Then, the probability of player 1 winning a set 6-0 is p⁶; the probability of player 2 doing that is (1-p)⁶.
Let’s assume a fairly evenly matched game, where p=0.6. Then, those probabilities are about 4.7% and 0.4%. Combined, that’s about 1 in 5,000, or 1:2500 to get either of 6:0;0:6 or 0:6;6:0.
Doesn’t sound too bad but in real life, that number will be a lot lower because of the server advantage in tennis. Especially in men’s tennis, the server has a big advantage, making even single set 6-0 scores highly unlikely.
And if the first set is 6-0, that indicates one side has exceptionally better skills.
In the model I proposed, it doesn’t. Even if the players are perfectly balanced, there’s a 1:64 probability of getting 6-0 and a 1:64 probability of getting 0-6. Combined, that’s a 3% chance of getting a bagel.
But as I said, there’s a huge server’s advantage in men’s tennis. That makes ‘bagels’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagel_(tennis)) less likely there, and means a player winning a set 6:0 indeed statistically is much better than their opponent.
They’re fairly common in women’s tennis, though, even ones with the side losing that set winning the match.
In the Women’s 3-set match, where there are 735 possibilities, these scores have never eventuated:
6-0 0-6 7-5, 6-0 0-6 6-0, 0-6 6-0 7-5
Meanwhile, in the 5-set format of Men’s matches, only 8.5% of the more than 100k result possibilities have occurred.
Then add on a huge UI.
Here I'm not really invested in any of the numbers... the website is beautiful though.
Yes, I see now that you can stop this my manually advancing the carousel but it’s not at all obvious. Particularly since it’s no longer visible on mobile when you’ve scrolled down to the scores.
I'll take action on these comments soon(ish). But yes, I concur I need to drastically improve the mobile layout tbh.
ben0x539•7mo ago
jlarks32•7mo ago