Ratty wrote:

---

What larks indeed ...

Here's some blatant confirmation bias for you .....

"Laura does seem to learn how to play her opponents, a narrow loss at first meeting is often followed by a clear win at the next rematch."

... or is it?

(I am confident that Indiana will now produce an analysis showing that the above quote from Peter Too is statistically unimpeachable).

 

---

Gee, it is going to get rather time consuming if folk can't make observations such as that they think a) partly or fully based on b) without being accused of blatant confirmation bias unless they have full statistical back-up for b) and even if the accuser has nothing showing otherwise.  Once upon a time folk were able to share fairly uncontroversial thoughts stated in that way without such a palaver.

I already spent quite a lot of time setting out Laura's win / loss vs ranking statistics for this year to refute your "periodic outperformance" and "return to norm" stuff about her wins and loss here.  

Not that you acknowledged this in any way, but simply moved on to your next bit of sport, sorry next accusation of "blatant confirmation bias".  

Re the latest matter of Laura regularly winning return matches against opponents ( and evidently particularly as a senior ), I guess one counterpoint is that Laura is of course generally getting better ( and I am not going to give her whole career record to prove that statement  )  so all other things being equal one would expect her to do better in the return.  But it is interesting and my memory ( uinchecked ! ) is that some of these return wins have been pretty conculsive as indicated before.

-- Edited by indiana on Wednesday 29th of September 2010 02:51:06 PM

Don't let the grumpy WUMs get you down, Indiana

Time, Gentlemen.

Incidentally, I think the loveliest bit of this tournament was Kimiko Date Krumm celebrating her 40th birthday by beating Sharapova and Hantuchova. Now there's someone who's had a really glorious return!