Great to see Katie have a full year injury free after such a prolonged period out of the game. She is now getting an opportunity to develop the talent she showed by becoming a top 10 junior.
I really feel for Freya who has been treading water a bit since returning from playing in SE Asia for Wimbledon Qualifying. While there I was standing next to another player who was of the opinion that Freya had been playing at a level better than that generally seen in qualifying and was confident she would win through.
I don't think her subsequent performance was particularly relevant to anything later, she was just ill playing through a bad cold and got injured. Subsequently it has been up and down but on occasions she has done well for the sample winning in Lubbock. She has natural talent, the weight of her shot is so much heavier than most women and a bit like Naomi it needs harnessing, I feel with some tweaking of her game and the support of a sports psychologist she has the potential to reach the same level.
My impression is she moved to playing senior tennis earlier than most of the girls and didn't really pursue a junior rank in the way most do. I feel there is a psychological advantage in having a period where you really dominate a cohort of players or are right at the top of a cohort. I say this in generality but by breaking into the top 10 or there abouts as a junior it instills a sense of belief and self confidence. Naomi's comments about her expectations as a child I thought were amusing and charmingly understated but from another perspective really interesting, she seemed surprised to be doing so well however it is obvious that she had talents/weapons that other players did not and well done to Fitzy for identifying and harnessing them.
-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Thursday 2nd of March 2017 07:15:32 AM
That's a terrific win for Katie :D
Toughie next; will be interesting to see how it pans out.
Yes, it's great that Katie has managed to get back to where she was before her long injury lay-off and, hopefully, can now push on upwards :)
That's about the best result to come from down under in the past few months....which is not saying a whole heap of beans....but well done, Katie !
In terms of upsetting the rankings, the third best result from this group down under. These are all the wins against a better ranked opponent (two of which were all GB Dart/Boulter affairs):
Your graphs and tables are great, AliB. (As indeed are those of several other people on this forum, awesome)
I tend to think that second round matches count higher than first round though. And similarly, a QF win over someone only 30 places higher, for instance, would rank even better than today's R16 match etc. etc. There's probably some way of factoring in points/money on offer over ranking differential, to see how they place overall. But I'm not the person to figure that out......
-- Edited by Coup Droit on Thursday 2nd of March 2017 10:21:24 AM
Agreed. This was just a quick look.
Also, if you're 100 and beat #10. That's 90 places. But a much better result than WR 500 beating WR 400, even though that's 100 places.
% of ranking differential would count, and probably not on a linear basis, but a curve - plotting a good curve is hard, as it's subjective.
I could easily weight each round to generate a score, perhaps using the differences in ranking points per round per event to generate some sort of value to the result: Ranking Differential % * round factor * event level factor
Perhaps I'll mess around with it tomorrow. I'm having trouble automating allocation of ranking points, because of things like Byes, variable draw sizes, w/o's. But, getting there slowly.
I have the same sort of quandary about Brit bashing opponents, is an 0-3 record against an opponent (GB 2017 vs. Mia Nicole Eklund) better or worse than 1-5 (GB 2017 vs. Iva Primorac)?
Does the context of the matches count?
Had hoped she'd have got closer than that, albeit it always looked likely to be a challenging encounter. Hey ho, bank that excellent R2 win and move on...
Emerging players also massively skew any real time analysis as what is and what was an outstanding win, only a historical reflection will tell the real story. That's what makes it all so much fun to watch express opinions and then watch them unravel as each players career evolves. Today's loss is what it is but in 5 years time I don't think anyone would consider it a surprise. It would be good to be wrong.