Women's ELO Ratings of the Open Era

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by Wuornos, Feb 2, 2008.

  1. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #1
  2. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    ELO Ratings for Major Winners over the last 10 Years

    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #2
  3. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Methodology

    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #3
  4. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    What do the numbers mean?

    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #4
  5. boredone3456

    boredone3456 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,932
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    As usual, your numbers are very interesting, and while I will not argue the method, some of the placements are very surprising. Sanchez-Vicario coming out ahead of both Serena and Billie Jean is a shocker. Even when taking into to Consideration Serena erratic play...I would think her having twice as many majors as Vicario would put her ahead...and Billie Jean is such a legend its a shock. The top 4 are no surprise at all, although they points are so close that order could change. Some of the other players numbers are also interesting...if only because you would not think at a glance the numbers would be so high (clijsters, sabatini, and I will say Goolagong because she competed in arguably the toughest era in womens tennis...is that why she is so high?) but over all, very interesting..and I admire your dedication...I don't think I would have the patience to work out those numbers.
     
    #5
  6. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #6
  7. 1970CRBase

    1970CRBase Guest

    So the question comes to mind.

    Graf and Navratilova ended up 9-9. They only played twice on clay between 85 and 87 and never after.

    Supposing they had played one more match and it was on clay. Who would likely win that match and how would that hypothetical match change the list?
     
    #7
  8. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #8
  9. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Elo Ratings as a predictor.

    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #9
  10. 1970CRBase

    1970CRBase Guest

    Good job. Even before the result, I thought 59% - 41% probabilty was a reasonable assessment even though the WTA rankings would suggest otherwise and coming into this match Jelena was 3-2 vs Serena. Beat the match poll also, btw ;)
     
    #10
  11. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2008
    #11
  12. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Deleted as found unuseful by board members. :cry:
     
    #12
  13. 1970CRBase

    1970CRBase Guest

    wuornos

    I'm sorry about this. It doesn't help science at all. I'm not sure why you would lose your cool since you presented a solid method for your arguments and you probably can disregard all other opinions that are basically about somebody's personal likes and dislikes, but not based on better science, as being just noise.

    Take the women's ELO for example, I would have liked to see Graf on top. But I'd agree that Martina is the better player of the two... Or that Sanchez is very underrated compared to the bluster of the overrated Williamses though Sanchez only has half the majors of either of the two - she was unlucky to be in the Graf era. Remove Graf from the whole equation and Sanchez would probably have 8 - 10 slams. Women's ELO with it's method shows too that Sanchez was a far tougher competitor than the anti Graf camp would like to admit, hence you should expect lots of opinionated attacks since people don't like their pet preferences challenged.

    Fortunately I've saved the previous threads on the men's and women's ELOs. I enjoyed your posts and your hard work. Come back when you are ready :)
     
    #13
  14. Wuornos

    Wuornos Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    England
    Thank's 1970. At the end of the day, I'm just barking mad. :). I just sometimes go like this and everything goes a bit out of focus and I lose perspective. Give me a couple of days and I'm sure I will be feeling much better.

    Thanks for the support, I appreciate it.

    Regards

    Tim
     
    #14

Share This Page