H*B 发帖数: 3645 | |
f******g 发帖数: 13917 | 2 这不废话,赢的时候叫什么暂停啊,
坏了自己的节奏
【在 H*B 的大作中提到】 : 赢得时候就没事了
|
H*B 发帖数: 3645 | 3 有道理,呵呵。
【在 f******g 的大作中提到】 : 这不废话,赢的时候叫什么暂停啊, : 坏了自己的节奏
|
c******d 发帖数: 564 | |
H*B 发帖数: 3645 | 5 狒狒没机会改善交战记录了
【在 H*B 的大作中提到】 : 赢得时候就没事了
|
c******d 发帖数: 564 | |
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 7 人可是卫冕冠军阿。
【在 c******d 的大作中提到】 : kao : 俄罗斯人太牛逼了
|
c******d 发帖数: 564 | |
c******d 发帖数: 564 | |
c******d 发帖数: 564 | |
|
|
d**f 发帖数: 293 | 11 Many people, incluing famous commentators like Patrick McEnroe, have said
their head-to-head record looks more and more meaningless now, since it is
so biased toward plays on clay. On non-clay surfaces, Federer has a better
record. More important, Nadal simply failed to meet Federer in so many
occasions in non-clay finals.
【在 H*B 的大作中提到】 : 狒狒没机会改善交战记录了
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 12 Federer also failed to meet Nadal on clay in many occasions last
year.
better
【在 d**f 的大作中提到】 : Many people, incluing famous commentators like Patrick McEnroe, have said : their head-to-head record looks more and more meaningless now, since it is : so biased toward plays on clay. On non-clay surfaces, Federer has a better : record. More important, Nadal simply failed to meet Federer in so many : occasions in non-clay finals.
|
S****2 发帖数: 349 | 13 灯壳打得好的时候,连ff都得上厕所,ff说灯壳时不时会有20。30分钟play
incredible tennis.
【在 c******d 的大作中提到】 : 登科反手小角度真犀利
|
S***e 发帖数: 4426 | 14 数据帝怎么解释费纳有多于一半的对决在红土,而他们每年各自只有大约、
甚至不到1/4的赛事是在红土上打的?到底who fail to meet who啊?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】 : Federer also failed to meet Nadal on clay in many occasions last : year. : : better
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 15 At the end of Federer's career, the numbers will not be that
biased.
I am not denying at present the numbers are biased. Note I said
*IN 2010* Federer failed to meet Nadal on clay multiple times.
【在 S***e 的大作中提到】 : 数据帝怎么解释费纳有多于一半的对决在红土,而他们每年各自只有大约、 : 甚至不到1/4的赛事是在红土上打的?到底who fail to meet who啊?
|
S***e 发帖数: 4426 | 16 2010:一次红土,一次硬地。红土占50%啊。
如果以后他们每10次meet中三次左右在红土才勉强算是unbiased。
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】 : At the end of Federer's career, the numbers will not be that : biased. : I am not denying at present the numbers are biased. Note I said : *IN 2010* Federer failed to meet Nadal on clay multiple times.
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 17 Please be scientific when reading what I wrote.
"In 2010, Federer failed to meet Nadal multiple times on clay"
is a correct statement. I am not indicating anything else.
Federer did not attend Monte Carlo, where Nadal won the final
6-0, 6-1.
Federer lost early in Rome.
Federer did meet Nadal in Madrid.
Federer lost early in Roland Garros.
So he failed to meet Nadal 3 times. Is there anything wrong with
my statement?
Since I was talking about clay strictly, I didn't bring up US Open
or Wimbledon.
【在 S***e 的大作中提到】 : 2010:一次红土,一次硬地。红土占50%啊。 : 如果以后他们每10次meet中三次左右在红土才勉强算是unbiased。
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 18 Ok, I guess you have some concern about my statement that the numbers
will be less biased in the future.
The way I analyze this is:
1) With Federer's aging and projected worse
performance on clay, he will be more likely to failed to meet Nadal
on clay in the coming few years.
2) With Nadal's improvement on hard courts, he is more likely to
meet Federer on hard courts in the coming few years.
3) Both 1 and 2 will bring the numbers to be less biased.
【在 S***e 的大作中提到】 : 2010:一次红土,一次硬地。红土占50%啊。 : 如果以后他们每10次meet中三次左右在红土才勉强算是unbiased。
|
S***e 发帖数: 4426 | 19 问题是你这个statement想说明什么呢?
如果我说,in 2010, nadal failed to meet federer on hard court multiple times.
这句话本身也是correct statement。因为去年federer拿到title的几个硬地,nadal要
么没参赛,要么提前出局了。
但是这个statement对于讨论他们h2h是否biased没有任何意义啊。
我没说你的statement错误,只是说:只要他们在红土的对决次数超过他们总对决次数
的30%,这个h2h数据当中就有bias。因为他们每年参加的红土赛事都不到总数的30%。
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】 : Please be scientific when reading what I wrote. : "In 2010, Federer failed to meet Nadal multiple times on clay" : is a correct statement. I am not indicating anything else. : Federer did not attend Monte Carlo, where Nadal won the final : 6-0, 6-1. : Federer lost early in Rome. : Federer did meet Nadal in Madrid. : Federer lost early in Roland Garros. : So he failed to meet Nadal 3 times. Is there anything wrong with : my statement?
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 20 I wrote that in supplement to deaf's post
"More important, Nadal simply failed to meet Federer in so many
occasions on non-clay finals."
to point out that there is another aspect of the story and things
are slowing changing now.
In fact, my personal projection is that from now on till before
one of their retirements, Nadal vs Federer on hard courts H2H
record should be around 50-50. Looking at it from another angle,
it means Federer's lifetime advantage over Nadal on hard court will
be nowhere near Nadal's advantage over Federer on clay, even if
you weigh the hard courts 200% considering the longer season.
times.
%。
【在 S***e 的大作中提到】 : 问题是你这个statement想说明什么呢? : 如果我说,in 2010, nadal failed to meet federer on hard court multiple times. : 这句话本身也是correct statement。因为去年federer拿到title的几个硬地,nadal要 : 么没参赛,要么提前出局了。 : 但是这个statement对于讨论他们h2h是否biased没有任何意义啊。 : 我没说你的statement错误,只是说:只要他们在红土的对决次数超过他们总对决次数 : 的30%,这个h2h数据当中就有bias。因为他们每年参加的红土赛事都不到总数的30%。
|
|
|
S***e 发帖数: 4426 | 21 fed在硬地对nadal的优势显然不如nadal在红土对fed的优势大。
这个没人怀疑吧。。。
但是,什么叫biased呢?就是说fed在nadal有绝对优势的红土按说只该每
10次中碰nadal不到3次,但因为fed是红土老二,所以经常以50%以上的
几率在红土碰到nadal。而在fed统治的硬地,nadal却经常fail to meet
federer。这才是这个fail to meet的由来。
如果他们在红土的对决已经是一半甚至超过一半了,何谈什么fail to meet呢?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】 : I wrote that in supplement to deaf's post : "More important, Nadal simply failed to meet Federer in so many : occasions on non-clay finals." : to point out that there is another aspect of the story and things : are slowing changing now. : In fact, my personal projection is that from now on till before : one of their retirements, Nadal vs Federer on hard courts H2H : record should be around 50-50. Looking at it from another angle, : it means Federer's lifetime advantage over Nadal on hard court will : be nowhere near Nadal's advantage over Federer on clay, even if
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 22 I feel our arguments are going at two completely X-Y directions
and there is no need to continue.
For the point you try to stress, I've already pointed out I did not
deny the current bias.
For the points I try to stress, if you deliberately avoid to talk
about them, then it's fine; if you still don't see what I was trying
to say, I just don't know how to express clearer.
【在 S***e 的大作中提到】 : fed在硬地对nadal的优势显然不如nadal在红土对fed的优势大。 : 这个没人怀疑吧。。。 : 但是,什么叫biased呢?就是说fed在nadal有绝对优势的红土按说只该每 : 10次中碰nadal不到3次,但因为fed是红土老二,所以经常以50%以上的 : 几率在红土碰到nadal。而在fed统治的硬地,nadal却经常fail to meet : federer。这才是这个fail to meet的由来。 : 如果他们在红土的对决已经是一半甚至超过一半了,何谈什么fail to meet呢?
|
K****D 发帖数: 30533 | 23 How about this, is it clearer?
"Overall, I think Nadal has an advantage over Federer in their
H2H matches. The advantage is not as large as 14:8 due to a bias.
i.e., If they meet in all 18 important tournaments throughout the
year, Nadal will likely have a better record at year end."
Is it fair?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】 : I feel our arguments are going at two completely X-Y directions : and there is no need to continue. : For the point you try to stress, I've already pointed out I did not : deny the current bias. : For the points I try to stress, if you deliberately avoid to talk : about them, then it's fine; if you still don't see what I was trying : to say, I just don't know how to express clearer.
|
m*****r 发帖数: 3822 | 24 you guys funny...
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】 : How about this, is it clearer? : "Overall, I think Nadal has an advantage over Federer in their : H2H matches. The advantage is not as large as 14:8 due to a bias. : i.e., If they meet in all 18 important tournaments throughout the : year, Nadal will likely have a better record at year end." : Is it fair?
|
s****y 发帖数: 704 | 25 Fed不是还被奶粉号称土场只比博格纳豆差嘛。
【 ,在 Snape (Severus) 的大作中提到: 】 |