Tennis Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
956 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hantuchova has more than 100 UE's in this match so far. Does anyone know what the record for UE's in a match? Just curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
I think there is something wrong about the way they count unforced errors this year; they have been unusually high for most matches.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,950 Posts
the commentators said she had exactly 100 for the match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,731 Posts
108 for Hantuchova
60-something for Ashley
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,098 Posts
As far as I've been able to see for myself, and according to Eurosport commentators as well, there's something unusual about the way they count unforced errors at Roland Garros... If the mistake comes when you have an easy ball and you just have to step towards it and go for a winner but net it, or you missed the line by an inch on an aggressive return... that makes no difference to them! So, maybe those 100 mistakes were a few less :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,036 Posts
Maya,

The Aussie commentators were saying that
a different type of ball is being used from
the ATP tour. Don't know if it's also a
different type of ball compared to what's
used in the WTA tour.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,731 Posts
Yep, basically every out, or net is counted at RG, not forced errors, say if you were ran out of the court, with your backed turned and hit the ball out, you could argue it was forced. I would say a lot of both players errors are forced. Ashley was running around all over the place.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,110 Posts
true dava, i heard from max that the french just goes like that... they count forced errors as unforced... to push up numbers....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
I think they have done the same last year.
In the match between James Black and the other American, Kames said when seeing the stats, that he doesn't think he made so many unforced errors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
212 Posts
Brian Stewart said:
Yep, they're counting errors differently here (again). All errors are being counted as "unforced". That really blows up the numbers.
Interesting!
I understand that the dissociation between forced and unforced errors is based on something that can be brought in question.I mean, it's not a number.Some may say it's a forced and some it's an unforced.(Not always,but it may happen).But,isn't there a "common rule" that everybody(in all tournaments) should follow when it comes to this?
How will they be able to compare the statistics with other tournament's statistics?

Oh,and i would also like to ask something else:
I have heard the term "clear winner"(i may be mistaken),so could somebody tell me what's the difference between a "clear winner" and a winner?

Thanks in advance
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
pathfinder said:
Interesting!
.......

I have heard the term "clear winner"(i may be mistaken),so could somebody tell me what's the difference between a "clear winner" and a winner?

Thanks in advance
A clear winner in my opinion is just like a an exageration of a winner, it's a winner shot, but when the oponent is really away from the ball.
But they go just the same statistically wise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,603 Posts
catamaran said:
Daniela still made an unusually high number of UE's, whichever way you count it, I think.
It's also interesting (and strange) to note from the official match stats that Daniela had 42 winners to Ashley's 16 :eek:

If, and it's a BIG if, Daniela had cut down on the UE's handing so many points to Ashley on a plate, it would have been a different result. It's almost as if Daniela beat herself rather than Ashley beating her. I mean, 16 winners is hardly amazing tennis. It seems Ashley played sensibly and just got the ball back in play and waited for Dani to make the mistake. It's clever and it worked. Dani doesn't play like that - it's all or nothing for her , a big winner or of miss by inches, there is no compromise with the way she plays. When someone plays so cavalier as that, there is always going to be the chance that she is just as likely to lose the game as she is to winning the game. That's what makes her so exciting to watch, and for anyone who doubts this theory, watch a tape of the Indian Wells final from last year when she beat Hingis. She just went for everything and it was one of those days when everything worked.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top