OnCourt (categories) [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

OnCourt (categories)

CrossCourt13
01-19-2008, 12:33 PM
I think it's my first thread here and hopefully an interesting one.

I've been using OnCourt for I while now but still didn't use it to it's full potential.
I find the option to put players into different categories quite interesting and would like to hear if anyone did something good with this.
The only one that's given here by default is the one listing all the left handers which is very useful indeed so I was thinking of creating more of them.
The ones that come to mind are :
1. Big serving guys
2. Single or double hander bh
3. Ball bashers (Blake, Tursunov, Gabashvilli :worship:,... )
4. Players pretty much equal on both wings (bh & fh)
5. Players with a weak bh
6. Players with a lot better bh than forehand
7. Good movers, quick players
8. S&V players
9. Great returners

I came up with the idea to do something like this yesterday while looking at the Gonzalez vs Cilic matchup and wanted to see how does Cilic generaly cope when he plays against a player with no backhand.
And I concluded, from his results, he generally does quite well.
Of course every stats can be misleading and every conclusion can be only a matter of opinion in the end but stats alone mustn't be considered bulletproof because of the various circumstances but they might create some kind of a general image of a good/bad matchup for any given player.

I realize it would take quite a bit of work to get all this done so I was wondering what you guys think of the idea itself and which of the categories would you find useful and which ones would you add here yourself.
I know many bettors regard form as the most relevant criteria when generating an opinion on who will win. I also think it's a very important factor of course but I would dare to say the matchup thing is pretty much equally important.
That's why I'm giving it plenty of thought before getting involved in a match bettingwise.

I was thinking of doing this for the top 100 players only.

Thanks for any (constructive :)) reply.