What are the most useless stats of a tennis match? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What are the most useless stats of a tennis match?

Neely
10-29-2004, 01:36 PM
Well, if tournaments provide us a good live scoreboard via the internet, we are not only given point by point scores, but sometimes even statistics!

The same is also true for most TV broadcasts when graphics with several stats are shown.


So what are, in your opinion, the most useless statistical numbers or categories?

__________________________________________________


For me this is "2nd serve percentage"!
I really don't give much for knowing if the 2nd serve percentage is 97%, 100% or 94%. It's enough for me if double faults are counted.


Also I think that the "unforced errors" category can be useful sometimes as a rough indication who the match is going, but it can be also a very controversial one as this is a very subjective category because it can depend on what people rate as either a "forced error" or an "unforced error".
A perfect example of how fucked up such a category can be was during the Olympic games as the official Athens (or NBC site) counted about 50 to 70 unforced errors for most of the players in almost all the matches. And sometimes it wasn't even mathematically possible that one of the players made so many unforced errors because the number of "unforced errors" was higher than the numbers of points they lost :lol:

TheBoiledEgg
10-29-2004, 01:52 PM
Total pts won..... thats meaningless.

WyveN
10-29-2004, 01:56 PM
Good thread.
I agree with unforced errors, everyone has a different interpretation of what a unforced error is and it is a meaningless stat unless you have actually seen the match.

jtipson
10-29-2004, 01:58 PM
Total pts won..... thats meaningless.

Yup. The problem is with that, is when the player that has fewer points actually wins the match, people moan that the result was unfair, which is totally crazy. Winning the big points wins the match - those are the ones that really count.

Space Cowgirl
10-29-2004, 02:08 PM
The graphics that the Masters tv producers put on showing the serve directions are a bit pointless IMO

Wulfram
10-29-2004, 02:13 PM
Yup. The problem is with that, is when the player that has fewer points actually wins the match, people moan that the result was unfair, which is totally crazy. Winning the big points wins the match - those are the ones that really count.

Which is also why it's not meaningless. It tells you whether it was a case of a player being better on the big points, or on all the points.

For example, it gives you an idea of how the match played out that Roddick won lots more points than Johansson in the US Open quarter-final. Of course Johansson still deserved to win, but it's still interesting to see.

Total points won is also useful to give a hint to who is playing better if there have been no breaks or completed sets.

joeb_uk
10-29-2004, 02:31 PM
For me this is "2nd serve percentage"!
I really don't give much for knowing if the 2nd serve percentage is 97%, 100% or 94%. It's enough for me if double faults are counted.

my one also, nice choice neely ;)

Via
10-30-2004, 12:01 AM
well guys... to give you some perspective from an 'official' lol....i've been counting the stats at the sydney tournament for the past two years. sometimes i didn't even see the ball hit (the umpire's chair's in the way....lol) so i'd enter it as forced/unforced error anyway I pleased. as long as the end-result still agreed with the score. sometimes the stats people would argue among themselves... but there's little time for that in between points. imho there's a tendency towards recording errors as unforced... most observers tend to think that the player *should* get a ball back, and ignore how stretched or awkward the player looked when hitting it.

the stats are printed and distributed after a match for coaches to go through with their players... i suppose they find them useful.... who knows.

Havok
10-30-2004, 12:20 AM
I like to see how many points each player has won. It's an indicator if they really had to fight to win a set or if it was a blowout set. Just having a score of 6-2 in a set looks like a complete rollover, but what if the points total are similar, that means every game was a battle.:p I'm with most of you in the "2nd serve percentage" who cares, we have the doublefault count, that's good enough. I agree that the unforced errors thing can be interpreted differently (the olympics a prime example, but they were freakin idiots so it's kid of a bad example), though I would like to see that stat as it's a fairly good meause of how cleanly the players are playing. Maybe I'll think of a few more when I actually folow a scoreboard now, it's been a while.

Chloe le Bopper
10-30-2004, 12:31 AM
I don't have any use for the "fastest serve" stat (whether it be 1st, 2nd, or combined). The average serve stats (percentages and speeds) are useful, since you can somewhat guage how a player is doing (whether it be physically or mentally) based on their general serve stats. I just don't care much for this particular one ;)

Good thread. There have been several responses that I would also agree with.

I like to see the "total points won" stat for reasons that other posters have already covered, but I can see how one might consider it "useless".

Purple Rainbow
10-30-2004, 07:27 AM
I think the category break point conversions should be changed. If somebody converts 1/5 bp's, than that doesn't sound good. However if all of those bp's came from the same game, the player in fact took the only break opportinity he had. I therefore think a category breakpoint conversions per game with break opportunities would be a useful additional stat.

Maybe a nice additional stat could be average points on opponents serve. If counted for both players you can see in a glimp who's struggling on serve.

And the 2nd serve pct. could indeed go as one of the more useless stats.