Is the difference between the big 4 and the others hitting out of the corners?

[dominikk1985]

To me it looks like most top50 players now have very good modern strokes. a lot of them can hit 90 mph FHs and hit very hard and consistent. out of the middle of the court (or one of the corners when they are sitting on one corner in the CC rally) they hit very well but once they are stretched out far usually their shots become a lot weaker especially at the BH side (most can hit a FH on the run but fewer can do the same on the BH).

the big 4 on the other hand can still hit very penetrating when they are stretched out to the side. the other players do reach those balls too but they have to play it more defensive.

this becomes obvious if guys like tsonga play Novak or fed. tsonga can hit those 100 mph FHs (certainly harder than nole) but against those players he is still often in defense).

ferrer is a little in between. he is a little better out of the corners than Tsonga and the other hard hitters (he usually beats those big hitters pretty badly too) but not as good as the top4.

so why are the big 4 (especially nole is very good in this) so much better out of the corners, especially on the BH side? and why can't the other hitters duplicate that? in a normal CC rally all the players look relatively equal but this changes if a player has to stretch out.

 

[luvforty]

you know what - I have in the other thread about FH over-discussion.

I don't think it's hitting out of the corners.

if you look at pro stats, what decides matches are 2nd serve points won, 1st serve points won, and BP conversion.

I'd say for the current top 4, Joke and Murray are their because of their returns... Fed is there because of his serve... Rafa is of his athleticism.. (just saying their dominating strength).

 

[luvforty]

here is the explanation.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/MatchFacts.aspx

look at the serving game and the return game stats.

shows what is really deciding matches... yet everybody here just talks about the FH

the very eye-catching part is how rafa, joker, murray dominate the leader board on the return page, while seems only Fed has some good showing on the serving page.

very interesting!

 

[5263]

you know what - I have in the other thread about FH over-discussion.

I don't think it's hitting out of the corners.

if you look at pro stats, what decides matches are 2nd serve points won, 1st serve points won, and BP conversion.

I'd say for the current top 4, Joke and Murray are their because of their returns... Fed is there because of his serve... Rafa is of his athleticism.. (just saying their dominating strength).

Of course all these things converge at some point and the above along with hitting from
the corners are important items.

From my perspective and charting, imo it most often comes down to who handles the
mid court balls better....at least in matches where no player is
completely out-classed. Unless having a bad day, they tend to serve and rally well enough
to hold serve or at least get their share of mid ct balls to attack,
but it takes a guy who can execute on a high level on the mid ct attacks to
consistently avoid the break, as well as earn the break given the chances.

 

[5263]

Unless having a bad day, they tend to serve and rally well enough
to hold serve or at least get their share of mid ct balls to attack,
but it takes a guy who can execute on a high level on the mid ct attacks to
consistently avoid the break, as well as earn the break given the chances.

This is another reason the Fh is so important for tactics.
Most often it is the Mid ct Fh attack that makes the difference.
In the rare case of a player like DJ, it is super hard to deal with a guy
with finishing talent like that off both wings.

 

[luvforty]

Of course all these things converge at some point and the above along with hitting from
the corners are important items.

From my perspective and charting, imo it most often comes down to who handles the
mid court balls better....

so in the context of talking about the big 4... the stats is showing that the difference maker is the service return shot in the return game... not the mid court shot in the return game.... otherwise joker/rafa/murray would also dominate the serving game page, but they don't.

stats are stats.

on a side note, I think the ranking being more relevant to the return than to the serve, is due to the conditions generally being slow today than say 10 years ago, otherwise the board leaders on the serving page would be higher in rankings.

 

[5263]

so in the context of talking about the big 4... the stats is showing that the difference maker is the service return shot in the return game... not the mid court shot in the return game.... otherwise joker/rafa/murray would also dominate the serving game page, but they don't.

stats are stats..

Yes, stats are stats, but knowing how to read stats is critical to making use of them.
Maybe you don't realize that to dominate the serve stats means little
against another who has stats good enough to hold consistently. The stats
just need to be good enough to hold regularly....no need to be at the top of
that stat.

I've never collected stats on a match where the execution level on mid ct balls
did not jive with the result and I've charted many matches of all the big 4 against
others and against each other.

 

[luvforty]

Yes, stats are stats, but knowing how to read stats is critical to making use of them.
Maybe you don't realize that to dominate the serve stats means little
against another who has stats good enough to hold consistently. The stats
just need to be good enough to hold regularly....no need to be at the top of
that stat.

I've never collected stats on a match where the execution level on mid ct balls
did not jive with the result and I've charted many matches of all the big 4 against
others and against each other.

ok, show facts please..... the above is only anecdotal argument on some data points based on your perception.

 

[5263]

Yes, Breaking serve is dependent on getting the serve back without giving up
the easy put away...but it's not like they are hitting a bunch of winners on their
returns. It more about how they got the rtn back in play, then had the skills to
defend the point long enough to get their chance to attack in return.

 

[5263]

ok, show facts please..... the above is only anecdotal argument on some data points based on your perception.

No, I gave you facts of my charting. I respect that you don't care for my charting, and that's fine.
I was just sharing a different point of view that I have developed over the last
4-5 yrs.
Happy New Year

 

[dominikk1985]

Of course all these things converge at some point and the above along with hitting from
the corners are important items.

From my perspective and charting, imo it most often comes down to who handles the
mid court balls better....at least in matches where no player is
completely out-classed. Unless having a bad day, they tend to serve and rally well enough
to hold serve or at least get their share of mid ct balls to attack,
but it takes a guy who can execute on a high level on the mid ct attacks to
consistently avoid the break, as well as earn the break given the chances.

please don't derail that thread into another FH thread (and don't forget that a FH return is a FH too).

I agree that a match is usually about who handles the mid court balls better. even if two top20 players match this is true.

but with the top4 it seems to be a little different. usually it is the first player who is able to drive the ball out and pull the opponent out wins the point. boris becker often said tennis is a fight for thee middle of the court (make the opponent hit there and drive him out of there). ferrer is fantastic at that and rec players should definitely do that too.

however the top4 unlike most other players are still able to counter and keep the pressure up if they are pushed into the corners. of course they want to avoid that too and often do but if they cannot they still can win the point.

 

[luvforty]

in my thread about FH over-discussion I have presented the data, and the explanation of the data, which explains why the top 4 is top 4, and why the first exchange (the serve and the return) decides ranking, not the stuff afterwards (including the mid court ball).

each of the top 4, actually deserves a little bit different explanation... I will lay out their ranking in the sequence of

1st serve won
2nd serve won
return 1st serve won
return 2nd serve won

Fed - 18, 1, 14, 17. so Fed is Fed, because when starting neutral, his variety and court sense puts him ahead of the pack.... but when starting from slightly behind in the point, he is not fairing too well (chip return of serve)

Rafa - 14, 2, 1, 3. none of the top 4 are monster servers, so that explains the 1st serve points rankings..... but Rafa's return game is at/near the top.

Murray - 17, 11, 10, 1.... among the top 4, murray has the weakest 2nd serve.... and in the return game, he seems to be conservative against 1st serve, but really go after the 2nd serve.

Joke - 13, 5, 2, 2. .... again, solid 1st serve, very good 2nd serve, but he murders the returns on both 1st and 2nd.

so what does the above tell us -

1) you need a very good first serve, but not necessarily bomb people off the court.

2) you can get to the top with pure talent like Fed.... but he could have done a lot better if he can punish the 2nd serve better.

3) short of Fed's genius, aka the most of us, the most bang for the buck comes from punishing the 2nd serve... Joke, Murray, Rafa are the top 3 in doing that.

4) the stuff after the first exchange, rallies, volleys, or mid-court ball, are important, but they don't decide matches.... otherwise we would see SYMMETRY, instead of ASYMMETRY, in their stats between returning and serving points.

5) what can we learn? to get most bang for the buck out of your practice time.... RETURN OF SERVE !!!

 

[5263]

4) the stuff after the first exchange, rallies, volleys, or mid-court ball, are important, but they don't decide matches.... otherwise we would see SYMMETRY, instead of ASYMMETRY, in their stats between returning and serving points.

5) what can we learn? to get most bang for the buck out of your practice time.... RETURN OF SERVE !!!

I like the 1st 3 Ok, but these are just your opinion and maybe that of the announcers you hear talk so much about this.
The fact that those guys do so well on winning second serve points tell you little about
how they do it. Not sure how you watch Dj, Rafa, and Andy play 7-15 shot
rallys when returning a second serve, then figure how KEY the initial rtn was?
I've done charting on this due to the many announcer comments like yours.
Most all the pros make some good and some avg rtns, which is why making
a good second serve is so key to holding serve with all players.

Imo you are reading way too much into that stat and would agree that the OP
is a much better look on this if you want to isolate and try to point to one
asspect.

 

[5263]

please don't derail that thread into another FH thread (and don't forget that a FH return is a FH too).

I agree that a match is usually about who handles the mid court balls better. even if two top20 players match this is true.

but with the top4 it seems to be a little different.

Hey, I agreed right off the bat that the OP was a good point and just suggested
that it and several others will tend to converge at some point for a bigger pt.

I don't agree that the Fh rtn is a Fh in that context really. When talking Fhs for
me, your are talking BL std Fh unless a descriptor is added. A Fh rtn can be
many different kinds of Fh, and usually it's own special version of the Fh in
high level play.

Good that we agree about the OP as a good idea and also on handling mid ct
balls. While I agree there are some special corner wk with the big 3 returners,
imo it still eventually boils down to execution on mid ct balls and has been a
decider in every match I've charted. Remember that much of that corner work
is defending a mid ct attack!
-Not allowing the effective mid ct attack.

 

[luvforty]

lol 5263 you are still not getting it...

if your theory were true, then rafa, murray and joke should be near the top in winning 2nd serve points just as they are at the top for returning 2nd serve points.... in other words, them 3 managed to handle mid court balls really well in the 2nd serve returning points, but in their own 2nd serve points, they suddenly don't do too well with mid court balls.

you get it now?

I am not over reading the stats.... the fact is right there... sorry you don't see it.

 

[5263]

if your theory were true, then rafa, murray and joke should be near the top in winning 2nd serve points just as they are at the top for returning 2nd serve points.... in other words, them 3 managed to handle mid court balls really well in the 2nd serve returning points, but in their own 2nd serve points, they suddenly don't do too well with mid court balls.

Sorry
But your assumptions betray you.
You assume they don't play as well on their second serves, when they may be
playing about the same, but just fall lower vs the rankings due to others doing
better when serving.

I didn't even look up the stats, but are you saying Rafa wins more points when
returning second serves than when he hits a second serve?? Sounds like
you are and I don't expect that is what the stats say.....without me even
looking.

And that is just one of your many mistaken assumptions.

 

[luvforty]

goodness - you are really confused...

1) I am not saying they don't play as well during their own 2nd serve point... YOU are saying that!

look, in a 2nd serve point, what are the roles of the 2 players? in the first exchange, there is the server and the receiver... afterwards, both are ralliers. Your notion is that the better rallier wins (e.g. handling midcourt ball), my theory is the better server/receiver wins..... what is ranking stats say?

2) SYMMETRY does not mean one between the number of points won between serve points vs. return points....... it means the ranking in serve points won vs. the ranking in return points won..... there is obviously an advantage for the server... (or an dis-advantage in the case of WTA, or most rec amateurs)

3) so you said it yourself - rafa, murray and joke don't rank as well in their own 2nd serve points because 'other players play better'.... what exactly does that mean? the other players serve better, or the other players handle mid court balls better?

 

[5263]

. in other words, them 3 managed to handle mid court balls really well in the 2nd serve returning points, but in their own 2nd serve points, they suddenly don't do too well with mid court balls.

you get it now?

Here is what you stated :???:

 

[luvforty]

Here is what you stated :???:

lol that was an inference from your mid-court ball theory.... because if the mid court ball theory were true, then what I stated would be the only explanation why murray/joke does well on returns but not so much on serves... (and for Fed it's just the opposite, but the ASYMMETRY is the same).

 

[5263]

lol that was an inference from your mid-court ball theory.... because if the mid court ball theory were true, then what I stated would be the only explanation why murray/joke does well on returns but not so much on serves... (and for Fed it's just the opposite, but the ASYMMETRY is the same).

Lets continue on your thread since you have one like this, ok

 

[luvforty]

yup that's fine.

 

[dominikk1985]

@luvforty

serve and return are very important but percentages are not just dependend on those shots.

david ferrer is very high on serve percentages (11th at 85% hold percentage) and nobody would call him a monster server. the reason he holds so much is that he is a dominant baseliner.

however baselining is also not about FH and BH. Footwork is equally as important if not more as the actual swing technique (well of course having a modern FH stroke is more important than movement but since most top100 guys have great FH mechanics often footwork is the deciding factor).

everything works together, neither serve, return or baseline game stand alone (unless you serve like ivo).

I don't understand why you insist that FH swing technique is not important? it is very important, but not more than other aspects of the game.

 

[luvforty]

dom - I am not saying FH not important... I am saying the focus on the FH is out of balance, because the stats for the pros are saying that serve/return decide who wins.

(on the other hand I admit that pro stats may not apply to recs.).

yes I noticed Ferrer's stat, but I didn't mention him earlier because we were talking about the top 4 (I assumed rafa instead of the soon-to-be Ferrer).

Ferrer, similar to Rafa, has good symmetry in his rankings in serving vs. return.. and again, the explanation for these 2, can either be that serve/return does not make the difference, or they happen to do both really well.

but, these 2 are the exception.... among the top 4, the other 3 guys fed, joke, murry are asymmetric... and if you expand the scope to top 10, top 20, top 100 etc.... you will find dominantly asymmetry instead of symmetry.... which means that being the better server/returner (instead of being the better rallier), decides the major portion of the win/loss.

 

[TennisCJC]

The top 4 win for different reasons:

1. Federer wins because he is very aggresive on serve and off the ground, is very steady on the return, has offense and defense, and more variety than anyone.
2. Nadal wins because he can grind people down with heavy spinning groundstrokes and spinning lefty serve. Also, great determination and speed.
3. Djoko wins because he has incredible speed and fantastic at offense and defense from the baseline. Adequate serve.
4. Murray wins because he has good power on the 1st serve and survives his 2nd serve. Excellent on baseline - more touch than Djoko but not as much as Federer. 2nd best return in the game behind Djoko. Weakness is could be more offensive from baseline.

The difference between the others and the top 4 is overall quality of play. Ferrer is very steady but lacks the power and offense of big 4. Tsonga has great power but lacks defense and steadiness of big 4. Berdych and Del Po can blow thru a couple of sets with power, but sometimes their movement can be exposed by finesse (Federer) or consistency (Murray and Nadal).

To me, the big 4 are different - Fed has the best Serve, Nadal is a heavy top grinder with heart, Djoko a great offensive and defensive baseline but serve is adequate at best, and Murray with great 1st serve, weak 2nd serve, ground groundgame but lacking killer instinct off the ground.

I don't think the top 4 win because they are better in the corners. I think they are just overall better period. Best combination of power, consistency, variety, offense and defense.

 

[Avles]

here is the explanation.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/MatchFacts.aspx

look at the serving game and the return game stats.

shows what is really deciding matches... yet everybody here just talks about the FH

the very eye-catching part is how rafa, joker, murray dominate the leader board on the return page, while seems only Fed has some good showing on the serving page.

very interesting!

You're reading too much into these stats. Every point starts with a serve, so of course the best players will automatically have the best percentages of serve points and return points won-- because they're winning the most points.

This doesn't tell us much about the relative importance of serve/return vs. groundstrokes, because we don't know if those players are winning the points with their serves, their returns, their groundstrokes or (most likely) some combination.

For example, if the best players win the most second serve points, maybe that's because they have the best second serves, or maybe it's because second serves are most likely to lead to a neutral rally where their superior ground games can come into play. We don't know.

So you can't look at these numbers and say that serves/returns are "winning matches" rather than groundstrokes. At the very least you'd need to take rally length into account, and these stats don't do that.

 

[luvforty]

see my FH-overdiscussed thread... explained there.

 

[5263]

You're reading too much into these stats.

This doesn't tell us much about the relative importance of serve/return vs. groundstrokes, because we don't know if those players are winning the points with their serves, their returns, their groundstrokes or (most likely) some combination.

For example, if the best players win the most second serve points, maybe that's because they have the best second serves, or maybe it's because second serves are most likely to lead to a neutral rally where their superior ground games can come into play. We don't know.

So you can't look at these numbers and say that serves/returns are "winning matches" rather than groundstrokes. At the very least you'd need to take rally length into account, and these stats don't do that.

Well stated. I'm not sure where the disconnect is for him and can't figure
how he thinks winning a rtn OR a serve pt means your serve or rtn was the
main reason. It may be true at times, but as you said,
"We don't Know".

 

[Ash_Smith]

you know what - I have in the other thread about FH over-discussion.

I don't think it's hitting out of the corners.

if you look at pro stats, what decides matches are 2nd serve points won, 1st serve points won, and BP conversion.

I'd say for the current top 4, Joke and Murray are their because of their returns... Fed is there because of his serve... Rafa is of his athleticism.. (just saying their dominating strength).

Funny you should say this! I've just done some work on returns with our national deaf tennis team and I checked out the stats...

Heres how they look for 2012 (all numbers are percentages)

The top four (or five) have some seriously good stats on returns!

For the majority of players, the stats (both those above and those I have collected in terms of how points are finished) inform us there a a couple of "quick wins" - increase your first serve percentage, improve your control of the return to remain neutral off the first serve and dictate off the second serve.

Cheers

 

[5263]

The top four (or five) have some seriously good stats on returns!

Cheers

Awww C'mon Man, Ash,

In a game dominated by holding serve, you can't tell me you are surprised
that the best players are able to rtn well enough to get breaks of serve?

Wouldn't be way more surprised to find that was not the case?

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ I'm not surprised - but it really brought it into focus and made me realise how little time we spend dedicated to such an important shot.

 

[5263]

^^^ I'm not surprised - but it really brought it into focus and made me realise how little time we spend dedicated to such an important shot.

Those stats just told you the results of points that started with a rtn, and
nothing about the importance of the return stroke itself, right?

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ Correct, for those stats alone - but when you combine those stats with court return maps for the players you start to build a picture of just how much control those top guys have developed off the return and how much pressure they create to start the rally.

 

[5263]

Those stats just told you the results of points that started with a rtn, and
nothing about the importance of the return stroke itself, right?

Ash, maybe you can help me here. I didn't see it with luvforty's info, but

where is any of this info pointing to the quality of the rtn?
Sure we all know we have to get it back in play to win a rtn pt, but many rtns
are very weak where the pt is won and some are clean winners...with every-
thing inbetween too.
The rtn may be one of 10 shots that help get a pt into the win column in
those stats.

I'm in no way saying the rtn isn't very important...but just don't see how
those stats are even close to reflecting much about that importance other
than the grossly obvious. If there is one of those that has a direct reflection
on the quality of the rtn and how that effects outcomes,...pls point me to it.

 

[5263]

^^^ Correct, for those stats alone -.

Ok, I'm with you.

 

[Ash_Smith]

Ash, maybe you can help me here. I didn't see it with luvforty's info, but

where is any of this info pointing to the quality of the rtn?
Sure we all know we have to get it back in play to win a rtn pt, but many rtns
are very weak where the pt is won and some are clean winners...with every-
thing inbetween too.
The rtn may be one of 10 shots that help get a pt into the win column in
those stats.

I'm in no way saying the rtn isn't very important...but just don't see how
those stats are even close to reflecting much about that importance other
than the grossly obvious. If there is one of those that has a direct reflection
on the quality of the rtn and how that effects outcomes,...pls point me to it.

Those stats on their own should lead to further investigation of the type and quality of return, they are not definitive by themselves (only insofar as the top four or five are put up much better numbers than the rest). Only when you then look deeper and start mapping return placement and accounting for the pressure they create in respect of allowing a neutral start to the rally, a controlling start to the rally or even a winning start to the rally, do you start to see the whole picture (I am a bit sad, so have done this!!!).

 

[5263]

Only when you then look deeper and start mapping return placement and accounting for the pressure they create in respect of allowing a neutral start to the rally, a controlling start to the rally or even a winning start to the rally, do you start to see the whole picture (I am a bit sad, so have done this!!!).

I agree. I have done some of this charting, but not enough with the exact focus you
likely are looking for.
I looked at how pts are won, including the shot or 2 prior to the finish that
may have heavily influenced the finish.
I've not seen too many points where the control was snatched from the server
and turned over to the returner. So far what I'm seeing is the ability to rtn it
in play without it being a complete sitter is what is normal for the best returners.
I expect the threat for the occasional clean winner is helpful as well.

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^Yeah, I started to do it for the wheelies to see what trends were happening at a world class level in wheelchair tennis (our guys and girls make waaaay too many mistakes on the return!), so I wanted to see what the best wheelies were doing.

Once I had done that and started to work with our deaf team it made sense to carry it over to the ATP for reference for them, not got around to doing the WTA yet!

 

[luvforty]

a few thoughts -

1) Ash - yes, top 4 has eye-catching return stats; however my other thread about FH-overdiscussed, I did correlation analysis for the top 100, serve's importance still outweigh the return's.

2) how the point started is irrelevant.... this is a concept that 5263 still has difficulty grasping.... it is 'priced into' the serve stats.. since the serve points won % is already a collection of all the scenarios of how points are started - ace, serve winner, serve + sitting duck, serve + neutralized return, return winner, whatever.

3) the asymmetry of the serve correlation to ranking, vs. return correlation to ranking, indicates that rally ball performance is not as important as the serve... another concept that 5263 still struggling with.

4) pro stats don't apply to recs, wheelies.... complete different game... will need some match stats to analyze... typically 30 is the minimum.

 

[5263]

a few thoughts -

1) Ash - yes, top 4 has eye-catching return stats; however my other thread about FH-overdiscussed, I did correlation analysis for the top 100, serve's importance still outweigh the return's.

2) how the point started is irrelevant.... this is a concept that 5263 still has difficulty grasping.... it is 'priced into' the serve stats.. since the serve points won % is already a collection of all the scenarios of how points are started - ace, serve winner, serve + sitting duck, serve + neutralized return, return winner, whatever.

3) the asymmetry of the serve correlation to ranking, vs. return correlation to ranking, indicates that rally ball performance is not as important as the serve... another concept that 5263 still struggling with.

4) pro stats don't apply to recs, wheelies.... complete different game... will need some match stats to analyze... typically 30 is the minimum.

yes, I'm struggling to see how you needed enormous stats to learn that
good players can usually hold serve and players that win alot are
able to often break serve. I think the answer is even "Priced" into the
terminology, with discussion of holding serve as the norm and breaking
serve as somewhat of an accomplishment.

Are we really having this conversation about the obvious??

 

[luvforty]

^^ yeah, you still don't get what I have been talking about lol.

 

[5263]

^^ yeah, you still don't get what I have been talking about lol.

I don't see where anyone else has either. You are basically right though.
I don't really get your point.
I guess even though you seemed to try to say several things are the most
important shots at various times, your OP is that the FH is over discussed &
not one of the several "most important" shots to you based on ATP stats.
Is that it? :???:

Just to clear up one aspect. When you were saying the 2ond serve rtn was
the most important, did you mean the actual rtn or winning the 2ond serve
rtn point?

 

[luvforty]

I don't see where anyone else has either. You are basically right though.
I don't really get your point.
I guess even though you seemed to try to say several things are the most
important shots at various times, your OP is that the FH is over discussed &
not one of the several "most important" shots to you based on ATP stats.
Is that it? :???:

Just to clear up one aspect. When you were saying the 2ond serve rtn was
the most important, did you mean the actual rtn or winning the 2ond serve
rtn point?

not sure about 'anyone else'.... no evidence either way.
not 'several things' - top 4, the 2nd serve return; top 100, the serve.
when did we discuss 'one of the most important'? it was always about 'THE MOST important'.... let's stay on topic.
for the purpose of this discussion, the actual rtn is the same as winning the 2nd serve pt... I have already explained a dozen times why.

 

[5263]

when did we discuss 'one of the most important'? it was always about 'THE MOST important'.... let's stay on topic.

for the purpose of this discussion, the actual rtn is the same as winning the 2nd serve pt... I have already explained a dozen times why.

I was saying one of the most important in reference to your commenting
that first this one, then that one, was "the" Most important stroke, not the
way you use it above. No need to be rude with childish comments like "let's
stay on topic", especially the way you bounce around so on the topic.

Why? Because I could agree with you if you were speaking of the whole rtn
pt, given that is what your stats reflect, but have to say I can't agree in seeing
as in bold above.
And yes, the is some feedback from others, as Ash agree'd the stats don't show the bold above.

 

[luvforty]

didn't mean to be rude... I never said 'one of the most'... it's always about 'the most'... and it's always in a context - top 4, top 100, rec.... and I have stated clearly 'the most' in each context.

the bolded part - you still don't get it and I don't blame you.... people who don't do stats work usually will have difficulty in this stuff.

 

[5263]

didn't mean to be rude... I never said 'one of the most'... it's always about 'the most'... and it's always in a context - top 4, top 100, rec.... and I have stated clearly 'the most' in each context.

the bolded part - you still don't get it and I don't blame you.... people who don't do stats work usually will have difficulty in this stuff.

But you have said Most about more than one stroke. That is what I'm referring to.

Ok, thats fine, but your smug approach because you feel you know stats better
comes through stronger than you think. Folks with stats have also been often
blinded by them and led astray many times; especially when so smug about
their so called "educated status".

 

[luvforty]

more than 1 context, therefore more than 1 stroke.

on your 2nd paragraph - people who said money can' buy happiness, never had any.

 

[UCSF2012]

Get a room! It's you two going back and forth at each other the entire time. Get each others' email address, bash each other like hell, but remember to kiss and make up afterwards.

 

[luvforty]

This is ********. Players tend to win matches when they win more points or more critical points. No Shiit. The bigger question is, how do they win more points? Is it the inside out forehand that sets up the weak point? (a la Fed) Is it wrong footing the other player, backhand down the line block, super angle 70% shot?....etc, etc, etc

The Bryan Brothers' playbook is a bit more detailed: Player A-weak low backhand volleys - give dipping passing shots, tends to poach on matchpoints - return DTL, etc, etc.

lol you are not getting it either... and I don't blame you either.

 

[5263]

on your 2nd paragraph - people who said money can' buy happiness, never had any.

another mistake on your part. Mostly heard it from people with money talking about how it didn't bring them the happiness they expected.

 

[dominikk1985]

Hey guys stay on topic.

I like arguing too but if I want to spam I go to the current player forum and post something about nadal or fed.