GOAT? You go with your gut, these guys do it with science.

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by fleabitten, Apr 29, 2011.

  1. fleabitten

    fleabitten Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    697
    Location:
    surfing through tennisopolis.com
    The boys at the Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois have constructed a complex system of analysis to determine the greatest tennis player of all time.

    If you are really into this stuff, you'll love it, but it's going to be too technical for about 75% of this forum:

    http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0017249

    "In our top 10 list, there are 9 players having been number one in the ATP ranking. Our ranking technique identifies _____________ as the best player of the history of tennis. This could be a posteriori justified by the extremely long and successful career of this player. Among all top players in the history of tennis.... Prestige score is strongly correlated with the number of victories, but important differences are evident when the two techniques are compared....."
     
    #1
  2. tennisdad65

    tennisdad65 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,994
    Location:
    somewhere in calif
    what a waste of time.. is this what science has come to?
    ps. Rod Laver is not on the list :oops:
     
    #2
  3. tenis1

    tenis1 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    848
    Jimmy Connors. Not a bad conclusion.

    Federer #7 and Nadal #24. Tards are not going to like the science :)

    Here is the list, to make it easier:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2011
    #3
  4. Semi-Pro

    Semi-Pro Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    3,199
    Location:
    Toronto
    Good god, it's like a thesis paper.
     
    #4
  5. viduka0101

    viduka0101 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    2,333
    waste of time
     
    #5
  6. tenis1

    tenis1 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    848
    Interestingly #1, #3 and #4 are all left handed.
    8 left handers in the first 30.
     
    #6
  7. fleabitten

    fleabitten Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    697
    Location:
    surfing through tennisopolis.com
    Good god, don't jump to the answer. Make them at least look at all the pretty graphs and pie charts.
     
    #7
  8. Dilettante

    Dilettante Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,108
    Location:
    Katy Perry's belly button
    This was already posted, but this gives another chance to say that the conclusion —the list— is utter stupid.

    Just to talk about my country's players, just for an instance: Orantes is #15 (??) much ahead of Nadal (???) and ahead of Santana too. Nonsense.

    And Vilas, Edberg ahead of Federer... simply laughable.

    BTW, this is not exactly scientific, it's just statistics and statistics can be almost, almost as gut driven as threads in this forum. In fact I don't know if I've seen in this forum a GOAT list as moronic as this one.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2011
    #8
  9. tenis1

    tenis1 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    848
    I like the science :)
     
    #9
  10. ChipNCharge

    ChipNCharge Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,026
    Location:
    Green Country
    I think an interesting stat to know would be who won the highest percentage of tournaments they entered throughout their career (ie: Borg entered XXX number of ATP tournaments in his career, and he won 63 of them, or XX%)
     
    #10
  11. MethodTennis

    MethodTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,604
    the irony of you posting this.

    Djokovic not making top 4 here either and there 00's top 4 goes with what i said :L

    But i agree this is pointless, you can make stats say what ever the heck you want as long as you present them in the right way :)
     
    #11
  12. tenis1

    tenis1 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Messages:
    848
    LOL. The winner of "the most failed and clueless poll" award tries to twist this in his favor. Laughable.
     
    #12
  13. jackson vile

    jackson vile Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    9,828
    1) we have people in the list that are not yet finished with their careers
    2) Goes to show you that anyone can make a good argument for GOAT LOL



    GOAT = meaningless
     
    #13
  14. Bud

    Bud Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    31,165
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Okker and Dibbs can be co-goats, ahead of Laver :lol:

    - - -

    As someone stated, this study has been hashed and re-hashed on here ad nauseum.
     
    #14
  15. fleabitten

    fleabitten Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    697
    Location:
    surfing through tennisopolis.com

    So true! :)
    I agree. I think overall they are on the right path, but they seem to put too much stock in the length of a career (to me). There's still a level of subjectability to it.
     
    #15
  16. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    34,767
    Andre Agassi above Federer and Sampras is correct due to Olympics gold and French Open respectively.

    But all of them above Nadal is wrong.
     
    #16
  17. kishnabe

    kishnabe G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    17,107
    Location:
    Toronto
    That is the true thesis of this paper!
     
    #17
  18. rossi46

    rossi46 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,051
    Location:
    MIA
    If we go with our guts then the GOAT has to be Nalbandian
     
    #18
  19. Gut Check

    Gut Check Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Messages:
    569
    So-called scientists claim to have a foolproof method of objectively ranking players, then base it heavily on a subjective "prestige" factor they make up arbitrarily. I grade this thesis paper "F" for Fail.
     
    #19

Share This Page