Atithee wrote: ↑Fri Apr 02, 2021 2:47 pm
Sameer, if you cannot do it for a longer period, I’ll do it some day. I may be wrong, I admit that I’ve an impression not based on a rigorous data analysis. Take all the results and just calculate the number of times our players have beaten higher ranked players in total. The data is all here. It is not about winning the tournament. Even the winners, were they the highest ranked player and they just did as good as their rank would imply? Or, did they beat 2-3 higher ranked opponents on the way to the title?
My argument started with a statement players perform better than their ranking at home, which I called a preemptive excuse when our fancied players lose abroad. I would like to check if the same holds true in India for Indian players.
A simple null and alternate hypothesis testing can provide a statistical answer.
I am not sure what point of my assertion is unclear.
Of course your assertion is quite clear. And I did that analysis for challengers in India for 2019 and 2020 and also added an element of how many Indian players lost to lower ranked foreign players ( see page 2 of this thread). If the net result of our players beating higher ranked foreign players - our players losing to lower ranked foreign players is positive than we can say that our players play better than their ranking at home. The result for challengers for those 2 years was 12-7 which is positive.
It is easier to do this at challenger level. It will take more time to do at futures level as more Indian players will be there and rankings at that time are not all updated on this site. Still will try to do it when will get time. Looking at the number of titile winners which I posted and my general feeling, I think the result will be even more in our players favour. But, let the stats speak out for themselves.
Yes, you did do it for a couple years. And, I appreciate it. I will pitch in by doing an analysis too. The good thing is all the data is here; I don’t need to go hunting for it. Thanks you for indulging me.
Home advantage is a pervasive phenomenon in sport. It has been established in team sports such as basketball, baseball, American football, and European soccer. Attention to home advantage in individual sports has so far been limited. The aim of this study was to examine home advantage in professional tennis. Match-level data are used to measure home advantage. The test used is based on logit models, and consistent specification is addressed explicitly. Depending on the interpretation of home advantage, restrictions on the specification of the model need to be imposed. We find that although significant home advantage exists for men, the performance of women tennis players appears to be unaffected by home advantage.
I have done an easier year 2018 when only 4 futures were held in Feb/March-
Week 1- 2 upsets by our players ( Vijayant Malik and Aryan Goveas) , No upsets against our players - 2-0
Week 2 - 2 upsets by our players ( Arjun Kadhe and Suraj Prabodh), 2 upsets against our players ( Sid Rawat and VSP) 2-2
Week 3- 1 upset by our players ( Kaza Vinayak Sarma), 1 upset against our player ( Sid Rawat) 1-1
Week 4 - 3 upsets by our players ( Aniruddh Chandrashekhar, Abhinav Sanjeev and Arjun Kadhe) - No upsets against our players 3-0
Overall, 8- 3 for our players. Quite decisive in favour of players.
One thing I noticed is that every week about 5 of the 8 seeds were Indian players. This was unlike what we see in current round of futures where only 2-3 Indians are seeds. So, our quality at that level ( 300-500 rank level) has certainly dipped.
Maybe we should change the title of this thread to: Does Sid Rawat do worse than his ranking at home? Then, we can all agree and be happy.
How on earth does that guy manage to be that "highly" ranked and then lay golden eggs more often than not? I suppose he must be a very streaky player. Our of the three upsets Sameer found, two were contributed by Sid. He was the #2 seed, etc. this set and lost badly early almost always. He is single-handedly trying to prove Atithee correct.
