IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results?? - TennisForum.com
View Poll Results: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results??
1ST SCENARIO: Player A (the consistent player) had a better season (SF/SF/F/F) 6 7.50%
1ST SCENARIO: Player B (the inconsistent player) had a better season (W/3R/W/1R) 63 78.75%
2ND SCENARIO: Player A (the consistent player) had a better season (SF/SF/SF/F) 17 21.25%
2ND SCENARIO: Player B (the inconsistent player) had a better season (2R/W/SF/4R) 39 48.75%
3RD SCENARIO: Player A (the consistent player) had a better season (SF/SF/SF/SF) 22 27.50%
3RD SCENARIO: Player B (the inconsistent player) had a better season (F/4R/F/4R) 30 37.50%
Inconsistency but with big results is always better than consistency without big results 37 46.25%
Consistency in spite of no big results is always better than inconsistent results 3 3.75%
Too hard to say. 14 17.50%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 01:33 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Matt-TennisFan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 229
                     
IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results??

Ok so I needed to create this thread before the off-season ended

I think it's always important in the GOAT debate or in the "real/true" No.1 discussions, to know what is valued more: consistency with no big results or inconsistency with big results.

Everyone has a different opinion, of course, but I'd like to know the overall majority's opinion and taking into consideration different hypotetical outcomes.

Which of the following "scenarios" Grand Slam seasons do you think is better?
(Player A will be our consistent player, and Player B will be our inconsistent but winner player)


1st Scenario:

PLAYER A

Australian Open: SF
Roland Garros: SF
Wimbledon: F
US Open: F

PLAYER B

Australian Open: W
Roland Garros: 3R
Wimbledon: W
US Open: 1R

2nd scenario:

PLAYER A

Australian Open: SF
Roland Garros: SF
Wimbledon: SF
US Open: F

PLAYER B

Australian Open: 2R
Roland Garros: W
Wimbledon: SF
US Open: 4R

3rd and final scenario:

PLAYER A

Australian Open: SF
Roland Garros: SF
Wimbledon: SF
US Open: SF

PLAYER B

Australian Open: F
Roland Garros: 4R
Wimbledon: F
US Open: 4R


The Poll is multiple choice so you can vote for all the scenarios.

Have fun and discuss (without rudeness or bashing please!)
Matt-TennisFan24 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 01:36 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 663
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

I'd rather win one slam and lose in R1 of all other slams than to reach final of all 4 slams and win none. Why?

Because in 50 years, nobody will give a shit who made quarters, semis or finals. People remember slams, nobody cares about the loser or the underachiever. Thus nobody will remember that someone lost several times in R1 one of a slam - but people will remember the slams that the player won.
ExtremespeedX is offline  
post #3 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 01:40 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Matt-TennisFan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 229
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremespeedX View Post
I'd rather win one slam and lose in R1 of all other slams than to reach final of all 4 slams and win none. Why?

Because in 50 years, nobody will give a shit who made quarters, semis or finals. People remember slams, nobody cares about the loser or the underachiever. Thus nobody will remember that someone lost several times in R1 one of a slam - but people will remember the slams that the player won.
I agree in some part, but isn't it a bit embarassing to lose early in a Slam when you're considered a favourite?

Meanwhile on the other side you are always in the mix for the title and you fall just towards the end, but you show how you managed to be top 4 or top 2 in all the important tournaments.
Matt-TennisFan24 is offline  
 
post #4 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:08 AM
Look who's back!
 
Sean.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 32,452
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Even if you never win a match again in your life you'll still go into the history books and be remembered as a Slam Champion, the highest accolade in your sport.

As things stand in the future Na Li is more likely to be remembered than Jankovic, even though Jelena was number one and had a very consistent year.



Vera Zvonareva * Ana Ivanović * Li Na * Laura Robson ......
Sean. is offline  
post #5 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:14 AM
Back in April 2017
 
Jimmie48's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 27,176
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremespeedX View Post
I'd rather win one slam and lose in R1 of all other slams than to reach final of all 4 slams and win none. Why?

Because in 50 years, nobody will give a shit who made quarters, semis or finals. People remember slams, nobody cares about the loser or the underachiever. Thus nobody will remember that someone lost several times in R1 one of a slam - but people will remember the slams that the player won.
Bullshit theory, do you really want to claim that people remember Iva Majoli over more accomplished players who've never won a slam?

Consistency is always more difficult to archive, playing at the top level for several years and staying motivated and healthy is much harder than just peaking for 1-2 events.
Jimmie48 is offline  
post #6 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:19 AM
Senior Member
 
ElusiveChanteuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 83,595
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmie48 View Post
Bullshit theory, do you really want to claim that people remember Iva Majoli over more accomplished players who've never won a slam?

Consistency is always more difficult to archive, playing at the top level for several years and staying motivated and healthy is much harder than just peaking for 1-2 events.
Not everyone remembers but definitely worth mentioning for sure. Caro is also worth mentioning, so far becoming #1 without winning a slam yet. but she definitely won't be remembered/mentioned until some other players who will become slamless #1 like her.
ElusiveChanteuse is offline  
post #7 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 663
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmie48 View Post
Bullshit theory, do you really want to claim that people remember Iva Majoli over more accomplished players who've never won a slam?
Yes. Slam > no slam. Is it so hard to understand? I remember Iva Majoli for the slam. Dementieva for Olympic gold etc... nobody cares about them consistently losing in big tournaments...Nobody remembers consistent losers

Quote:
Consistency is always more difficult to archive, playing at the top level for several years and staying motivated and healthy is much harder than just peaking for 1-2 events.
Consistency is difficult to achieve when you win big events like Federer or Graf who were both consistent and won big titles, not New Haven or Brussels and your only top 10 scalp is Schiavone
ExtremespeedX is offline  
post #8 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:22 AM
Back in April 2017
 
Jimmie48's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 27,176
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremespeedX View Post
Yes. Slam > no slam. Is it so hard to understand?
It's not hard to understand, it's simply wrong and has little to do with reality but is based on your absurd overvaluation of slams.
Jimmie48 is offline  
post #9 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:24 AM
Senior Member
 
ElusiveChanteuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 83,595
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

But in this "who has better season" case, I'd go with the one with more consistent results. But I personally would win a slam rather than #1 in my career. You can only have about 48 chances (96 weeks max) in a normal career (let say 12 years) to win a slam but you have about 12 years time to become #1. Not saying that winning a slam is harder to achieve, but it's definitely more precious in terms of achievement. As #1, you can get it without big results. But winning a slam, if you don't push hard, you can never get it for sure.
ElusiveChanteuse is offline  
post #10 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:25 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 663
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmie48 View Post
It's not hard to understand, it's simply wrong and has little to do with reality but is based on your absurd overvaluation of slams.
Slams are only overvalued for fans of players who can't win them.
ExtremespeedX is offline  
post #11 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:32 AM
Back in April 2017
 
Jimmie48's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 27,176
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremespeedX View Post
Slams are only overvalued for fans of players who can't win them.
Yeah, cling to that...it's the last thing you have and she can take it away as early as four weeks from now... and then your empty pathetic hater life has run out of options
Jimmie48 is offline  
post #12 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:33 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 663
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmie48 View Post
Yeah, cling to that...it's the last thing you have and she can take it away as early as four weeks from now... and then your empty pathetic hater life has run out of options
If Dullniacki wins a slam, I will never insult her again.
ExtremespeedX is offline  
post #13 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:35 AM
Senior Member
 
ElusiveChanteuse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 83,595
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremespeedX View Post
If Dullniacki wins a slam, I will never insult her again.
*subscribes*
ElusiveChanteuse is offline  
post #14 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:36 AM
銀の龍の背に乗って
 
TIEFSEE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 糸
Posts: 101,551
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

Player B in three situations.


急げ悲しみ 翼に変われ
急げ傷跡 羅針盤になれ
TIEFSEE is offline  
post #15 of 53 (permalink) Old Dec 29th, 2011, 02:45 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,825
                     
Re: IMPORTANT POLL: Consistency without big results VS Inconsistency with big results

I chose player B in three situations as well. But wouldn't choose definitively, inconsistency with results, is always better than consistency without results.

But under these scenarios, I chose player B three times.
Excelscior is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome