PDA

View Full Version : Last Years Championship Lindsay should have won!


usher3103
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:25 PM
As I am eager for this years End of Season Championship I was looking back at the draws for the years 2004 and 2005. I noticed that in 2004 in the Red Group was Myskina and Serena Williams both with 2 wins and 1 loss. However in the round robin stage when the two played Serena beat Myskina, but Myskina won 5 sets and only lost 2 whereas Serena won 5 and lost 3. Therefore Myskina was the winner of that group making Serena the runner up. Therefore the system of deciding on who wins a group is based on the most wins and least loses and then if thats a tie, the most set wins and least set losses.

But in the 2005 draw I noticed in the green group Maria Sharapova finished ahead of Lindsay Davenport even though they both had 2 wins 1 loss and sharapova played 8 sets winning four and losing 4 whereas lindsay davenport played 7 sets winning 5 and losing 2. Therefore even if sharapova beat davenport in the round robin I still believed that the winner of a group was determined on how many wins they had and if it was a tie then the player who had played the least sets and won more sets than they lost was the winner, following the previous years scoring. I therefore believe that if the system was correct Lindsay Davenport would have won the group then she would have gone on to play Mauresmo, which I am in no doubt she would have won considering that last year they played 3 times last year Lindsay winning 6-7, 7-6, 6-4 at Wimbledon, 6-4, 6-4 in New Haven and 6-2, 6-4 in Filderstadt. Even if Maria had then beat Pierce the other semi finalist or Pierce beat Maria I am sure Lindsay could have raised her game and then maybe beaten them too in order to take the title. Does anyone have input on the matter and as to why the draw was laid out in that way. Thanks

tennisIlove09
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:29 PM
coulda, woulda, shoulda, DIDNT

Andrew..
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:34 PM
coulda, woulda, shoulda, DIDNT
CliffNotes presents: The Career of Lindsay Davenport.

-jenks-
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:35 PM
As I am eager for this years End of Season Championship I was looking back at the draws for the years 2004 and 2005. I noticed that in 2004 in the Red Group was Myskina and Serena Williams both with 2 wins and 1 loss. However in the round robin stage when the two played Serena beat Myskina, but Myskina won 5 sets and only lost 2 whereas Serena won 5 and lost 3. Therefore Myskina was the winner of that group making Serena the runner up. Therefore the system of deciding on who wins a group is based on the most wins and least loses and then if thats a tie, the most set wins and least set losses.

But in the 2005 draw I noticed in the green group Maria Sharapova finished ahead of Lindsay Davenport even though they both had 2 wins 1 loss and sharapova played 8 sets winning four and losing 4 whereas lindsay davenport played 7 sets winning 5 and losing 2. Therefore even if sharapova beat davenport in the round robin I still believed that the winner of a group was determined on how many wins they had and if it was a tie then the player who had played the least sets and won more sets than they lost was the winner, following the previous years scoring. I therefore believe that if the system was correct Lindsay Davenport would have won the group then she would have gone on to play Mauresmo, which I am in no doubt she would have won considering that last year they played 3 times last year Lindsay winning 6-7, 7-6, 6-4 at Wimbledon, 6-4, 6-4 in New Haven and 6-2, 6-4 in Filderstadt. Even if Maria had then beat Pierce the other semi finalist or Pierce beat Maria I am sure Lindsay could have raised her game and then maybe beaten them too in order to take the title. Does anyone have input on the matter and as to why the draw was laid out in that way. Thanks

If there is a two way tie, it is determined by who won the match.

If there is a 3 way tie, it is determined by sets won/lost

usher3103
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:35 PM
whats all that about

tennisIlove09
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:36 PM
CliffNotes presents: The Career of Lindsay Davenport.

:o Aint that the truth.

usher3103
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:36 PM
as i said in 04 myskina and williams both won 2 lost 1 and serena beat myskina but still finished runner up in group

terjw
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:36 PM
I thought the system for deciding what to do if 2 players were tied was the result of the match they played against each other.

If there is a 3 way tie - you can get into the situation where A beat B, B beat C, C beat A and you get into least sets lost and then least games lost.

Matt01
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:36 PM
:lol:

Lindsay was robbed ;)

MH0861
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:38 PM
as i said in 04 myskina and williams both won 2 lost 1 and serena beat myskina but still finished runner up in group

Lindsay also finished 2-1 in that group.

usher3103
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:41 PM
Lindsay also finished 2-1 in that group.

Lindsay only had a set record of 4-3 which meant that she hadnt done as good as myskina or williams in matches thats why she never qualified, but last year she beat sharapova in terms of perfromance in matches but still finished runner up

johnoo
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:43 PM
I thought the system for deciding what to do if 2 players were tied was the result of the match they played against each other.

yes thats how they do it.

usher3103
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:45 PM
yes thats how they do it.

So the reason that lindsay didint qualify in 04 was because there was three people all the same and they do the how many sets won and games etc, but in 2005 she finished second because when 2 people are equal they take thre result of the match they played and the winner finishes top.

Cheers for sorting that out I was losing me mind over that

MH0861
Oct 22nd, 2006, 08:54 PM
Lindsay only had a set record of 4-3 which meant that she hadnt done as good as myskina or williams in matches thats why she never qualified, but last year she beat sharapova in terms of perfromance in matches but still finished runner up

Yeah, but since all 3 were 2-1, they went to sets won/lost, right? That's how Myskina ended up ahead of Serena in the group, despite losing to her.

When 3 people have the same record (ie, 2004 and Williams, Myskina, Davenport), it's sets won/lost.. when 2 people have the same record (ie, 2005, Sharapova and Davenport), it's whoever won the match between the two.

usher3103
Oct 22nd, 2006, 09:17 PM
Yeah, but since all 3 were 2-1, they went to sets won/lost, right? That's how Myskina ended up ahead of Serena in the group, despite losing to her.

When 3 people have the same record (ie, 2004 and Williams, Myskina, Davenport), it's sets won/lost.. when 2 people have the same record (ie, 2005, Sharapova and Davenport), it's whoever won the match between the two.

I bet people are getting bored of this now but I looked on the official match notes for last year and on page 23 of this web link:

http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/3/global/includes/TrackIt.asp?file=http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/3/global/Pdfs/events/2005/losangeles2_notes.pdf

It says that if Sharapova beats Petrova in round Robin stage she will finish first and if not davenport will finish first. Sharapova lost to Petrova 6-1, 6-2 so Davenport should have finished first according to the WTA.

tennisfan2480
Oct 22nd, 2006, 09:19 PM
It's actually simpler than that! Davenport lost Mary in last year's Semifinals, 6-7, 6-7. That could have easily been 7-6, 7-6, meaning, she's be in the Final against Mauresmo, having a great shot to win 2005's Championships.

esquímaux
Oct 22nd, 2006, 09:24 PM
coulda, woulda, shoulda, DIDNT*DEATH*

johnoo
Oct 22nd, 2006, 10:33 PM
I bet people are getting bored of this now but I looked on the official match notes for last year and on page 23 of this web link:

http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/3/global/includes/TrackIt.asp?file=http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/3/global/Pdfs/events/2005/losangeles2_notes.pdf

It says that if Sharapova beats Petrova in round Robin stage she will finish first and if not davenport will finish first. Sharapova lost to Petrova 6-1, 6-2 so Davenport should have finished first according to the WTA.
if I remember right there was a thread about this last nov,about what it said in the pdf and about what happened in that sharapova finished first,we never really got a proper answer then either so lets hope they sort it out this year :rolleyes: