Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 9 topics

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: May 17 08:14AM -0700

Op woensdag 17 mei 2017 00:17:35 UTC+2 schreef arahim:
> Outdoor Grass: Federer 2-1 (Nadal 33.33%, Federer 66.67%)
 
> Equalizing for surfaces (If they played a 100 on each surface):
> Nadal 198.21, Federer 201.79
 
Something tells me TT is not going to like these stats!
 
However, this is what I (and others) have been arguing for years. They mostly met on Rafa's best surfaces, early in the year. I believe the first time met post-Wimbledon season was in 2013 (Fed's worst year since 2002 incidentally), excluding the YEC. That's why those samples sizes (in Fed's favour) are so small.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: May 17 08:21AM -0700

Op woensdag 17 mei 2017 11:59:30 UTC+2 schreef John Liang:
 
> This is actually meaningless,
 
I disagree. It's one way to show how much the overall h2h stat itself is misleading.
 
> the important stats is how well they did against the pool of competitors they faced. Purely on the stats you showed Nadal should also have more hard court slam titles because most of the slam are played in outdoor venues, but the reality is Federer won more on hard court because he was superior against the same competition they both faced.
 
Fair enough. Still doesn't make it meaningless. A perhaps more fair statistical analyses would be a breakdown of h2h between varying surface speeds. Still, the outdoor h2h stat tells us that the matchup favours Rafa, in those conditions, regardless of who is the better overall player.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 17 05:23PM +0200

>> Nadal 198.21, Federer 201.79
 
> Something tells me TT is not going to like these stats!
 
> However, this is what I (and others) have been arguing for years. They mostly met on Rafa's best surfaces, early in the year. I believe the first time met post-Wimbledon season was in 2013 (Fed's worst year since 2002 incidentally), excluding the YEC. That's why those samples sizes (in Fed's favour) are so small.
 
 
You don't have to be Einstein to realize they've met mostly on
surface favouring Nadal.
 
So it was never about the fact Nadal led h2h, but "how much" he led.
 
Nadal had disproportionate success rate vs Federer, at least until
this AO final.
 
Now that's gone.
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
arahim <arahim_arahim@hotmail.com>: May 17 09:31AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 8:21:58 AM UTC-7, kaennorsing wrote:
> Op woensdag 17 mei 2017 11:59:30 UTC+2 schreef John Liang:
 
> > This is actually meaningless,
 
> I disagree. It's one way to show how much the overall h2h stat itself is misleading.
 
Exactly.
 
> > the important stats is how well they did against the pool of competitors they faced. Purely on the stats you showed Nadal should also have more hard court slam titles because most of the slam are played in outdoor venues, but the reality is Federer won more on hard court because he was superior against the same competition they both faced.
 
> Fair enough. Still doesn't make it meaningless. A perhaps more fair statistical analyses would be a breakdown of h2h between varying surface speeds. Still, the outdoor h2h stat tells us that the matchup favours Rafa, in those conditions, regardless of who is the better overall player.
 
Nadal and Federer never met at USO. There is no question about who avoided whom more there and if they had played who would win...in the land of would and could. And there are other factors.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 17 09:49AM -0700

HahahHahajah what happened in Wimbledon 2008?! HAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHAH hahahhaah
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 17 09:51AM -0700

Hahjahahhahahhah lol you go Fedfans! Must be why you all absolutely hate Nadal so much eh! Lolol this is too funny!
fymido_lenito@yahoo.com: May 17 09:11AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 3:20:00 AM UTC-7, arahim wrote:
 
> Murray hit 30 a couple of days ago and Djokovic will do so in another 5 days at which point the top five will all be over 30.
 
> Tsonga, Berdych, Mofils are in the top 15 at over 30. Still threatening the top 10 or finally passed for good by the under 30 crowd?
 
> There are another 6 who are 35 or above in the top 100. Karlovic the oldest at 38 and the previous persistent number 5 Ferrer now 35.
 
I still expect them to retire in their "coming of age" order ie. Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray. Five years ago, I would have said Nadal/Federer/Djokovic/Murray. Federer's recent successes have masked the fact that he will be 36 in 2 months. It takes just one more injury or losing a tiny bit of your speed and/or reflexes. Agassi became No.1 in 2003, yet his form sliding down pretty quickly from 2004 onwards.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 17 09:40AM -0700

Age of the Young Guns! Lol
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 17 09:42AM -0700

Nonsense, Fed wrecked his knee last year and came back and won the AO! The field is ripe for the pickings, why on earth would he retire?!
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 17 09:43AM -0700

Also other players, linesmen, officials etc are counting on him to boost their wages with pay-offs etc he has others to think about too!
ahonkan <ahonkan@gmail.com>: May 17 01:27AM -0700

On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 17:59:22 UTC+5:30, soccerfan777 wrote:
> Elder one is Prisha (girl) and younger one is Rishan (boy)
 
They look like original names. Haven't heard them before. Nice ones!
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: May 17 08:59AM -0700

Thanks Ahonkan
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 17 06:17AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 10:30:03 PM UTC+10, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > You certainly did not have any complaints about players like Sampras exploring his WOW when he was facing tier 0 greats in a lot of his slam finals.
 
> I don't care about WoO. Sampras exploited it less due to shorter
> career.
 
Sampras did not only just exploit the WoW but he also had lame competitions.
 
> But Sampras took care of other greats very convincingly.
 
Other greats ? there was only 1 great that was at his peak during Sampras' career, yes, he convincingly took care some of tier 1 or 0 great.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 17 06:24AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 8:30:03 AM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > You certainly did not have any complaints about players like Sampras exploring his WOW when he was facing tier 0 greats in a lot of his slam finals.
 
> I don't care about WoO. Sampras exploited it less due to shorter
> career.
 
There is ample scope for WoO to manifest in a 12-year period.

> But Sampras took care of other greats very convincingly.
> --
 
You need to give more respect to the three *exceptional* 10+ slam winners currently playing.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 17 06:26AM -0700

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:34:07 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > > I thought it was crowds shouting "WoOoOoOoO!"
 
> > Is that the Seminoles chant?
 
> You mean when they're doing the tomahawk chop, or is that the Atlanta Braves? :) Not sure that still goes on. These days it might get fans arrested.
 
Let me check the next time I watch a Seminoles game.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 17 06:29AM -0700

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:30:02 AM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
> do it.
> He has all those slam trophies in his cabinet and that's it.
 
> But his boatness, well..
 
Sustained slam wins over a long period of time is better. To some the 2010 Nadal is a candidate for 'boatness', but we know how abysmal (for a BOAT) he is.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 17 04:31PM +0200


>> But Sampras took care of other greats very convincingly.
>> --
 
> You need to give more respect to the three *exceptional* 10+ slam winners currently playing.
 
They're great, but otoh getting used to someone and having an
permanent rivalry is essentially good for you and your game.

 
Sampras lacked percent rival and pressure from behind.
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: May 17 07:04AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 7:09:44 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
 
> Even if you believe Shara is 100% drug cheat, she has paid her dues & is
> out of suspension. The game has an obligation to allow the best players
> to compete for the biggest titles.
 
No one is talking about banning her from the sport, except maybe Bouchard. But by cheating and bringing shame to the sport as one of its best known representatives, she has been denied the *privilege* of getting a wildcard and has to work her way through qualification like anyone else. In this case, she has not built up enough points to play the qualies. I think it is an ethically sound decision.
 
From a monetary perspective, it is probably a terrible move but the French have never been the most capitalist people in the world. :)
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: May 17 07:05AM -0700

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:16:50 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
> I don't think it's a good decision. She served 15 months. How long did doper Cilic serve? 4 months and then wasn't he given wildcards into events including at slams?
 
I am not completely familiar with the Cilic case, but two wrongs do not make a right. Are you insinuating that there is a gender bias here? :)
reilloc <reilloc@gmail.com>: May 17 08:57AM -0500

On 5/17/2017 6:46 AM, The Iceberg wrote:
> That's why he didn't even bother to use a clip like Agassi Rafter at Wim 2001.
 
Obviously, he's Putin's man and only posts about tennis to try to
justify his presence here. Clearly, he's laying the groundwork to
contend that the Trump golf swing's the definitive stroke in that game,
that any detractors should be gulagged.
 
LNC
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: May 17 02:41PM +0100

On 17/05/2017 13:42, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> The idiot pollsters got the total wrong result for UK general election 2015, Brexit and Trump.
 
As I wrote before - Corbyn to be PM next month then.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 17 06:27AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 9:18:56 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
 
> > Assuming that Nadal doesn't get dusted in an early round of the FO, it might make winning the thing more satisfying if he beats Federer along the way, but from Federer's perspective, who cares about wallowing with Nadal in the dirt? Roger has bigger fish to fry in London. Maybe chips too.
 
> There's a bigger fish than calendar slam?
 
Wimbledon and USO are Federer's best chance to win more slams, Federer made a realistic assessment of his chance at FO so there is nothing illogical about his decision to pull out to maximized his chance at Wimbledon and also reduce the chance of injury at most grinding tournament in tennis.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 17 06:37AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 7:18:56 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
 
> > Assuming that Nadal doesn't get dusted in an early round of the FO, it might make winning the thing more satisfying if he beats Federer along the way, but from Federer's perspective, who cares about wallowing with Nadal in the dirt? Roger has bigger fish to fry in London. Maybe chips too.
 
> There's a bigger fish than calendar slam?
 
Barring a Nadal injury, no chance for Federer, so best to be realistic and try to increase the slam count, arguably the next bigger fish.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 17 06:32AM -0700

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:37:58 AM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> Oh no he doesn't cos he's just a Big Chicken who's scared to play Nadal on clay!
 
AO 2017. A memorable day, Jan 29, 2017.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 17 06:33AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 8:55:47 AM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> Maybe your hero Bouchard can try to be a bit more like Murray and win Wimbledon one day LOL
 
When will Andy win AO? When will he come out of the escapist 'not meant to be' mindset??
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment