PDA

View Full Version : Performance Ranking of the Top Eight Seeds


vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 01:59 PM
After the first round, here is a snapshot of the performance of the top eight seeds. I took three performance indicators and then ranked each of the top eight by these indicators. They are ranked on each indicator and then ranked based on the average of the three indicators. The results are below:

(Games Lost) (W/UE ratio) (Rank of opponent)
Jelana 4 [27/24 +3] 104
Score:10
Serena 5 [26/31 -5] 123
Score:14
Dinara 7 [/26 -19] 70
Score:15
Elena 13 [30/36 -6] 88
Score:17
Ana 8 [17/33 -16] 107
Score:19
Venus 6 [28/20 +8] 100
Score:9
Vera 6 [24/29 -5] 50
Score:8
Sveta 11 [28/23 +5] 99
Score:13

Based on this analysis, the first round winner is Vera, who played by far the toughest opponent based on rank. Her opponent was ranked 50. Venus was second, she played the cleanest match with a +8 W/UE ratio, but her opponent was ranked 100. Jelena lost the fewest games and therefore came in third. Sveta surprisingly rounds out the top four, despite dropping a set in her opening round. The final ranking is:

1. Vera (toughest opponent)
2. Venus (best W/UE ratio)
3. Jelena (fewest games lost)
4. Sveta
______________________________
5. Serena
6. Dinara
7. Elena
8. Ana

I will add to the analysis after each round until QF. Discuss.

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 01:59 PM
Reserved for second round

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 02:00 PM
Reserved for third round

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 02:00 PM
Reserved for fourth round

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 02:00 PM
QF wrapup

guapogreg08
Jan 21st, 2009, 03:36 PM
this is retarded

SvetaPleaseWin.
Jan 21st, 2009, 03:38 PM
sveta ftw

Renalicious
Jan 21st, 2009, 03:43 PM
How can Serena play worse than Jelena. :help: No way.

SM
Jan 21st, 2009, 03:43 PM
ranking means nothing, look where Dokic is.

winners-u.e doesnt even tell an acurate picture...the match might be high quality with long rallies but this mite not show on statistics such as these

Watching
Jan 21st, 2009, 03:44 PM
Serena's W-UE wasn't -10 she hit like waaaay more than 6 winners and waay more than 16 errors lol

Edit: AO site says 26 winners to 31 errors which is -5 differential still not great but a little better lol.

Miss Amor
Jan 21st, 2009, 03:47 PM
Which match were you watching? Serena had 26 winner and 31 Unforced errors

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/scores/stats/day7/2164ms.html

Il Primo!
Jan 21st, 2009, 04:00 PM
Neither Sserena nor Venus tops the list. There must be something effing wrong.

VenusTeam Williams FTW :rocker:

Renalicious
Jan 21st, 2009, 04:29 PM
Il Primo! :)

Do you still hate Mauresmo? :drool:

Il Primo!
Jan 21st, 2009, 04:32 PM
Il Primo! :)

Do you still hate Mauresmo? :drool:

Oh boy, this is a freaking slippery way you want me to follow, I'm NOT going to discuss about this:o

Renalicious
Jan 21st, 2009, 04:34 PM
Okay then. :scared: I think the answer is obvious though. :D

MrSerenaWilliams
Jan 21st, 2009, 05:48 PM
If anyone SAW Jelena's first round match, they would EASILY put her in the bottom 1/2 of that list....:unsure:

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 05:58 PM
Which match were you watching? Serena had 26 winner and 31 Unforced errors

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/scores/stats/day7/2164ms.htmlthanks. I amended the first post to reflect the correct stats from Serena's match. I had mistakently used the W/UE ratio for her opponent.

Miss Amor
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:00 PM
Thats better :angel:

These statistics dont take into account forced errors, aces, dfs etc. tho

serenus_2k8
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:01 PM
Surely this would mean its bad to have a high W-UE ratio?

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:08 PM
Thats better :angel:

These statistics dont take into account forced errors, aces, dfs etc. thoI thought about adding aces and df, but those should reflect in the winner and UE stats.

Nothing is perfect, but this is an effort to see how well the players played (W/UE and games lost), while also considering the quality of their opponent. The best indicator for the quality of an opponent is ranking, despite all the flaws of the ranking system that are discussed ad nauseum on this board.

again, thanks for pointing out the mistake.

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:09 PM
If anyone SAW Jelena's first round match, they would EASILY put her in the bottom 1/2 of that list....:unsure:perhaps, but Jelena only lost 4 games and had a positive W/UE ratio. Serena had a negative W/UE ratio.

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:17 PM
Neither Sserena nor Venus tops the list. There must be something effing wrong.

VenusTeam Williams FTW :rocker::lol: well, Vera is on fire, for now. just look at her second round demolition. she will clearly win round two I think.

sammy01
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:27 PM
Thats better :angel:

These statistics dont take into account forced errors, aces, dfs etc. tho

i thought aces and df's are included on the winner/ue ratio automaticaly :confused:

Miss Amor
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:37 PM
i thought aces and df's are included on the winner/ue ratio automaticaly :confused:


I thought so too, but then for some tournaments they werent included, so I got confused :confused:

Especially on the Aus open match statistics, soemtimes even if they have hit 2-3 aces, they show that they have hit 0 winners :shrug:

DeliriousPotato
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:39 PM
Go Venus it's your birthday!!! Wohoo! I wish Venus got trickier opponents so that she could prepare better for the advanced stages. Suarez Navarro isn't strong on hardcourts (although she is tough in clay)

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 06:54 PM
Go Venus it's your birthday!!! Wohoo! I wish Venus got trickier opponents so that she could prepare better for the advanced stages. Suarez Navarro isn't strong on hardcourts (although she is tough in clay)I'll take it. Assuming they both get there, Venus will have a good chance to work off any remaining rust in the fourth round against Pennetta.

For now, she is on a 10 match winning streak.;) Happy for her to get win #11 anyway she can.

miffedmax
Jan 21st, 2009, 07:15 PM
Well, I would say Lena can only get better. Except, of course, that she might not. :eek:

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 08:09 PM
Well, I would say Lena can only get better. Except, of course, that she might not. :eek:nope. not a good first round for Elena, but perhaps a day's rest will help.

starin
Jan 21st, 2009, 08:28 PM
Dinara and Sveta weren't as terrible as the stats list. Their opponents played awesome at times. Elena, Serena, Jelena weren't that good. Their opponents were all poor quality and all 3 looked bad at times. Not in any order. Bottom 5 are: Elena/Serena/Jelena/Kuzzie/Ana. Top 3: Dinara/Venus/Vera. And Dinara didn't even play that well. This AO is so weak right now.

MrSerenaWilliams
Jan 21st, 2009, 08:35 PM
perhaps, but Jelena only lost 4 games and had a positive W/UE ratio. Serena had a negative W/UE ratio.

True...

However:
Serena won 84% of 1st serves against Jelena's 69% (a 15%+ for SW, the best % among all Top 8 seeds)
Serena won 55% of 2nd serves against Jelena's 42% (a 13%+ for SW, 3rd behind Ana's 59% and Venus' 56%)
Both converted 43% of break points

Jelena lost 1 less game than Serena. And her opponent could barely put the ball in the court :unsure:....not saying that Serena beat a Maria/Ana/Venus by that scoreline, but :shrug: I just think W/UE isn't a clear enough indicator of "playing well" and assessing performance.

Thanks for doing this, though.

vwfan
Jan 21st, 2009, 08:58 PM
True...

However:
Serena won 84% of 1st serves against Jelena's 69% (a 15%+ for SW, the best % among all Top 8 seeds)
Serena won 55% of 2nd serves against Jelena's 42% (a 13%+ for SW, 3rd behind Ana's 59% and Venus' 56%)
Both converted 43% of break points

Jelena lost 1 less game than Serena. And her opponent could barely put the ball in the court :unsure:....not saying that Serena beat a Maria/Ana/Venus by that scoreline, but :shrug: I just think W/UE isn't a clear enough indicator of "playing well" and assessing performance.

Thanks for doing this, though.Well, W/UE isn't the best, especially where the Williams are concerned because they tend to take more risks. Jelena will probably always do better than both on this indicator, yet they are multiple slam winners.

Let me look at break point conversion (as a indicator of who is playing the big points better):

1. Jelena (6/14 or 43%)
2. Serena (3/7 or 43%)
3. Dinara (6/14 or 43%)
4. Elena (6/16 or 38%)
5. Ana (4/9 or 44%)
6. Venus (5/11 or 45%)
7. Vera (5/14 or 36%)
8. Sveta (5/6 or 83%):eek:

Well, Sveta was scary good! Wow. Everyone else clustering in 43-45% range. So again, Jelena held her own with her peers on this measure.

Miss Amor
Jan 21st, 2009, 09:02 PM
Sveta :worship:

MrSerenaWilliams
Jan 21st, 2009, 09:42 PM
Another stat is Break Points Saved/Faced

1.Serena 2/2 (100%)

2. Vera 5/7 (73%)
2. Ana 5/7 (73%)

4.Elena 6/11 (55%)

5. Sveta 2/5 (40%)

6. Jelena 1/3 (33%)
6. Dinara 2/6 (33%)

8. Venus 0/2 (0%)

So If We Combined The BP Conversion Rate W/ The BP Saving Rate, We'd Get This:

1. Sveta (7/11 or 64%)
2. Serena (5/9 or 56%)
2. Ana (9/16 or 56%)
4. Vera (10/21 or 48%)
5. Elena (12/27 or 44%)
6. Jelena (7/17 or 41%)
7. Dinara (8/20 or 40%)
8. Venus (5/13 or 38%)


That's their winning rate of the "big points" in their first round matches.

vwfan
Jan 22nd, 2009, 12:18 AM
Another stat is Break Points Saved/Faced

1.Serena 2/2 (100%)

2. Vera 5/7 (73%)
2. Ana 5/7 (73%)

4.Elena 6/11 (55%)

5. Sveta 2/5 (40%)

6. Jelena 1/3 (33%)
6. Dinara 2/6 (33%)

8. Venus 0/2 (0%)

So If We Combined The BP Conversion Rate W/ The BP Saving Rate, We'd Get This:

1. Sveta (7/11 or 64%)
2. Serena (5/9 or 56%)
2. Ana (9/16 or 56%)
4. Vera (10/21 or 48%)
5. Elena (12/27 or 44%)
6. Jelena (7/17 or 41%)
7. Dinara (8/20 or 40%)
8. Venus (5/13 or 38%)


That's their winning rate of the "big points" in their first round matches.yes. your assessment of "big points" is another take and good measure of how well a player plays under pressure. Though if you are really playing well, then you should not be facing break points in the first place.

so while Venus lost both of the break points she faced, that's all she faced. whereas, elena faced 11, saved more and therefore has a higher rate of return. a player who faces only 2 break points is certainly playing better than a player who faces 11, don't you think?

thus break point conversions is a better measure since getting breakpoints on your opponents serve is good, whereas getting breakpoints on your own serve is not. your ability to capitalize once earning breakpoints on your opponents serve is even more important.

fufuqifuqishahah
Jan 22nd, 2009, 01:07 AM
yes. your assessment of "big points" is another take and good measure of how well a player plays under pressure. Though if you are really playing well, then you should not be facing break points in the first place.


:lol: this thread is funny. :D thanks for doing the work. no matter what, there's never going to be an agreement of "performance". just as long as the OP has legitimate arguments for the criteria the OP used, then it is okay in my book :yeah:


i would incorporate crowd volume and crowd capacity levels into the max. ;) the more excited the crowd the better the performance. :p also, i would incorporate how high their skirts flow up in relation to their body -> the higher the skirts flow up the more effort they are putting into their shots and the better performance it is for the crowd. :o lastly, i would penalize injury timeouts and time in between points. if the player is getting injured and is huffing and puffing in between points, that means they are less likely to be fit for the next round. :angel: