PDA

View Full Version : WTA Triangles (Bizzare H3H)


Cp6uja
Apr 12th, 2008, 09:01 AM
Today in Amelia will be played SF between Sharapova and Davenport, and i notice very interesting "triangle" between Ameli*, Maria and Lindsay:

Sharapova vs Davenport: Sharapova lead 5-1
Davenport vs Mauresmo: Davenport lead 12-4
Mauresmo vs Sharapova: Mauresmo lead 3-1


So experience player like Davenport with so many matches of course must to have many interesting stats including some of this bizzare triangles and my favorite in her career case is that where also all three is slam champions:

Seles vs Sabatini: Seles lead 11-3
Sabatini vs Davenport: Sabatini lead 7-3
Davenport vs Seles: Davenport lead 10-3


But many of young players is also already involved in some of this triangles, for example my fav player 20yo Ana already played 8 matches vs 20yo Tatiana:

Ivanovic vs Golovin: Ivanovic lead 6-2
Golovin vs V.Williams: Golovin lead 2-0
V.Williams vs Ivanovic: V.Williams lead 4-1


Actualy three of my fav 5 players is involved in this type of H3H:

Ivanovic vs Jankovic: Ivanovic lead 5-1
Jankovic vs Dementieva: Jankovic lead 4-2
Dementieva vs Ivanovic: Dementieva lead 3-0


Jankovic is always very thankfull player for some bizzare stats and facts so she not disappoitment us in this wierd triangles:

Jankovic vs A.Bondarenko: Jankovic lead 7-0
A.Bondarenko vs Mauresmo: A.Bondarenko lead 2-0
Mauresmo vs Jankovic: Mauresmo lead 5-1

or

Jankovic vs Petrova: Jankovic lead 4-2
Petrova vs Na Li: Petrova lead 4-0
Na Li vs Jankovic: Na Li lead 4-1

...etc


So give some yours example of this strange WTA triangles or try to give some logical (or bizzare) explanation of some of examples which is already presented in this thread.

BTW... h2h results like 3-2 or 8-6 is more "tied" than "lead" and 1-0 h2h results is not relevant for anything so please escape H3H triangles with some of not so clean lead.



Threads Most Impressive (Most Bizzare) H3H triangles will be added here:

Sharapova vs Davenport: Sharapova lead 5-1
Davenport vs Mauresmo: Davenport lead 12-4
Mauresmo vs Sharapova: Mauresmo lead 3-1


Seles vs Sabatini: Seles lead 11-3
Sabatini vs Davenport: Sabatini lead 7-3
Davenport vs Seles: Davenport lead 10-3


Ivanovic vs Golovin: Ivanovic lead 6-2
Golovin vs V.Williams: Golovin lead 2-0
V.Williams vs Ivanovic: V.Williams lead 4-1


Ivanovic vs Jankovic: Ivanovic lead 5-1
Jankovic vs Dementieva: Jankovic lead 4-2
Dementieva vs Ivanovic: Dementieva lead 3-0


Jankovic vs A.Bondarenko: Jankovic lead 7-0
A.Bondarenko vs Mauresmo: A.Bondarenko lead 2-0
Mauresmo vs Jankovic: Mauresmo lead 5-1


Jankovic vs Petrova: Jankovic lead 4-2
Petrova vs Na Li: Petrova lead 4-0
Na Li vs Jankovic: Na Li lead 4-1


Šprem - Likhovtesva 4-0
Likhovtesva - Suarez 4-2
Suarez - Šprem 4-0


Roesch - Dementieva 3-1
Benesova - Roesch 5-0
Dementieva - Benesova 3-0


Golovin-Kuznetsova 3:1
Zvonareva-Golovin 2:0
Kuznetsova-Zvonareva 7:3


Golovin-Petrova 5:1
Vaidisova-Golovin 3:1
Petrova-Vaidisova 3:1


Hantuchova-Dokic 3:1
Dementieva-Hantuchova 9:3
Dokic-Dementieva 5:3


ASV vs Davenport: Sanchez-Vicario lead 7-5
Davenport vs Dechy: Davenport lead 8-0
Dechy vs ASV: Dechy lead 4-0


Chaky owns Nadia 4-0
Nadia owns Dina 5-0
Dina leads Anna 3-2


Zvonareva vs Schiavone: Zvonareva lead 6-0
Schiavone vs Petrova: Schiavone lead 4-1
Petrova vs Zvonareva: Petrova lead 4-1


Martinez vs Husarova 3-0
Husarova vs ASV 3-0
ASV vs Martinez 15-4


Novotna vs Martinez 4-1
Navratilova vs Novotna 6-1
Martinez vs Navratilova 4-1


Sukova vs Frazier 3-0
Frazier vs Shriver 4-1
Shriver vs Sukova 9-3


M.J.Fernandez outclassed Zvereva(5-0), Paulus(4-0), Majoli(4-1) and Apelmans(4-1)... 17-2 overall
Zvereva(5-2), Paulus(4-1), Majoli(3-0) and Apelmans(5-2) outclassed Irina Spirlea... 17-5 overall
Irina Spirlea vs M.J.Fernandez 4-0

Slutiana
Apr 12th, 2008, 09:05 AM
No. Different players match up well/not so well against other players. Nothing bizarre about that.

Cp6uja
Apr 12th, 2008, 09:29 AM
No. Different players match up well/not so well against other players. Nothing bizarre about that.
Situations like this:
Player A have impressive H2H vs player B.
Player B have impressive H2H vs player C.
Player C have impressive H2H vs player A.
is actualy very unusual in any sport and tennis is not exception.
But we have some examples (including couple realy extreme bizzare) and that is subject of this thread.

Some tennis triangles have actualy easy explanations but some is realy big mistery... For example if Federer lead against Hewitt 13-5, Hewitt lead 6-0 against Kafelnikov and Kafelnikov lead 4-1 against Federer explanation is simple. Roger face with Russian when he is too young and on other hand Hewitt played his best tennis when he is very young. After Kafelnikov retirement Roger improve so much that he simple outclassed Lleyton... but most of triangles is not so easy to be explained by logic or circumstances.

-sugi-
Apr 12th, 2008, 09:53 AM
There is a statistic forum you know, where you can put these "statistic" threads of yours.

Slutati
Apr 12th, 2008, 10:52 AM
Golovin-Kuznetsova 3:1
Zvonareva-Golovin 2:0
Kuznetsova-Zvonareva 7:3

Golovin-Petrova 5:1
Vaidisova-Golovin 3:1
Petrova-Vaidisova 3:1

Hantuchova-Dokic 3:1
Dementieva-Hantuchova 9:3
Dokic-Dementieva 5:3

:p

Renalicious
Apr 12th, 2008, 10:59 AM
Pratt leads Kirilenko 3-0
Kirilenko lead Safarova/Dulko/Azarenka 3-0
Dulko/Safarova/Azarenka lead Pratt 1-0

:)

Just Do It
Apr 12th, 2008, 11:31 AM
Bondarenko is Jelena's bitch :tape:

Highlandman
Apr 12th, 2008, 11:55 AM
Roesch - Dementieva 3-1
Benesova - Roesch 5-0
Dementieva - Benesova 3-0

Chunchun
Apr 12th, 2008, 12:17 PM
Roesch - Dementieva 3-1
Benesova - Roesch 5-0
Dementieva - Benesova 3-0

Who the F is Roesch? :eek:

Highlandman
Apr 12th, 2008, 12:19 PM
Who the F is Roesch? :eek:

http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/2/players/playerprofiles/PlayerBio.asp?PlayerID=180306

Player with probably worst attitude ever :sad: Big wasted talent.

Renalicious
Apr 12th, 2008, 12:25 PM
^ She had a good 2007 though. She's on her way up. She went from almost 400 to 195ish.

roxi
Apr 12th, 2008, 12:34 PM
Šprem - Likhovtesva 4-0
Likhovtesva - Suarez 4-2
Suarez - Šprem 4-0

Cp6uja
Apr 12th, 2008, 02:04 PM
Zvonareva vs Schiavone: Zvonareva lead 6-0
Schiavone vs Petrova: Schiavone lead 4-1
Petrova vs Zvonareva: Petrova lead 4-1

Highlandman
Apr 12th, 2008, 02:14 PM
^ She had a good 2007 though. She's on her way up. She went from almost 400 to 195ish.

She was on a good way, but wasted in 2007 also a lot. I mean: She lead 5-1 vs. Bammer in Berlin or also similar cases.
She just sometimes is then like "It is all too easy, I don't give a damn anymore." Then she goes mad and crazy on court and then her concentration goes totally off :sad:

The mentally problem went all over her career, that's sad. She was on a very good way 2002/2003. I like her game a lot, she is very talented. :sad:

RenaSlam.
Apr 12th, 2008, 02:18 PM
Tennis is not transitive. Period.

matanuriel
Apr 12th, 2008, 03:25 PM
Such a pointless thread:

I like to eat meat.
meat likes to eat grass.
grass likes to drink water.

Put together 3 useless facts and you'll get it.

saint2
Apr 12th, 2008, 03:30 PM
Chakvetadze-Petrova-Safina is a nice tringle

Chaky owns Nadia 4-0
Nadia owns Dina 5-0
Dina leads Anna 3-2

Ballbasher
Apr 12th, 2008, 03:33 PM
Sprem-Pratt-Likhovtseva

Pratt leads Sprem 1-0
Likhovtseva leads Pratt 6-0
Sprem leads Likhovtseva 4-0

janko
Apr 12th, 2008, 06:49 PM
Such a pointless thread:

I like to eat meat.
meat likes to eat grass.
grass likes to drink water.

Put together 3 useless facts and you'll get it.

:lol:

Cp6uja
Apr 12th, 2008, 11:41 PM
Such a pointless thread:

I like to eat meat.
meat likes to eat grass.
grass likes to drink water.

Put together 3 useless facts and you'll get it.I understund that for some people even very simple things is very complicate. If you like examples from nature i give you 3 different cases so try to catch difference:

3 useless facts (without any "circle" or relations):
Elephant is bigger than Monkey.
Monkey eat banana.
Banana is yellow.
We have unlimited number of combination of 3 (useless) not connected facts from nature.

3 usual facts (with logical "circle" and relations):
Lion beat Wolf. :dead:
Wolf beat Buck. :dead:
Lion beat Buck. :dead:
We have milions "expected" circles and relations in nature like in this case.

3 unusual facts (with bizzare "circle" and strange relations):
Cobra beat Cat. :dead:
Cat beat Mungos. :dead:
Mungos beat Cobra. :dead:
We dont have so many "unexpected" circles and bizzare relations in nature like in this case...


If you finaly understand point try to catch difference between this:

3 useless facts (without "triangle" connections):
Cibulkova beat Cornet
Cornet is part of Ice-Cream.
Ice-Cream is cold.

and this

WTA Bizzare Triangle:
ASV vs Davenport: Sanchez-Vicario lead 7-5
Davenport vs Dechy: Davenport lead 8-0
Dechy vs ASV: Dechy lead 4-0


BTW some of H3H suggestions and WTA triangle examples is added at post#1 :wavey:

Slutiana
Apr 13th, 2008, 12:11 AM
No, no and no. And stop calling them H3H. It doesn't make any sense. :o

sammy01
Apr 13th, 2008, 12:21 AM
No, no and no. And stop calling them H3H. It doesn't make any sense. :o

i agree, its that certain players like to play other types of players, the maria, davenport and momo one shows this. maria likes playing a flat ball striker with limited movement (davenport) but dosen't like to play a all courter like momo who mixes up the play and is fast. davenport likes to play a momo type player that she is always dictating and hitting the winners. this is not unusual just shows how different players like to play certain types of players and dislike others.

cnelson575
Apr 13th, 2008, 12:41 AM
Well some can be explained by times in the players career. One player on the downward end of career and one peaking or upswing etc. But the Davenport/Sharapova/Mauresmo i think is a example of just some players dont match up with others well. I do think even without Momo slide that Sharapova would have turned that H2H around.

cnelson575
Apr 13th, 2008, 12:45 AM
I think the biggest difference between Sharapova/Davenport matchup is Maria's mental toughness and
Lyndsay sorta moody behavior. I love Lyndsay but sometimes it seems rather she is winning or losing
she just says im tired of playing this i need to go eat a burger LOL.

Sir Stefwhit
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:03 AM
Cool thread!

I never understand why people like to criticize threads like this. Then to make things worse, threads like 'who's got the biggest breast', or 'Justine should retire', or 'Best hairdo' seem to garner so much interest and don't illicit anywhere near the same level of criticisms.

We all know tennis is about match ups- and that's what this thread is about. Anyone who has even the slightest idea about tennis knows one rivalry has absolutely nothing to do with another, but it's still interesting to see the three player dynamic outlined by the thread starter- at least to me it is.

Ellery
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:06 AM
Love this thread :) Very interesting :)

SvenssonFan
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:09 AM
Situations like this:
Player A have impressive H2H vs player B.
Player B have impressive H2H vs player C.
Player C have impressive H2H vs player A.
is actualy very unusual in any sport and tennis is not exception.
But we have some examples (including couple realy extreme bizzare) and that is subject of this thread.

Some tennis triangles have actualy easy explanations but some is realy big mistery... For example if Federer lead against Hewitt 13-5, Hewitt lead 6-0 against Kafelnikov and Kafelnikov lead 4-1 against Federer explanation is simple. Roger face with Russian when he is too young and on other hand Hewitt played his best tennis when he is very young. After Kafelnikov retirement Roger improve so much that he simple outclassed Lleyton... but most of triangles is not so easy to be explained by logic or circumstances.


Some of these "triangles" aren't valid because they are different timeframes. I mean, take the Seles/Sabitini/Davenport one.

Seles vs Sabatini: Seles lead 11-3
Sabatini vs Davenport: Sabatini lead 7-3
Davenport vs Seles: Davenport lead 10-3

All of Seles/Sabatini span from 1988-1996, Sabatini/DAvenport was like 1994 and 1995 only, and Seles won first two against Davenport but then lost 10 of the next 11 matches. Those matches were post-1996 after Sabatini had retired, and also....most of the Seles/Davenport matches were 3-setters if I recall correctly. Triangles are more valid when the 3 players are playing in the same timeframe.

Cp6uja
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:13 AM
No, no and no. And stop calling them H3H. It doesn't make any sense. :oSorry... what this "No, no and no" means :confused:. And H3H in title is my marketing trick to intrigue some curious people to visit this thread (of course that i know that H3H term not exist in English... b/c I create this term yesterday personaly!).

i agree, its that certain players like to play other types of players, the maria, davenport and momo one shows this. maria likes playing a flat ball striker with limited movement (davenport) but dosen't like to play a all courter like momo who mixes up the play and is fast. davenport likes to play a momo type player that she is always dictating and hitting the winners. this is not unusual just shows how different players like to play certain types of players and dislike others.Like i say already in one of my previous posts here (when give that Federer/Hewitt/Kafelnikov example easy to be explained)... some of this triangles is easy to be explain by logic, some by circumstances and some is just happen... In all 3 match-ups in this triangles advantage must to be very clean (1-0 or 2-1 or 9-7 or etc... is not acceptabile like "clean advantage") so you are very wrong when you say that "this is not unusual"...

Of course that in mostly cases A>>B>>C h2h produce A>>C or atleast A>=C... but if we have for example 50 players which all played against each others that produce about 20.000 different triangles so of course that some of this big number will be "strange".

Sir Stefwhit
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:33 AM
In all 3 match-ups in these triangles advantages must be very clean (1-0 or 2-1 or 9-7 or etc... is not acceptabile like "clean advantage")...
I'm glad you made that point because without it, it loses a lot of intrigue. It's not simply the three H2H records that makes this interesting, for me it's domination that intrigues me most. Player A doesn't simply lead the H2h, Player A dominates Player B, who in turn dominates Player C, who in turn dominates Player A. That phenomena is what helps to make this scenario largely uncommon.

Cp6uja
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:40 AM
Some of these "triangles" aren't valid because they are different timeframes. I mean, take the Seles/Sabitini/Davenport one.Seles/Sabatini/Davenport (11-3, 7-3, 10-3) is actualy perfect example of this WTA triangles b/c all three match-ups is based at atleast 10 h2h matches. I dont see how fact that this "H3H" have some logical explanation change anything.

And BTW all of this three match-ups is not so "corrupted" like you say:
- Sabatini at 11 of her 14 career h2h matches against Seles played in her best years like TOP5 player... but still sucks.
- In last 4 h2h matches which Sabatini all won and make advantage against Davenport (before that theys h2h is tied 3-3) Lindsay played like better ranked or atlist like maximum only two places worse ranked player... but still lose all that matches.
- All matches which Seles played against Lindsay, she played like TOP10 player and atleast TOP6 seed at all that tournaments but still have so disaster 3-10 h2h.

AcesHigh
Apr 13th, 2008, 02:28 AM
Your threads and stats are very interesting.. but there's nothing bizarre about this. Every player is different.. Venus had no problem with Capriati but Serena did.. bizarre? Not really. Players with different styles, with different mentalities SHOULD have different H2H's with different people.

cnelson575
Apr 13th, 2008, 06:54 AM
Thats what makes tennis interesting, styles contrast and how the dynamics can play a factor. One player can lead in a h2h and not always be the overall better player. Dynamics is the key.

Cp6uja
Apr 13th, 2008, 11:54 AM
I think that this thread is more proof that in some cases h2h is overrated and is more product of some special occasiones than real differences between two players. For example i remember all theories here when Ana Ivanovic lose 8 straight sets against Schnyder despite fact that Schnyder always have big problems vs "big hitters". If they not played after that we will still have that 4-0 h2h results and "Patty owned Ana" song here... but now is already 4-3. Same thing with Henin vs Sisters h2h when they not played any match between 2003 and 2007 so Justine dont have real chance to improve that bad h2h from past. Dont forget that biggest rivarly in history of womans tennis started with 20-4 lead for Chris Evert, but finished with Navratilova 43-37 final advantage. So match-ups is best sign, but not always.

Experience players with long career is good source for research like this and if some player played about 10 years against more than 100 different players of course that she have couple h2h results much better and couple much worse than she "deserve" and that is always good chance for this "triangle" case. Today i checked three players from this group (Conchita Martinez, Pam Shriver and Mary Joe Fernandez) and i find some interesting triangles (especialy last one):

Martinez vs Husarova 3-0
Husarova vs ASV 3-0
ASV vs Martinez 15-4

Novotna vs Martinez 4-1
Navratilova vs Novotna 6-1
Martinez vs Navratilova 4-1

Sukova vs Frazier 3-0
Frazier vs Shriver 4-1
Shriver vs Sukova 9-3


M.J.Fernandez outclassed Zvereva(5-0), Paulus(4-0), Majoli(4-1) and Apelmans(4-1)... 17-2 overall
Zvereva(5-2), Paulus(4-1), Majoli(3-0) and Apelmans(5-2) outclassed Irina Spirlea... 17-5 overall
Irina Spirlea vs M.J.Fernandez 4-0 :tape: :tape: :tape:

bellascarlett
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:04 PM
Well some can be explained by times in the players career. One player on the downward end of career and one peaking or upswing etc. But the Davenport/Sharapova/Mauresmo i think is a example of just some players dont match up with others well. I do think even without Momo slide that Sharapova would have turned that H2H around.

I agree about the timing of the matches. Maria would have a good chance to close the gap if only Momo stopped losing before they are scheduled to meet. Nothing is bizarre about the Davenport/Sharapova/Mauresmo triangle. In time, I think that will straighten out.

-Sonic-
Apr 13th, 2008, 01:56 PM
cool thread Cp6uja

And yes, although some can be explained away due to the time in each person's career, and yes some people like some match ups more than others, i think its really interesting to see.



It just goes to show how much how much the random-ness of each draw could DRASTICALLY affect the path of a person's career.

Archer16
Apr 13th, 2008, 08:27 PM
Amusing thread.

I tried to make one with Shahar work, but the best I could up with was:

Peer leads Ivanovic 2-0 (link (http://www.wtaworld.com/showpost.php?p=12933652&postcount=74))
Ivanovic leads Petrova 4-2
Petrova leads Peer 2-0

Before this season started there was also
Peer leads Bartoli 5-1
Bartoli leads Safina 3-1
Safina lead Peer 3-0, but thanksfully this last one has been cut to 3-2 since.

Mikey B
Apr 13th, 2008, 08:30 PM
love these stats... just another reason why you cant predict anything in tennis!

*Jool*
Apr 14th, 2008, 05:20 PM
interesting

what stroke me in this thread is that : Dechy and Husarova are 4/0 and 3/0 vs Sanchez Vicario :eek: