|
|
| Тема |
 Re: ЗА или ПРОТИВ [re: Henman] |
|
| Автор |
naja_haje ((не)познат) |
|
| Публикувано | 15.11.12 00:35 |
|
|
|
Интересно четиво, за който се интересува. Ето заключението, че да знаете за какво става въпрос:
In this paper we have investigated four hypotheses relating to the service in tennis. Many
television commentators believe in them, but are they true? We have used almost 90,000 points
at Wimbledon to analyse them.
The first one is indeed true: in the men’s singles the service dominance is larger than in
the ladies’s singles. However, a player is not as good as his/her second service. Actually, it is the
first service that makes the difference.
Both conclusions have important implications for the question whether the rules of the
game should be changed by allowing for only one instead of two services. This suggestion is
often heard as a means to decrease the service dominance, thereby, it is hoped, making tennis
more attractive for the spectator. Not surprisingly, we indeed find a lower service dominance.
8
Additionally, tennis matches would become more even, which makes tennis even more attractive.
It is also commonly believed that serving first in a set provides an advantage. This is not
true, except in the first set. The reason for this advantage in the first set can be completely
accounted for by the "first game effect": fewer breaks occur in the very first game of the match.
Because of the "first game effect" it is advisable for most players to elect to serve when they win
the toss, not to receive.
A man only sees what he wants to see...
| |
| |
| 
|
|
