WTT Champions Japan 2025 - 7-11 Aug 2025

[NextLevel]

Just for people who are not tennis fans who need to know much of an idiot TBH is:

Prior to 2008, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer faced each other 17 times, with Nadal leading the head-to-head 12-5. Nadal dominated on clay, winning all five encounters at the French Open, while Federer led on grass with a 2-1 advantage at Wimbledon. They never played each other at the US Open in this period.

Here's a breakdown of their matches before 2008:
Key Matches & Results:

• 2004 Miami Masters: Nadal won in straight sets (6-3, 6-3).
  
  
• 2005 French Open Final: Nadal defeated Federer in four sets (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3).
  
  
• 2006 French Open Final: Nadal won in four sets (1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6(4)).
  
  
• 2006 Wimbledon Final: Federer won in five sets (6-0, 7-6(5), 6-7(2), 6-3, 6-4).
  
  
• 2007 French Open Final: Nadal won in four sets (6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4).
  
  
• 2007 Wimbledon Final: Federer won in straight sets (7-6(7), 4-6, 7-6(3), 2-6, 6-2).
  
  
• 2007 Hamburg Masters Final: Federer won in straight sets (2-6, 6-2, 6-0).
  
  
• 2007 Tennis Masters Cup Shanghai: Federer won in straight sets (6-4, 6-1).
  

Overall Statistics (Pre-2008):

• Clay: Nadal led 7-1.
• Grass: Federer led 2-1.
• Hard Court: 2-2.
• Grand Slams: Nadal led 5-2.

 

[ThePongCommenter]

Just for people who are not tennis fans who need to know much of an idiot TBH is:

Prior to 2008, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer faced each other 17 times, with Nadal leading the head-to-head 12-5. Nadal dominated on clay, winning all five encounters at the French Open, while Federer led on grass with a 2-1 advantage at Wimbledon. They never played each other at the US Open in this period.

Here's a breakdown of their matches before 2008:
Key Matches & Results:

• 2004 Miami Masters: Nadal won in straight sets (6-3, 6-3).
  
  
• 2005 French Open Final: Nadal defeated Federer in four sets (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3).
  
  
• 2006 French Open Final: Nadal won in four sets (1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6(4)).
  
  
• 2006 Wimbledon Final: Federer won in five sets (6-0, 7-6(5), 6-7(2), 6-3, 6-4).
  
  
• 2007 French Open Final: Nadal won in four sets (6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4).
  
  
• 2007 Wimbledon Final: Federer won in straight sets (7-6(7), 4-6, 7-6(3), 2-6, 6-2).
  
  
• 2007 Hamburg Masters Final: Federer won in straight sets (2-6, 6-2, 6-0).
  
  
• 2007 Tennis Masters Cup Shanghai: Federer won in straight sets (6-4, 6-1).

Overall Statistics (Pre-2008):

• Clay: Nadal led 7-1.
• Grass: Federer led 2-1.
• Hard Court: 2-2.
• Grand Slams: Nadal led 5-2.

Looks like Gwen or ChatGPT failed him just as hard as it did when it told him that a 2000 USATT player has a 5-10% chance of beating a 2400 USATT player in a match.

Nadal - Federer head to head prior to 2008: 8-6 in favor of Nadal (dominant winning record for Federer, according to @TensorBackhand)
Including 2008 the year in which Nadal went 4-0 against Federer: 12-6 in favor of Nadal
After 2008: 12-10 in favor of Nadal. So 12-6 before and including 2008, and 12-10 after = "records flipped and Federer never really figured him out", according to TensorBackhand

 

[RefereeNumber2]

In 2008, Federer had a dominant winning record against Nadal. But those records flipped as Nadal improved, entered his prime, and Federer never really figured him out. So Nadal's old record was not at all indicative of their long-term average.

Your tennis knowledge is just as lacking as your knowledge of table tennis and basketball.

As @NextLevel pointed out, Nadal had a winning head to head against Federer at the start of 2008. And apparently unknown to you, Federer actually then won 7 out of their last 8 matches they played against each other. If Nadal had figured him out, was that just a string of bad shooting days from Nadal? Or did it possibly have something to do with Federer’s improved backhand and more aggressive tactics?

 

[NextLevel]

Looks like Gwen or ChatGPT failed him just as hard as it did when it told him that a 2000 USATT player has a 5-10% chance of beating a 2400 USATT player in a match.

Nadal - Federer head to head prior to 2008: 8-6 in favor of Nadal (dominant winning record for Federer, according to @TensorBackhand)
Including 2008 the year in which Nadal went 4-0 against Federer: 12-6 in favor of Nadal
After 2008: 12-8 in favor of Nadal. So 12-6 before and including 2008, and 12-8 after = "records flipped and Federer never really figured him out", according to TensorBackhand

Moral of the story - don't tell stories about things that people you are talking to actually lived through and followed. Chat GPT can only agree with them lol.

 

[TensorBackhand]

You have a way with words, I never said the historical records are meaningless, in fact, I have used them to propose a bet that is favorable to you that I can take the other side of. It just isn't so favorable to you that if Harimoto has genuinely and significantly improved, you still can't lose. Again are you willing to accept the following:

$50 for you if Wang wins 5 next match against Tomo.
$50 for me if Tomo wins any one of these matches.

Wang has a 10-1 record against Tomo in WTT events. The bet has a 62% chance of cashing well for you. Over to you.

Look at your odds-making. You have Wang as as massive 80% favorite.

After ALLL that argument about how you know so much about TT and how much Harimoto has improved and how he forced WCQ into error, in the end, your conclusion is still the same as mine: that whenever WCQ and Harimoto face off, WCQ would be a massive favorite.

Congratulations for proving my point. In the end, we both agree on the same thing. Today's result was a result of WCQ not playing to his normal level, and that long term, you still believe Harimoto will lose 80% of his matches against WCQ.

At least we are now in agreement! I agree with you, WCQ should be a significant favorite to win.

I'm satisfied with this conclusion and we obviously agree on the same thing. So this will be my last response to you. Good luck.

 

[NextLevel]

Your tennis knowledge is just as lacking as your knowledge of table tennis and basketball.

As @NextLevel pointed out, Nadal had a winning head to head against Federer at the start of 2008. And apparently unknown to you, Federer actually then won 7 out of their last 8 matches they played against each other. If Nadal had figured him out, was that just a string of bad shooting days from Nadal? Or did it possibly have something to do with Federer’s improved backhand and more aggressive tactics?

And his no longer playing as much on clay - that part cannot be left out. If he had continued to play on clay, it would still have been bad for him.

 

[NextLevel]

Look at your odds-making. You have Wang as as massive 80% favorite.

After ALLL that argument about how you know so much about TT and how much Harimoto has improved and how he forced WCQ into error, in the end, your conclusion is still the same as mine: that whenever WCQ and Harimoto face off, WCQ would be a massive favorite.

Congratulations for proving my point. In the end, we both agree on the same thing. Today's result was a result of WCQ not playing to his normal level, and that long term, you still believe Harimoto will lose 80% of his matches against WCQ.

At least we are now in agreement! I agree with you, WCQ should be a significant favorite to win.

I'm satisfied with this conclusion and we obviously agree on the same thing. So this will be my last response to you. Good luck.

You haven't accepted or rejected the bet. Not responding explicitly within the next 24 hours will be taken as rejection.

My conclusion is that Harimoto has improved, by how much I don't know, but I am willing to wager with some confidence that the historical record overstates the degree of difference, not enough to wager 50-50, but enough to wager on a 1-4 record or better for Harimoto in their next 5 matches. Since you are saying that Harimoto's win was a fluke, you should be taking the bet as you should be saying that the record is really 10-0, and that you are 100% sure to cash in lol. I could very well be wrong, but hey, I think my bet is reasonable.

 

[ThePongCommenter]

I'm satisfied with this conclusion and we obviously agree on the same thing. So this will be my last response to you. Good luck.

Convenient cop out while you furiously source-check Gwen about the Nadal-Federer head to head.

 

[NextLevel]

Convenient cop out while you furiously source-check Gwen about the Nadal-Federer head to head.

Thats how you can tell he is trolling, he has no comments on his obvious lies and errors.

 

[ThePongCommenter]

Thats how you can tell he is trolling, he has no comments on his obvious lies and errors.

Swallowing one's pride is hard for those who think they know it all, I find that these types are the ones who always get stuck in their table tennis progress, so checks out

 

[NetProphet]

I seriously don't get what everybody is clamoring about. I don't like to argue. Let's just make it simple.

From now until 2028, I will pay you $20 for each game that Harimoto takes off of WCQ. You pay me $20 for each game that WCQ takes off of Harimoto.

Fair Deal? Any takers?

If you are so confident that Harimoto caused WCQ to play poorly, its easy money for you right?
I could also easily be wrong. But my opinion right now is that WCQ played a bad game, had a "bad shooting night", but will recover. Since you all are so confident that WCQ played his best and Harimoto's brilliant strategy forced WCQ into error, come claim your free money from me.

@ThePongCommenter
@NextLevel
@piligrim
@NetProphet

Ah come on now.
You must be deliberately misreading, misunderstanding and ignoring all of the valid points that have been put to you.
It's easier to say fair enough guys, maybe you're right than turn this into WCQ has been better than TH for 5+ yrs so he should absolutely 100% not lose to him ever.

Even if WCQ played below his highest level (which is a fair statement given the result) can you not see how you come across as foolish for not recognising that TH played out of his skin and (to the eyes of most other ppl posting here) to a level that would have beaten almost anyone in the world on that day - watch it again!

Just give Tomo the credit he is due and restore our faith that you actually watched the same match as we did and stop with the silly "everyones a coward for not betting against the (I think based on LSDs early exit) new world number ONE"

 

[pongfugrasshopper]

"New" ranking is out, but it looks like someone at WTT accidentally just copied/pasted the previous week. No Yokohama results. Hopefully, they fix this soon.

 

[NextLevel]

 

[PandaPawg]

Thanks for the shameless promotion. I saw some views coming from this site, so I had to log back in to thanks whoever this is

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

while tb is dodging tennis and bets

tb, why are you not answering my table tennis question?

 

[Lazer]

Thanks for the shameless promotion. I saw some views coming from this site, so I had to log back in to thanks whoever this is

You made this video way to sloooow and to looong. Be more to the point...

Cheers
L-zr

 

[Bollwerk]

"New" ranking is out, but it looks like someone at WTT accidentally just copied/pasted the previous week. No Yokohama results. Hopefully, they fix this soon

Yokohama was still going on Monday, i guess only events ending the previous week get added. Feeder and Youth Contender are there, so it's not last week's ranking.

 

[TTTT]

"New" ranking is out, but it looks like someone at WTT accidentally just copied/pasted the previous week. No Yokohama results. Hopefully, they fix this soon.

Check out the "publication notes" for this week's update:

Added events

• WTT Feeder Spokane 2025 (USA)
• WTT Youth Contender Vientiane (LAO)

No expired events

 

[PandaPawg]

You made this video way to sloooow and to looong. Be more to the point...

Cheers
L-zr

The reason I stopped making YouTube videos is because of people like you. Literally nobody asked for your useless opinion. You make your comments waaaay too much and pointless. Make better points. Cheers

 

[ThePongCommenter]

The reason I stopped making YouTube videos is because of people like you. Literally nobody asked for your useless opinion. You make your comments waaaay too much and pointless. Make better points. Cheers

This guy is old and grouchy. Ignore him. We appreciate your analysis and your point about Harimoto stepping off the table to play more aggressive counterlooping rallies rather than the usual close-table safer blocking is realized by some. Unfortunately this thread also serves as a reminder of the people you mention in your intro who can't comprehend table tennis beyond "WCQ must have suddenly forgot how to play in the few hours between the SF and F even though he had been in dominant form all tournament and the one a few weeks prior".