Week 10 - WTA Premier Mandatory ($7M) - Indian Wells, CA, USA - Hard

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Week 10 - WTA Premier Mandatory ($7M) - Indian Wells, CA, USA - Hard

indiana · Tennis legend

From *5-2 to Jo, Hev gets one break back and rolls through the next game to love in no time at all.

Jo to serve for the match again, *5-4

Jan · Hall of fame

Jo wins 6-4 6-4

indiana · Tennis legend

Yay and aww ...

Heather is safely into the Miami MD but now with 120 points to defend there she does need at least one win there to stop Naomi inheriting the GB #2 spot for a week at least.

I think though we'd all prefer any battle over that #2 spot to be more between two players winning matches. If neither Hev or Naomi get some wins together and Tara has a decent run or two, she could be getting into the mix, certainly before her grass points from last year start coming off. Before then Tara is already closer in points to Hev than the difference in the points they have to defend.

Meantime all the best to Jo. (21) Garcia or Rodina next.

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 10th of March 2017 09:15:08 PM

brendan · Strong Club Player

does anyone know what the UNDF means on the live scores?

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

It probably means it's borked, and their developers messed their tags up.
It's doing it for the little sprites that represent things on the interface. You'll also see in 'Completed Matches' that the tick marks that denote a match winner are currently displaying a hollow rectangle instead of the image for a tick. The UNDF usually is where the match winners name is displayed.
It's been like it about a week now, and, though it doesn't fatally ruin the app, I'm surprised it's not fixed. I reported it to their technical team a few days ago, but I doubt anyone's really paying attention. It'll get fixed eventually , I'm sure (though the WTA.com points tables still list the old ITF levels and points on their site, and I thought that would get fixed quicly too!)

I didn't see the match, but it seems a bit 'meh' going from reaction. Was it any good?

paulisi · Tennis legend

Jo looked a bit rusty. Hev was generally outpowered as expected.

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

paulisi wrote:
Jo looked a bit rusty. Hev was generally outpowered as expected.

Thanks; hard to tell much from the brief highlights.

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

R64: Johanna KONTA (GBR) [11] 11 defeated Heather WATSON (GBR) 108 6-4 6-4

R32: Johanna KONTA (GBR) [11] 11 v. Caroline GARCIA (FRA) [21] 25 (CH 23, OCt. 2016)
> H2H 2-1
> 2016 Zhuhai, China - WTA Elite Trophy - Hard - Round Robin - Konta by 6-2 6-2
> 2016 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Olympic Games - Hard - JK[10] - R32 - Konta by 6-2 6-3
> 2016 Madrid, Spain - WTA Premier Mandatory - Clay - R64 - Garcia by 6-4 2-1 RET

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Here are those highlights (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRwPUXCMZr4)

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Hev's doubles is now on, 1-1*

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Won the first set. Lost the second. And got pulverised in the MTB ..... :(

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

She lost 6-4, 3-6, 1-10.

Not a good day at the office

indiana · Tennis legend

Rather remarkably, particularly in these days of collapsing women's draws, 14 of the 16 seeds in the top half of the draw won their opening match ( and playing players who had already won a MD match ).

Now one of the upsets was Kristyna Pliskova beating the #33 seed Daria Kasatkina, ie the additional seed added when Serena withdrew ( by the way, Kristyna's twin sister, (3) Karolina Pliskova just got through against Monica Puig having lost the first set 6-1 and being behind in the third ).

The other upset even though the next lowest seed is, with respect, much more interesting. (WC) Kayla Day beat (32) Lucic-Baroni 6-4 5-7 7-5

Kayla, WR 175 and JCH 1 is age 17. Mirjana WR 30 and JCH singles 2 turned 35 on Thursday. Mirjana was an Australian Open semi finalist in January. Her previous Slam semi final though was Wimbledon 1999, before Kayla was born !

By the way, Mirjana was not the only Wimbledon 1999 semi finalist in action this week ( though of course they will have shared the action in many many weeks ). Alexandra Stevenson lost in the Australian 25K to Harriet Dart. Harriet though is rather older than Kayla and by that Wimbledon had reached the ripe old age of 2 !

Oh, and who did Mirjana and Alexandra lose to back in 1999? Steffi Graf and Lindsay Davenport respectively, with Lindsay going on to take the title.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Kayla's win is a subjective upset but objectively a highly predictable event. You could not possibly get a more predictable upset as the present rankings sit!!

Particularly when you look at the boxes she and her opponents sit in statistically when considering rank by age. You could consider her the lowest rank of what is a negatively skewed statistical box of players not yet 18 likely to become a full time WTA touring pro. Cici Bellis would be a negative outlier from a rankings perspective.

Kayla's precocity sticks her in a separate box ie high likelihood of being a top 10 WTA touring pro. I say that as along with Cici she sits outside the general pattern of the best players featuring by rank in the top 20 cohort more than a year above their age, a cohort that doesn't really exist until you look at those not yet turned 21!

Subjectively she has the luxury of sitting in the shadow of Cici who is so precocious a win against a higher ranked opponent is considered an inevitable consequence of an emerging superstar so not an upset. Where as the precocity of Kayla is unrecognised by the less objective tennis fan and subjectively labelled an upset when statistically it is not much different from a Cici win.

Now looking at the other extreme of rank by age, this a cohort of players arguably most vulnerable to an (subjective) upset. In that respect her opponent could be considered to have a rank placing her in the tail of a skewed distribution compounded by the chronicity cohort she sits in. She features in the best rank by age cohort of players older than 28 and in the cohort at least 33 where the drop off in rank behind her is ferocious ie a win against the next best ranked player at least 33 subjectively would not be considered an upset! A bit like the Cici situation but in reverse!

So objectively when considered statistically Kayla's is a highly predictable event given the match up. So objectively not an upset at all!

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Saturday 11th of March 2017 06:35:28 AM

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Saturday 11th of March 2017 06:36:21 AM

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Saturday 11th of March 2017 06:40:57 AM