View Single Post
Old 01-06-2013, 09:21 AM   #15
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,533

Thanks all for the comments, will post replies as a I have time.

Just a few quick replies now.

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
oh and I am assuming you calculated the RG 2008 final stat for nadal from the official website ? well those stats are totally wrong ...I don't know what the hell the statistician was doing !

I did the stats for the first set:

federer: 3 winners, 17 UEs, 7 forced errors
nadal : 6 winners, 4 UEs, 8 forced errors

they have :

federer : 9 winners, 12 UEs, 3 forced errors
nadal: 15 winners, 3 UEs , 3 forced errors

while you could say UEs are subjective, the winner counts are way off

federer won 52 points in that match, they have him @ 31 winners, nadal at 7 UEs, therefore federer only forced 14 errors from nadal ?

he had 31 winners , but forced only 14 errors from nadal?
Yes those official stats are messed up, but fortunately they don't have an impact on the AM. As long as the unforced errors can be trusted -- and they do look ok -- then the remaining points can be regarded as either forcing points or as clean winners, without worrying about how many exactly were clean winners. That's the problem with the official stats: the figures that they have for Winners are actually the number of points that each player won, in total, on serve (ie, Federer won 31 points on his own serve, Nadal won 46 on his own).

In 2007 the RG site also had a problem counting Winners, and I don't know how the Winners were calculated that year. Fortunately, again, it doesn't have an impact on the AM, so long as the Unforced Errors look reliable, which they do.

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
at wimbledon : 92 QF vs stich or 99 F vs agassi ?

Having actually watched those 2 matches , I feel sampras played a tad bit better in the stich match ( I can see the sampras fans angrily shouting here ! ) - especially returning wise ...

don't have the stats with me for either of the matches now , but I feel sampras' AM would be better in the 92 QF ....

want to see how many of those who watched both those matches agree with me !
The official Wimbledon stats in '99 have Unforced Errors that are completely unreliable. Those figures look like the total number of errors of every kind, forced and unforced. They've got Sampras at 51 unforced errors. NBC put Sampras at only 22, which looks right. Unfortunately I don't know the UE count that NBC had for Agassi, so AM's can't be calculated.

Do you have any idea what the UE counts were for the Stich match?

Or the UE count for Becker in the '95 Wimby final?

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
by aggressive ratio you mean : no of points won by a player through forcing/total number of points in the match

where no of points won by forcing = winners+errors forced from opponent ?
That would just be a measure of how aggressive a style a player has, and it would be clearly advantageous to big hitters.

I thought he meant:
(a player's points won by making winners and by forcing opponent into errors) / (a player's unforced errors).

krosero is offline   Reply With Quote