|
|
Post by somecoach on Jul 23, 2022 13:02:22 GMT -5
joetrinsey, thank you again. Great article, and I do already subscribe  . Follow up question to the article... ![]() In your write up, there were two parts where you indicated that you have service error data considered. "...2. Some of the advantage of serving the sidelines is nullified by increased errors....When doing this study, I included service errors into the seam..."
and
"...again you see that effectiveness about halved by missed serves, relative to serving the interior seams."I didn't see that data in those tables, is that something you'd be able to share? That would certainly make the picture crystal clear. I can just take your word for it, but I like numbers and graphs and tables  Outside of helping find some statistic info, I want to express my appreciation for growing the game and helping with coaches make decisions based on fact/data/information instead of just doing what their previous coach taught them.
|
|
|
|
Post by joetrinsey on Jul 24, 2022 6:49:51 GMT -5
somecoachI'm going to add some additional data in a part 2 and I'll that data into that post. But so you have it now... I have error rates of 18% and 17% respectively when I judged the player to be aiming for the 1 or 4-seams (sideline seams), compared with an error rate of 8% when not. There's definitely some fuzzy judgment here as I assign every sideline miss to have been aiming for the 1 or 4-seam. For misses in the net or out the back I assigned the seam (or lack of seam) that most closely matched the flight of the ball. So it's possible that I overcounted sideline errors; there has to be some non-zero number of serves where the player was aiming for an interior seam and miss-hit the ball badly enough to miss out the sideline. But I think it's probably safe to say that players miss serves about twice as often when aiming for a sideline seam as when aiming for an interior seam.
|
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Jul 24, 2022 15:28:59 GMT -5
somecoach I'm going to add some additional data in a part 2 and I'll that data into that post. But so you have it now... I have error rates of 18% and 17% respectively when I judged the player to be aiming for the 1 or 4-seams (sideline seams), compared with an error rate of 8% when not. There's definitely some fuzzy judgment here as I assign every sideline miss to have been aiming for the 1 or 4-seam. For misses in the net or out the back I assigned the seam (or lack of seam) that most closely matched the flight of the ball. So it's possible that I overcounted sideline errors; there has to be some non-zero number of serves where the player was aiming for an interior seam and miss-hit the ball badly enough to miss out the sideline. But I think it's probably safe to say that players miss serves about twice as often when aiming for a sideline seam as when aiming for an interior seam. Can't wait for part 2, this works, thank you again! |
|
|
|
Post by sonofdogman on Jul 27, 2022 11:32:02 GMT -5
Good stuff
|
|
|
|
Post by joetrinsey on Aug 10, 2022 15:12:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Sept 6, 2022 16:05:22 GMT -5
Must be season, I am just seeing this posted thank you joetrinsey!! |
|
. Follow up question to the article...
