Talk About Tennis 2.0

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 6:59 pm This is one of those cases when I feel that ELO does a better job than conventional ranking. It almost seems "unfair" when one finalist does a heavy lifting, eliminating the string of favorites, while other reaps the reward, because by the final his/her opponent is emotionally (and maybe physically) spent.

mick1303 wrote:This is one of those cases when I feel that ELO does a better job than conventional ranking. It almost seems "unfair" when one finalist does a heavy lifting, eliminating the string of favorites, while other reaps the reward, because by the final his/her opponent is emotionally (and maybe physically) spent.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 11:25 am What happened to Chang when he decided to bulk up? He was still as fast, and reached three slam finals. But he was still the smallest of the top four Americans at the moment, and his lack of height was always a liability.
You are totally right that the extremes make it difficult to be a top player. Amanda Coetzer, as good as she was, always played at a disadvantage. So did Kei and Diego, and so did Isner, at the opposite extreme.
Paolini is having a good week, and she is proving she belongs as a top player. Does she belong as a very top player, a top 10? That is till a long way from where she is. These cases happen every once in a while, and we should not make much of them (see, Diego beating Rafa in Rome a few years ago).

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 8:20 pm

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 6:59 pm This is one of those cases when I feel that ELO does a better job than conventional ranking. It almost seems "unfair" when one finalist does a heavy lifting, eliminating the string of favorites, while other reaps the reward, because by the final his/her opponent is emotionally (and maybe physically) spent.

You mean like that US Open where Leylah-Annie went through Murderers Row while Raducanu romped?

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 8:20 pm

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 6:59 pm This is one of those cases when I feel that ELO does a better job than conventional ranking. It almost seems "unfair" when one finalist does a heavy lifting, eliminating the string of favorites, while other reaps the reward, because by the final his/her opponent is emotionally (and maybe physically) spent.

You mean like that US Open where Leylah-Annie went through Murderers Row while Raducanu romped?

ashkor87 wrote:

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 8:20 pm

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 6:59 pm This is one of those cases when I feel that ELO does a better job than conventional ranking. It almost seems "unfair" when one finalist does a heavy lifting, eliminating the string of favorites, while other reaps the reward, because by the final his/her opponent is emotionally (and maybe physically) spent.

You mean like that US Open where Leylah-Annie went through Murderers Row while Raducanu romped?

Raducanu had to get past Bencic, who had just beaten Swiatek..Bencic is as formidable as they come, on hard courts... I am quite convince the 'odd' results that USO were because the court was exceptionally fast - young guns like Leylah and Raducanu are quicker, have better reflexes, and better eyesight. It will never happen again, of course, because courts will only get slower

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 9:29 pm

mick1303 wrote:This is one of those cases when I feel that ELO does a better job than conventional ranking. It almost seems "unfair" when one finalist does a heavy lifting, eliminating the string of favorites, while other reaps the reward, because by the final his/her opponent is emotionally (and maybe physically) spent.

Is that why Kalinskaya couldn’t close from 5-3 up in the third and didn’t win another game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk