IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecm/nasm04/317.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equilibrium or Simple Rule at Wimbledon? An Empirical Study

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng-Tao Tang
  • Shih-Hsun Hsu
  • Chen-Ying Huang

Abstract

We follow Walker and Wooders’(2001) empirical analysis to collect and study a broader data set in tennis, including male, female and junior matches. We find that there is mixed evidence in support of the minimax hypothesis. Granted, the plays in our data pass all the tests in Walker and Wooders (2001). However, we argue that not only the test on equal winning probabilities may lack power, but also the current serve choices may depend on past serve choices, the performance of past serve choices, or the time that the game has elapsed. We therefore examine the role that simple rules may play in determining the plays. For a significant number of top tennis players, some simple low-information rules outperform the minimax hypothesis. By comparing junior players with adult players, we find that the former tend to adopt simpler rules. The result of comparison between female and male players is inconclusive

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng-Tao Tang & Shih-Hsun Hsu & Chen-Ying Huang, 2004. "Equilibrium or Simple Rule at Wimbledon? An Empirical Study," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 317, Econometric Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecm:nasm04:317
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/esNASM04/up.31012.1075445774.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    minimax; learning; low-information;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecm:nasm04:317. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.