ATP M1000 WTA 1000 BNP Paribas Open/Indian Wells 3/5 -3/16 2025

[Suliso]

We don't, but it's a bit sad to see that she hasn't found something else meaningful to do. That's all really.

[JTContinental]

We don't, but it's a bit sad to see that she hasn't found something else meaningful to do. That's all really.

Yes, at this point in her life you would think she might have started a successful interior design business or launched her own clothing line.

[ponchi101]

We don't, but it's a bit sad to see that she hasn't found something else meaningful to do. That's all really.

Yes, at this point in her life you would think she might have started a successful interior design business or launched her own clothing line.

Took me a minute...

[dave g]

It makes me wonder if she (Venus) is planning on announcing her official retirement at Indian Wells.

[ashkor87]

It makes me wonder if she (Venus) is planning on announcing her official retirement at Indian Wells.

Very unlikely..at Miami, maybe..home town now. She has little affection for IW, probably

[ponchi101]

By now, maybe Venus just wants to play a match.
Even if she has dropped so much, it must still be difficult for her to find a competitive match (Serena is always away). Maybe she just likes to be in a really competitive situation.

[ti-amie]

[ashkor87]

Well well . How can this kind of mixup happen?

[ponchi101]

Well well . How can this kind of mixup happen?

AI.

[ptmcmahon]

Go try to get AI to make semifinal predictions for a tournament and you'll see exactly what Ponchi means. Was getting it to try Santiago this week and four times in a row it picked the same not possible four semifinalists, even when I gave it a link to an updated draw It's definitely a WIP, especially with sports.

(Side note a song I have been trying to remember for 30 years that I have been describing to my friends... it found in 30 seconds...)

[ashkor87]

I am interested in seeing how different IW results are from Miami and why...do players peak early and then run out of steam,? Or do the great players adjust in time for Miami after bring shaken by IW? Last year, Medvedev learned from IW and did better at Miami ..didn't happen with the women..Swiatek etal petered out and Collins won Miami. The dynamic is interesting.

[ponchi101]

The natural fluctuations in the game?
You don't always have to have an elaborate theory of why player A did well in tournament X and then, in the next tournament, s/he did poorly.
Let's say you have a player that has gone 7-3 in her last three tournaments. That is a very good run. But, it means:
She lost in all
And, since most seeded players play only four rounds in regular tournaments, it means that maybe she won 3-3-1 in the tournaments, and the last one she won only one round. Which is a natural phenomena as far as stats are concerned.
We always look for some complicated narrative, forgetting the obvious: only TWO players will do really well at any tournament, because of the nature of the sport. The rest will offer a great variation of results.

[Suliso]

The same applies to us lowly amateurs when we play tennis or any other sport. Can you really explain why one day you won and another lost vs the same opponent? I usually can't.

[ashkor87]

As a counter, i am willing to point to a pattern- powerful players will do well at IW then will fail to adapt to Miami..humid, slightly faster courts. Only great players like Djokovic can win both, Vika too - she was the dominant hard court player that year
To be specific- Swiatek, Keys, Rybakina will do well at IW. Sabalenka, as I have remarked elsewhere, doesn't seem to fire until the clay court season. Those who do sell at IW will not repeat at Miami, it is a good test of how great Swiatek really is... We shall find out ..

[ptmcmahon]

The natural fluctuations in the game?
You don't always have to have an elaborate theory of why player A did well in tournament X and then, in the next tournament, s/he did poorly.
Let's say you have a player that has gone 7-3 in her last three tournaments. That is a very good run. But, it means:
She lost in all
And, since most seeded players play only four rounds in regular tournaments, it means that maybe she won 3-3-1 in the tournaments, and the last one she won only one round. Which is a natural phenomena as far as stats are concerned.
We always look for some complicated narrative, forgetting the obvious: only TWO players will do really well at any tournament, because of the nature of the sport. The rest will offer a great variation of results.

Exactly. I think a lot of times here were seem to think good players should do well every time no matter what, and if not something is wrong Although part of that can be from some of the dominant runs we've seen last couple of decades.