Patrick - fact checking....
TT
> From 2002 till half of 2007 his break point conversions were
> amazing...
> in the latter part of 2007 it seemed to just vanish almost,
> truly a bizzare career sea change...
Nope.
FEDERER BREAK POINT CONVERSION RATE
2004 - 41%
2005 - 44%
2006 - 43%
2007 - 41%
2008 - 41%
2009 - 41%
2010 - 41%
2011 - 40%
For comparison...
NADAL BREAK POINT CONVERSION RATE
2004 - 43%
2005 - 46%
2006 - 43%
2007 - 44%
2008 - 45%
2009 - 47%
2010 - 44%
2011 - 44%
Joe Ramirez
So Nadal was at peak in 2009?
felangey
> 2004 - 41%
> 2005 - 44%
> 2006 - 43%
> 2007 - 41%
> 2008 - 41%
> 2009 - 41%
> 2010 - 41%
> 2011 - 40%
>
>
> For comparison...
>
> NADAL BREAK POINT CONVERSION RATE
>
> 2004 - 43%
> 2005 - 46%
> 2006 - 43%
> 2007 - 44%
> 2008 - 45%
> 2009 - 47%
> 2010 - 44%
> 2011 - 44%
Cool.....do one for slams.
Katya
It appears the club players also convert in the low 40%.
The annual average seems to have marginal importance.
At match level it might tell the story, but it's more of an indicator:
good/bad day
GOYLE
>
> - Show quoted text -
I also think the outliers should be excluded. On average, the players
have BP in the 40% range. On a good day or bad day the average goes up
or down and the value is markedly smaller or larger then the average
value.
TT
So you deny importance of break% ?
Doesn't make Patrick's statement factual though.
...Interesting stat about Nadal's 2009...maybe it tells us about his
body breaking but not mind...
TT
You couldn't be more wrong.
Iceberg
I was going to say, surely top 5 players have higher bp averages than
club players!
Katya
Can't find the link, but forget the club players.
Annual statistics on bp conv is a dead horse when the ATP players are
packed within 5%. What's the relevance of 2 extra breaks during a
whole year ?
This is just part of the revisionist campaign to prop up Rafito for
posterity with whatever args.
As we speak, the rst board lits up with teenage style propaganda:
what's gayer than the Monte Carlo image zip file ?
Sweet and enthusiastic ? Yes, but for a Britney worshiper. Not for the
tough guys that call Fed a 'pussy'.
TT
Go fuck yourself whore.
Joe Ramirez
Actually, I thought it was more important *before* I saw these tables
of annual results. Now it's clear to me that there's little, if any,
correlation between annualized break point efficiency and general
level of play or results. Obviously, squandering oodles of break
points in a single match can be fatal, but the annual percentages
don't seem to tell us anything beyond that simple fact. I think the
statistic would have to be much more focused -- e.g., slams only, or
later rounds of tournaments only, or versus top 10 players only -- to
be meaningful.
>
> Doesn't make Patrick's statement factual though.
That's true, but now it seems that his mistake regarding Fed's results
was relatively trivial, because the stat itself -- considered on an
annual basis -- is relatively trivial.
TT
That's ridiculous. You question break% because your favourite player has
a poor statistic on it. Can you not see that Fed actually IS a poor
returner from ad-court?
His success is because of getting lots of break opportunities and
holding serve well. But he's not strong on big points when receiving, as
bp conversion rate tells us.
Joe Ramirez
I question the significance of the statistic when presented on an
annualized basis because it's plainly insignificant. Federer is
actually a lot closer to Nadal than I imagined he would be; I expected
a larger gap between them, especially in the last few years. But the
most important fact is that, as I've already said, THERE IS LITTLE IF
ANY CORRELATION BETWEEN ANNUALIZED BREAK POINT EFFICIENCY AND GENERAL
LEVEL OF PLAY OR RESULTS. Now go think about that before replying with
yet another of your patented "everything is because of Federer" bits
of nonsense.
Sakari Lund
Did you read at all what Joe said? You automatically assume that 99,9%
of rst posters say all they say to make some excuses for Federer or
something. In this case that assumption doesn't make any sense. What
he is saying that these numbers say that there is very little
correlation between break point conversation rates and results in a
yearly basis. That is especially true with Nadal.
TT
Nonsense.
It's like saying that ace count or service points/games won% tells
nothing since it doesn't necessarily correlate with matches won. So we
can't tell from stats that Karlovic is a great server...
Break point conversion rate does correlate somewhat with return games
won, naturally.
A tennis match consist of 2 different ways of winning games...holding
your serve and breaking your opponent: BP conversion rate correlates
with the latter, more specifically tells us how one does on pressure
points on return.
Of course even more telling stat would be to compare a player's BP
conversion rate and return points won%
TT
> That's true, but now it seems that his mistake regarding Fed's results
> was relatively trivial, because the stat itself -- considered on an
> annual basis -- is relatively trivial.
Absurd. Patrick specifically claimed that Fed had a great break%, it was
his primary claim in his post.