Re: winners/unforced errors - roland garros 2011/regular updates
Interesting, but when I remarked by email to a tennis writer I know about Wicky beating Ana in Rome despite a (listed) 19-40 deficit on this, he told me not to believe it; specifically saying that "statisticians are amateurs". And in many sports, stats have different meaning, as in:
The basketball player who pads his PPG average by scoring 48 in a 30 + point win (maybe staying in the game because its played near where he grew up, went to college, or vs. his former team) instead of sitting out most of the 4th Quarter.
The baseball player who hits 3 homers in a 10-1 win.
The football QB who gets intercepted way downfield "taking a shot" on 3rd and short, giving the ball to the other team about 40 yards downfield like a good punt would have had they failed to convert the 3rd down.
The hockey player whose "plus-minus" is affected by a cheap goal for or against his team, where he wasn't even near the play. (The late 2 Stanley Cup winning coach Fred Shero of the Philadelphia Flyers scoffed @ the +/- numbers, saying that he didn't need them to know if one of his guys was playing well or not).
Even in tennis, a player may serve a high % by playing it relatively safe, while another is 10% lower but is grabbing an edge on that point (even where she doesn't score a service winner). Stats are interesting, but only one piece of the puzzle in sports.
My current avatar (NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell) needs fired!