"Simpson Paradox" and Federer

[DarthFed]

Its more difficult the other way around because you can't check as easily which matches he won as the ones he lost. But I went through the finals (not very thoroughly, only the ones that seemed tight) and none of those fitted the pattern.

Found one!

2000 Basel against Hewitt. Hewitt won one point more but lost the match

My memory is more sharp when it comes to failure than success (both for me and the teams/players I root for).

2008 Basel vs. Hewitt was not on my radar at all. 2006 YEC vs. Roddick probably doesn't fit in this paradox but that was a match where Roger saved 1 or 2 match points in the 2nd set and ended up winning the match.

You would to have to be family to Federer to remember that one. In 2000 Federer was ranked 29 or so and had yet to make a QF at a slam.

Ah, 2000 Basel, not 2008...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think the fundamental question here is what if anything this 4-24 means. Although
it would be nice to get a list of the matches, we should be able to answer it in abstract
without the list also.

 

[Haelfix]

The other strategy Ive noticed players doing is strategically tanking sets to conserve energy and then turning it on late game after getting Roger to lose rythm. In a lot of the five setters where he's lost, its often b/c he was generally ahead and then ran out of steam (or the opposing player outputs a great fourth or fifth set). Conversely, many of the five setters that he's won he's generally had to come from behind in.

That's very often the case in tennis and a psychological fact about sports. Its often easier to come from behind then it is to hang on to a tough win.

 

[Garro]

Funny I was just checking that one out but couldn't find the stats. Roger blew 5 match points that match. Again...similar pattern. Very tight matches with some very unclutch play.

Now the trick would be thinking up the 4 that he won where he had less points than the loser.

In addition to the one Denisovich mentioned, I found five others. One of them, 2000 US Open Peter Wessels, was a retirement. But even if you exclude that, the 4-24 statistic is still wrong. The other four are Xavier Malisse Wimbledon 2001, Angre Agassi US Open 2004, David Nalbandian WTF 2005 (group stage), and Milos Raonic 2012 Madrid Masters. The Agassi US Open match I should have guessed since it was one of the craziest matches condition wise. The others I would not have, but the Nalbandian one doesn't surprise me.