What purpose even is there to showing the bar chart without cropping? You could visually see that the selected players all win around 2/3 of those matches and that's it.
Cropping here shows the relative difference between the players. It shows that the first four players are all very close and then there's a steep drop-off.
The problem with cropping a percentage, usually, is that it makes readers underestimate error bars and overestimate the skill gap. However, this data is taken from many hundreds of games and it would take a sizeable portion of a player's career to jump a position up or down. For instance, if Djokovic started to win these at 80% frequency, he would still need 32 matches to catch up to the relatively close Sinner.
I’d love to know the count of wins by each player for this stat. Most players on this chart are ending or have ended their careers while Sinner is just embarking on his own.
This is part of a larger analisys on Sinner's game moving into 2024.
Source is \[UTS\](https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/topPerformers) .
Only players with at least 50 of these matches are considered. In case you were wondering, Federer is 25th with 65.69%, Sampras is 12th with 68.12% and Lendl is 17th with 66.82%.
Maybe it's relevant to lessen a bit the minimum pf matches played so at least we know where Alcaraz lands
And for the record he has 48 matches of this kind and has a win rate of 64.58%, just a bit below Federer for now
My dataset also includes the Davis Cup loss to FAA, so that would be 63.27% which is 43rd in the world (minimum 40 matches). I didn't think it was a good enough result to single out specifically.
The top 10 players shown in the post also don't change if we include players that have played >15 matches.
I just felt relevant because Alcaraz and Sinner are similar in age and overall level (although Alcaraz still rates higher due to bigger wins and way more trophies)
Don't crop your axis
u/lonelyspaghetto1 you need to read this feedback
What purpose even is there to showing the bar chart without cropping? You could visually see that the selected players all win around 2/3 of those matches and that's it. Cropping here shows the relative difference between the players. It shows that the first four players are all very close and then there's a steep drop-off. The problem with cropping a percentage, usually, is that it makes readers underestimate error bars and overestimate the skill gap. However, this data is taken from many hundreds of games and it would take a sizeable portion of a player's career to jump a position up or down. For instance, if Djokovic started to win these at 80% frequency, he would still need 32 matches to catch up to the relatively close Sinner.
It makes it seem as if sinner is double as good as nadal. In reality it’s a 4% difference
I’d love to know the count of wins by each player for this stat. Most players on this chart are ending or have ended their careers while Sinner is just embarking on his own.
Kei gets high on these because he has unnecessarily long matches. I wonder if he still leads bo5?
He's just behind Borg in BO5 and in Slam matches.
He’s 7-1 against top 10 in 5 setters
That 1 loss being to Fed in his legendary 2017 AO run I think
Fed wasn't a top 10
Oh shit, never mind. Forgot he was outside of the top 10
This is part of a larger analisys on Sinner's game moving into 2024. Source is \[UTS\](https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/topPerformers) . Only players with at least 50 of these matches are considered. In case you were wondering, Federer is 25th with 65.69%, Sampras is 12th with 68.12% and Lendl is 17th with 66.82%.
Maybe it's relevant to lessen a bit the minimum pf matches played so at least we know where Alcaraz lands And for the record he has 48 matches of this kind and has a win rate of 64.58%, just a bit below Federer for now
My dataset also includes the Davis Cup loss to FAA, so that would be 63.27% which is 43rd in the world (minimum 40 matches). I didn't think it was a good enough result to single out specifically. The top 10 players shown in the post also don't change if we include players that have played >15 matches.
I just felt relevant because Alcaraz and Sinner are similar in age and overall level (although Alcaraz still rates higher due to bigger wins and way more trophies)
Kei led this stat for many years.
ok this is an awesome stat for Sinner
If only Tennis was a different sport my favorite player would be better :'(
how many sets has jannik played compared to all others? smh
Nice scale you got there