Joined
·
3,765 Posts
I crunched these numbers a month ago and tried posting them but couldn't get the table to work properly so I quit. But now that wins are being discussed I thought "what the heck!"
Please note that all ranking statistics are year-end numbers from the Monday after Munich.
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Losses-------------------09--14--05--15--18--07--18--23--11—-10-
Walkovers----------------01--00--01--00--01--00--00--00--01—-00-
2-Set Losses-------------05--03--04--09--11--03--06--14--09--06-
3-Set Losses-------------04--11--01--05--07--04--12--09--03—-04-
Tiebreakers Won in Ls----03--02--00--01--00--01--02--00--01--00-
TBs Lost in Losses-------01--03--02--02--01--02--05--03--01--04-
Losses to Top 10 Players-08--10--02--12--10--07--10--14--06--06-
Ls to Outside 25 Players-00--01--00--01--04--00--02--07--03--03-
Average Rank Lost To-----05--13--11--10--15--04--15--21--15--20-
Median Rank Lost To------05--08--10--06--07--03--10--05--06--08-
Readjusted Rank Lost To--05--08--10--07--13--03--12--17--10--14-
Now in detail...
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Losses-------------------09--14--05--15--18--07--18--23--11—-10-
Walkovers----------------01--00--01--00--01--00--00--00--01—-00-
Of course, the fewer tournaments you play the fewer opportunities you have to lose. Out of those who played 17 tournaments, only Davenport had fewer than 10 losses.
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
2-Set Losses-------------05--03--04--09--11--03--06--14--09--06-
3-Set Losses-------------04--11--01--05--07--04--12--09--03—-04-
Tiebreakers Won in Ls----03--02--00--01--00--01--02--00--01--00-
TBs Lost in Losses-------01--03--02--02--01--02--05--03--01--04-
I include whether the match was a 2- or 3-setter and tiebreakers to give an idea of how close the matches may have been. Of course, it's hard to tell from the scores if a match really was close or not but this was the least hectic way for me to gather data.
I don’t know what you get walking away from these numbers but after seeing this I actually appreciate Capriati’s efforts a bit more. She lost in straight sets just 3 times (fewer than Venus!) in 2001 compared to 11 3-set losses. Though she wasn’t great towards the end of the year it wasn’t all that easy to take her down.
(If you notice the disparity in Hingis’ numbers, it’s because she pulled out in the first set against Davenport at Filderstadt.)
<br />Now comes the more confusing stuff. I include these only because I bothered to do the math...
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Losses to Top 10 Players-08--10--02--12--10--07--10--14--06--06-
Ls to Outside 25 Players-00--01--00--01--04--00--02--07--03--03-
It depends on where you want to draw the line. I chose 25 but if I pick 20 or 30 some of the numbers do change significantly. The strangest exception is Dokic. She didn’t lose to anyone ranked between (and including) 20 and 37.
For the following, I counted the walkovers (simply because I was too lazy to reformulate my excel sheet). Counting the walkovers actually helped everyone involved except Davenport.
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Average Rank Lost To-----05--13--11--10--15--04--15--21--15--20-
Readjusted Rank Lost To--05--08--10--07--13--03--12--17--10--14-
The "Average Rank Lost To" is the total of all the ranks of all the players divided by the number of losses.
The "Readjusted Rank Lost To" is basically the same except that I knocked off both the highest and lowest rank from the total. It helped everyone but Davenport (who remains the same yet again).
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Median Rank Lost To------05--08--10--06--07--03--10--05--06--08-
This one is the dead center score... or at least what Excel told me was the median. Quite deceptive. Dokic and Davenport are tied with 5 but part of the reason why Dokic’s is so low is because she lost to Davenport 5 times and Capriati thrice. Venus and Henin are tied with the worst number. If you could see a correlation between them, tell me.
[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: cynicole ]
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: cynicole ]</p>
Please note that all ranking statistics are year-end numbers from the Monday after Munich.
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Losses-------------------09--14--05--15--18--07--18--23--11—-10-
Walkovers----------------01--00--01--00--01--00--00--00--01—-00-
2-Set Losses-------------05--03--04--09--11--03--06--14--09--06-
3-Set Losses-------------04--11--01--05--07--04--12--09--03—-04-
Tiebreakers Won in Ls----03--02--00--01--00--01--02--00--01--00-
TBs Lost in Losses-------01--03--02--02--01--02--05--03--01--04-
Losses to Top 10 Players-08--10--02--12--10--07--10--14--06--06-
Ls to Outside 25 Players-00--01--00--01--04--00--02--07--03--03-
Average Rank Lost To-----05--13--11--10--15--04--15--21--15--20-
Median Rank Lost To------05--08--10--06--07--03--10--05--06--08-
Readjusted Rank Lost To--05--08--10--07--13--03--12--17--10--14-
Now in detail...
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Losses-------------------09--14--05--15--18--07--18--23--11—-10-
Walkovers----------------01--00--01--00--01--00--00--00--01—-00-
Of course, the fewer tournaments you play the fewer opportunities you have to lose. Out of those who played 17 tournaments, only Davenport had fewer than 10 losses.
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
2-Set Losses-------------05--03--04--09--11--03--06--14--09--06-
3-Set Losses-------------04--11--01--05--07--04--12--09--03—-04-
Tiebreakers Won in Ls----03--02--00--01--00--01--02--00--01--00-
TBs Lost in Losses-------01--03--02--02--01--02--05--03--01--04-
I include whether the match was a 2- or 3-setter and tiebreakers to give an idea of how close the matches may have been. Of course, it's hard to tell from the scores if a match really was close or not but this was the least hectic way for me to gather data.
I don’t know what you get walking away from these numbers but after seeing this I actually appreciate Capriati’s efforts a bit more. She lost in straight sets just 3 times (fewer than Venus!) in 2001 compared to 11 3-set losses. Though she wasn’t great towards the end of the year it wasn’t all that easy to take her down.
(If you notice the disparity in Hingis’ numbers, it’s because she pulled out in the first set against Davenport at Filderstadt.)
<br />Now comes the more confusing stuff. I include these only because I bothered to do the math...
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Losses to Top 10 Players-08--10--02--12--10--07--10--14--06--06-
Ls to Outside 25 Players-00--01--00--01--04--00--02--07--03--03-
It depends on where you want to draw the line. I chose 25 but if I pick 20 or 30 some of the numbers do change significantly. The strangest exception is Dokic. She didn’t lose to anyone ranked between (and including) 20 and 37.
For the following, I counted the walkovers (simply because I was too lazy to reformulate my excel sheet). Counting the walkovers actually helped everyone involved except Davenport.
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Average Rank Lost To-----05--13--11--10--15--04--15--21--15--20-
Readjusted Rank Lost To--05--08--10--07--13--03--12--17--10--14-
The "Average Rank Lost To" is the total of all the ranks of all the players divided by the number of losses.
The "Readjusted Rank Lost To" is basically the same except that I knocked off both the highest and lowest rank from the total. It helped everyone but Davenport (who remains the same yet again).
-------------------------LD--JC—-VW--MH--KC--SW—-JH—-JD—-AM—-MS—
Median Rank Lost To------05--08--10--06--07--03--10--05--06--08-
This one is the dead center score... or at least what Excel told me was the median. Quite deceptive. Dokic and Davenport are tied with 5 but part of the reason why Dokic’s is so low is because she lost to Davenport 5 times and Capriati thrice. Venus and Henin are tied with the worst number. If you could see a correlation between them, tell me.
[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: cynicole ]
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: cynicole ]</p>