Objective way to define decline - Sets/Games lost to outside top 20 players

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by kragster, Mar 9, 2012.

  1. kragster

    kragster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,671
    I was trying to think of an objective way to measure decline. In general it's hard to measure the decline of a player by benchmarking against another player, because the other player's performance level is not a stationary quantity. But I think that if you benchmark top players vs a group, you probably get a much clearer picture. In particular I think benchmarking against players outside the top 20 is a great way to gauge decline.

    I would say 2 years of consecutively performing worse vs those outside the top 20 ( in terms of sets lost, not just matches lost) would be a good indicator of decline.

    I haven't pulled any numbers yet, hope someone like Mustard can do that :D
     
    #1
  2. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Why use outside top 20? Why not just look at their W-L records for a season. Calculate the average # of losses for a 3 to 4 year window and let that decide your peak years.
     
    #2
  3. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,778
    Why not go simply by ranking fall?
     
    #3
  4. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    BecAuse some people suggest that competition might get stronger or weaker over time.
     
    #4
  5. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Ask clarky.
     
    #5

Share This Page