's draw, very peculiar list of players that Federer played -- all of them important names in his career: Soderling, Blake, Roddick, del Potro, Nadal.

Yeah it was a good win alright but Blake and Roddick were far from world beaters on clay.

 

[El Dude]

That's the thing with precedents: just because something has or has not happened in the paset, doesn't mean it won't or will happen in the future, but it does give us something to consider.

If Rafa doesn't win any of the four tournaments before RG, I think it will mean his chances of winning RG are greatly diminished - but not because he didn't win the previous tournaments. That's just correlation. The reason is what it indicates: that his form is not good enough. But even then we have to look below the surface...who is he losing to? Is it a red-hot Thiem in every tournament? Is it a resurgent Novak? Or is it a lesser player?

Anyhow, I don't think we'll have a good sense on Rafa until we get to Rome. He hasn't done as well at Madrid, so I really don't expect him to win there. If he does, that's great news for him and his fans. But if he doesn't, it isn't the end of the world. But Rome will be a better indicator.

 

[Horsa]

I didn't want anyone to miss Mrzz's 9th option of Buddy Guy. Great improvisation is the hallmark of clay tennis. And secretly imbedded is Mrzz's love of blue clay.

Thank you very much, Moxie. I'd never heard of him to tell you the truth.

 

[Horsa]

@GameSetAndMath: turns out there are others: Ken Rosewall 1968, Michael Chang 1989 (his only other title was indoor HC Ivan Lendl 1984. Jim Courier in 1991. That's a solid 9 players winning RG w/o any other clay title in that year. Kafelnikov was a +1 if you consider Prague, whenever that was. Can I quit looking now? I'm pretty sure it doesn't need a graph, though.

If a graph is produced, can we please have 1 without green on it?
I'm sick of seeing the colour as I don't like green.
I know it's supposed to be serene.
I hate to see too much green on my screen.

 

[Horsa]

We need a "Love" button here... tried to click "Like" a thousand times but it doesn't work...The blue clay connection!! Great! I own you a few beers just because of that.

There should be another hidden reference in "Some other guy", but I confused the name of the album. Buddy's brother Phil Guy has an album called "Another Guy" (that's what made me do the connection). I only realised my mistake now, by the way.

I guess you could have had "My guy" as an option too.

 

[Moxie]

Thank you very much, Moxie. I'd never heard of him to tell you the truth.

He's a great blues man. Mediocre clay player.

 

[Moxie]

That's the thing with precedents: just because something has or has not happened in the paset, doesn't mean it won't or will happen in the future, but it does give us something to consider.

If Rafa doesn't win any of the four tournaments before RG, I think it will mean his chances of winning RG are greatly diminished - but not because he didn't win the previous tournaments. That's just correlation. The reason is what it indicates: that his form is not good enough. But even then we have to look below the surface...who is he losing to? Is it a red-hot Thiem in every tournament? Is it a resurgent Novak? Or is it a lesser player?

Anyhow, I don't think we'll have a good sense on Rafa until we get to Rome. He hasn't done as well at Madrid, so I really don't expect him to win there. If he does, that's great news for him and his fans. But if he doesn't, it isn't the end of the world. But Rome will be a better indicator.

Obviously, the past and patterns can only tell us so much, but it's a bit funny coming from you, the cautioning of reading too much into them. In any case, I think what would really diminish Rafa's chances at RG is if his form doesn't pick up. His A-game has only appeared in flashes. As you say, I think it does matter that he's lost only to a very good Fognini and white-hot Thiem, and Madrid is not the best indicator, whatever happens there. I do think he can win RG w/o a title on clay previous to it, as long as his form is there. Some of the reasons that he has won RG so many times are not options at other tournaments...such as Bo5 format and the size of Phillipe Chartrier.

 

[Moxie]

A note on your Dangerous Floaters @mrzz: Struff went out first round to your countryman Thiago Monteiro in Munich.

 

[El Dude]

Obviously, the past and patterns can only tell us so much, but it's a bit funny coming from you, the cautioning of reading too much into them. In any case, I think what would really diminish Rafa's chances at RG is if his form doesn't pick up. His A-game has only appeared in flashes. As you say, I think it does matter that he's lost only to a very good Fognini and white-hot Thiem, and Madrid is not the best indicator, whatever happens there. I do think he can win RG w/o a title on clay previous to it, as long as his form is there. Some of the reasons that he has won RG so many times are not options at other tournaments...such as Bo5 format and the size of Phillipe Chartrier.

It is only "a bit funny" if you think I take my historical inquiries more seriously than I actually do. I have said, again and again (and again) that they aren't meant to be definitive - they are explorations, meant for fun and to give me a better sense of things, but not to come up with the One Final True Answer.

That said, I think it is more meaningful to look at precedents across a wide range of players, than one single player. To say that Rafa has never won RG without winning at least one earlier clay tournament isn't all that meaningful or predictive. But to say that all 6+ Slam winners have accomplished X-Y-and-Z is more predictive...but still not definitive, as precedents are always broken (e.g. Stan being the first 3+ Slam winner to win his first Slam at age 28).

I think we agree that his form in his last match in Rome will be the best indicator...at least up until we see him step onto the courts at Roland Garros.