PDA

View Full Version : Finally, Cliff Drysdale says something nice about women's tennis


rhz
Jun 1st, 2003, 10:10 PM
this is after Petrova bt Capriati

Cliff: "you think Women's tennis is predictable??? Hellooo......"

TennisHack
Jun 1st, 2003, 10:12 PM
Cliffy isn't the one constantly putting down women's tennis. He's pretty neutral in the true spectrum of things.

franny
Jun 1st, 2003, 10:22 PM
i love cliff, he is ALWAYS the fair one and of all the espn broadcasters, he is the best one. I think he is better than pam and especially better than stupid patrick mccenroe.

starr
Jun 1st, 2003, 10:24 PM
He's been touting Serena to win the tournament all week long.

Women's tennis is pretty predictable though. When you are just watching a women's tournament, it's ok tennis, but when you see them play matches back to back with the men's matches... It's another world. The women hit so many unforced errors and don't have the same variety as the men. I think that is the next step up. Power with the mix up of the spins and the accuracy of the men's game.

starr
Jun 1st, 2003, 10:26 PM
i love cliff, he is ALWAYS the fair one and of all the espn broadcasters, he is the best one. I think he is better than pam and especially better than stupid patrick mccenroe.


Pam's voice should be destroyed as a weapon of mass destruction. (lol... I mean, if we could find it. :))

Cliffie is all right, but he was better when he was with the Firey One. He's a bit of a whore though. He just gushes all over anyone who is winning at the time.

ToeTag
Jun 1st, 2003, 11:22 PM
He's been touting Serena to win the tournament all week long.

Women's tennis is pretty predictable though. When you are just watching a women's tournament, it's ok tennis, but when you see them play matches back to back with the men's matches... It's another world. The women hit so many unforced errors and don't have the same variety as the men. I think that is the next step up. Power with the mix up of the spins and the accuracy of the men's game.
Hmmmm....well the same reason you don't like Women's tennis is the same reason I stopped watching men's tennis...I find they hit too many UE,and they all play alike.

jenglisbe
Jun 1st, 2003, 11:41 PM
squawk box - Just look at the stats; men's matches nearly always have better winners/errors ratios than women's matches. Let's look at today's matches...

The Henin/Schnyder match featured 62 more errors than winners
The Zvonareva/Williams match featured 88 more errors than winners
The Clijsters/Maleeva match featured 70 more errors than winners
The Petrova/Capriati match featured 76 more errors than winners
**Every one of these 8 females had more errors than winners

The Verkerk/Schuettler match featured 22 more errors than winners
The Moya/Novak match featured 50 more errors than winners
The Kuerten/Gaudio match featured 37 more errors than winners
**Verkerk was even in his winners and errors

As you can see, the women's matches have a far worse ratio of winners to errors (all of those men's matches had a smaller difference than any women's match)...and this was on a day with the best women's matches of the tournament!!

starr
Jun 2nd, 2003, 12:16 AM
That is unbelievable to me that you have that idea about women's tennis. There is far more similarity in the women's game, imo, and there is no question that the women have more unforced errors. Watching women's matches, I see error after error for no apparent reason except that the women can't control their power or are going for too much. Men have that too, but to a much lesser extent. Btw, When did you quit watching men's tennis?

franny
Jun 2nd, 2003, 12:32 AM
it doesn't matter, women's still have funner matches. They have errors yes, but they have drama. Men don't and quite frankly is boring. I like to be able to pull for an underdog in a match, but in men's tennis, there really isn't an underdog. Everyone plays the same style and same level. Its no fun. And also, stats dont tell everything. Men has better ratio because they hit harder and finish points off faster. Women work the points and has more rallys. You can only hit so many winners after a 15-30 shot rally. Think of it in math terms. Women has longer rally. So therefore, their probability of hitting an error per shot is higher than the men. That is why they have higher ratio of winners and errors.

Cariaoke
Jun 2nd, 2003, 12:40 AM
um, ok so one day's analysis of matches suddenly proves that men's tennis is cleaner?

what about all the upsets last week... one player had 101 ufe's in a 5 set match... who plays 5 set matches? yeah, I thought so.

it depends on the # of sets played... obviously, if there's more sets played... then usually there's more errors because players were out on the court longer! wow, if you actually think about it, it makes sense! I guarantee you that a 2 set match will almost always have LESS errors than a 3 set match. A three set match usually has less errors than a five set one.

we could apply this same logic to winners! hmmm... there are probably more winners in a 5 set match than in a 3 set one. and while I'm at it, there's probably more winners in a 3 set match than in a 2 set one! *smacks forehead* the results are astounding, aren't they? :rolleyes:

BigTennisFan
Jun 2nd, 2003, 12:58 AM
Well, I still like best of three instead of best of five. Why? In best of three, the pressure is on you immediately because if you lose the first set, you'd better not lose the second set.

Peter M
Jun 2nd, 2003, 01:05 AM
cariosity- jenglisbe was as talking about the winner/error differential. Hence, the number of sets is immaterial. It is the variance between the two numbers that matters.

Cariaoke
Jun 2nd, 2003, 01:13 AM
the point still remains the same. I believe it was Philippoussis that had the 101 errors and we know he didn't have 102 winners. there are bad matches on both sides but to say that one day's worth of play proves that men's matches are cleaner is totally asinine.

TennisHack
Jun 2nd, 2003, 01:37 AM
It all depends on your taste. I, too, prefer men's tennis to women because five sets is real drama. Look no further than the top half of the draw's third round.

However, some people don't have the attention span to sit through 5 matches. I think the men have more variety than the women in general; in the women's game, for instance, most of the top players are all-surface players whereas that isn't true on the men's side.

One gender isn't 'better' than the other.

WtaTour4Ever
Jun 2nd, 2003, 02:10 AM
I think overall Men's matches are cleaner then womens.....

If its a Womens math with a top player I would watch that over a mens match, however if we are talking two unknown women vs two unknown men, I'd watch the mens match

jenglisbe
Jun 2nd, 2003, 02:25 AM
cariosity - did you even read the details in my post? Those numbers were the differences betwen errors and winners; it has nothing to do with the number of sets. I was showing that the difference between errors and winners in the men's matches is smaller than the difference in women's matches; thus men's matches are cleaner.

Hell, you keep harping on 101 errors in a 5 set match, but Venus had something like 80 errors in her 3 set match Sunday. Which is the better average? The male ;)

Peter M
Jun 2nd, 2003, 03:15 AM
Actually, when, on average, the Winner/UE differential is in the minus category per set (as seems to be the case for both men and woman on clay)-- playing three sets as opposed to five should give better overall numbers-- since the number of sets is less.

For example, if a player hits 10 winners and 15 errors per set. After 3 sets, they will be (-15) while after 5 sets they will be (-25).

So, comparing the overall differential between men and women at this tournament (by using overall match stats, as we have been-- as opposed to averages) is prejudicing the mens' numbers, yet they still come out cleaner when using this manner of comparison.

Or, math aside, we can just say that we have seen these matches this past week, and we can see with our eyes that mens' matches are, without a doubt, cleaner. But, I would still prefer to watch the women. :)

Brian Stewart
Jun 2nd, 2003, 12:12 PM
Those W/UE stats are not a reliable comparison for a couple of reasons.

First, they're not accurate. I've long known this from observation alone, but when I documented some matches a while back, the degree of difference astounded me. When applying the exact same standards to both, I found that the men were charged with 60% fewer errors than they should have been, and the women were charged with 60% more than they should have been. An even larger sample might vary the numbers some, but even if you cut them in half, that's still a huge difference.

We even had a recent example in Dominikovic vs Williams. Remember that game where Dominikovic came back from a 0-40 hole? Venus made an error on the first break point. On the second, Dominikovic put in a nice hook serve that Venus barely got a racquet on and could only poke back into the net. A clear service winner if ever there was one. Yet the announcers and statisticians were calling it an error.

In another case, I recall a women's match in which each player was assessed 6 UEs in a 3-game span. Sloppy tennis, right? Well, when I saw the match, I paid close attention, and the 2 players had only 1 unforced error combined in those games. That's a very extreme example, but it indicates what can happen with the stats.

Secondly, service numbers are included. This distorts the numbers a good bit. A lot of matches that become serving contests have a deceptively high W/UE ratio. When you take serves out of the picture, a lot of "well played" matches fall into the minus category. Also, refering back to point one, statisticians tend to be very generous with the awarding of service winners for big serving men. If your opponent doesn't have time to set up for a return because you beat them with speed/placement, that's a service winner. If they don't have time because they took a full backswing on the return, that's a return error.

The third point is that UE stats, even when they are accurate, only tell how a point ended, now how it was played. And they don't differentiate between a down-the-line scorcher that misses by an inch, and a total shank that lands in the parking lot. An example from the first part of this paragraph is the Williams(2) encounters. You often hear about the errors they make, but what about all of the spectacular shots they hit in between? Great shots that prolong points aren't included in these stats.

So, using these stats as a comparative of the quality of men's and women's tennis isn't accurate. It's apples and oranges. The reasons being:

The stats are not uniformly assessed. Identical plays are not judged the same for men and women.

The stats are incomplete. A more accurate gauge would be to look at true errors vs # of shots hit. The women's rallies tend to be longer (and with fewer points decided outright by the serve). The more shots you hit, the more errors you'll make.

If you were to examine a complete set of accurate stats, the differences would be negligible.

Greenout
Jun 2nd, 2003, 12:26 PM
Yeah, women's matches are far more entertaining
than's men's matches because one can get more into
it because of the familiar personalities of the
game. Right now they're showing JCF vs Mantilla.
Less errors;but no intrigue, mystery, drama or plot
to follow.

Love them or hate them players like Jen, Dani, Dokic,
Amelie, LD, Serena, Venus, Monica etc... are so
different from one another in game, style, dress,
temperment that it's not difficult to get into a match.
Alot of people still haven't a clue what Rainer Schuttler
or Albert Costa looks like.

In the men's game there just doesn't seem to be
any big stars nowadays that cross over beyond their
hero status in their respective home countries. Maybe
Paradorn or Younes or James Blake comes the nearest
to that. In the women's game players like Daniela,
Dokic, Kim, Justine, Venus, Serena etc...have fan bases
throughout the globe. They're international stars.

controlfreak
Jun 2nd, 2003, 01:03 PM
Yeah, women's matches are far more entertaining
than's men's matches because one can get more into
it because of the familiar personalities of the
game.

[...]

In the men's game there just doesn't seem to be
any big stars nowadays that cross over beyond their
hero status in their respective home countries.

The fact that there are fewer "big stars" in the men's game is what makes it more entertaining. The standard is more even, there is more strength in depth, therefore more upsets occur and it is harder to predict who will win.

In women's, the same few players win almost everything (e.g. Serena) therefore there are fewer interesting matches and fewer surprise winners. These female stars may make women's tennis *more marketable* than men's at the moment (like Tiger Woods did for golf), but a real tennis fan who wants to see the bigger picture will appreciate that men's tennis has the greater potential for drama and excitement.

controlfreak
Jun 2nd, 2003, 01:04 PM
Oh and FYI, Schuettler is the one with sideburns and a backwards baseball cap, and Costa is the one with abnormally large ears.

macn
Jun 2nd, 2003, 02:21 PM
I like that the top women win and make the latter rounds. The men have so many upsets that when the later rounds come around you see unknown names. That's like going to a Rolling Stones concert only to find out that the backup band will be starring because the Stones couldn't make it. I pray that Andre Aggasi makes it to the finals because if he dosen't, I'll probably miss the Men's final.

jenglisbe
Jun 2nd, 2003, 04:15 PM
Brian - return "errors" don't count as errors in terms of stats, so I think you are wrong there. Unforced errors have to be during a point.

macn - I agree; I like that I can see familiar faces throughout a tournament on the women's side. It bores me to watch different men win every tournament. I mean, I don't like 1 player winning everything (unless it's Pete ;)), but too much parity is also bad to me...