IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ejw/journl/v16y2019i1p114-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unforced Errors: Tennis Serve Data Tells Us Little About Loss Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • MichaÅ‚ Krawczyk

Abstract

Nejat Anbarci and collaborators argue in two recent papers that male tennis players’ behaviour is consistent with aversion to losses rather than maximization of expected utility. To prove this point they sketch simple theoretical models. I discuss numerous shortcomings of their theoretical and empirical analysis. I suggest that their conclusion, that male tennis players are loss averse, is unsubstantiated.

Suggested Citation

  • MichaÅ‚ Krawczyk, 2019. "Unforced Errors: Tennis Serve Data Tells Us Little About Loss Aversion," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 16(1), pages 114–123-1, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:16:y:2019:i:1:p:114-123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econjwatch.org/File+download/1102/KrawczykMar2019.pdf?mimetype=pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://econjwatch.org/1154
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaassen, Franc J.G.M. & Magnus, Jan R., 2009. "The efficiency of top agents: An analysis through service strategy in tennis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 72-85, January.
    2. Nejat Anbarci & K. Peren Arin & Cagla Okten & Christina Zenker, 2017. "Is Roger Federer more loss averse than Serena Williams?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(35), pages 3546-3559, July.
    3. Anbarci, Nejat & Arin, K. Peren & Kuhlenkasper, Torben & Zenker, Christina, 2018. "Revisiting loss aversion: Evidence from professional tennis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-18.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Legge, Stefan & Schmid, Lukas, 2016. "Media attention and betting markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 304-333.
    2. Anbarci, Nejat & Arin, K. Peren & Kuhlenkasper, Torben & Zenker, Christina, 2018. "Revisiting loss aversion: Evidence from professional tennis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-18.
    3. Joseph P. McGarrity & Brian Linnen, 2010. "Pass or Run: An Empirical Test of the Matching Pennies Game Using Data from the National Football League," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(3), pages 791-810, January.
    4. Nejat Anbarci & K. Peren Arin & Christina Zenker, 2019. "Tennis Serve Data May Elude Some as Serves Get Too Fast," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 16(1), pages 124–129-1, March.
    5. Legge, Stefan & Schmid, Lukas, 2013. "Rankings, Random Successes, and Individual Performance," Economics Working Paper Series 1340, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    6. Tomi Ovaska & Albert J. Sumell, 2014. "Who Has The Advantage? An Economic Exploration of Winning in Men's Professional Tennis," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 59(1), pages 34-51, May.
    7. Axel Anderson & Jeremy Rosen & John Rust & Kin-Ping Wong, 2021. "Disequilibrium Play in Tennis," Working Papers gueconwpa~21-21-07, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
    8. Sebastian Bervoets & Bruno Decreuse & Mathieu Faure, 2014. "A Renewed Analysis of Cheating in Contests: Theory and Evidence from Recovery Doping," AMSE Working Papers 1441, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France, revised Jun 2015.
    9. François Cochard & Alexandre Flage & Gilles Grolleau & Angela Sutan, 2020. "Are individuals more generous in loss contexts?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(4), pages 845-866, December.
    10. José L. Ruiz & Diego Pastor & Jesús T. Pastor, 2013. "Assessing Professional Tennis Players Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 14(3), pages 276-302, June.
    11. Pastoriza, David & Alegre, Inés & Canela, Miguel A., 2021. "Conditioning the effect of prize on tournament self-selection," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. Brian Goff & Stephen L. Locke, 2019. "Revisiting Romer: Digging Deeper Into Influences on NFL Managerial Decisions," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(5), pages 671-689, June.
    13. Herrmann, Oliver & Jong-A-Pin, Richard & Schoonbeek, Lambert, 2019. "A prospect-theory model of voter turnout," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 362-373.
    14. Leonidas Spiliopoulos, 2018. "Randomization and serial dependence in professional tennis matches: Do strategic considerations, player rankings and match characteristics matter?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(5), pages 413-427, September.
    15. Ely, Jeffrey & Gauriot, Romain & Page, Lionel, 2017. "Do agents maximise? Risk taking on first and second serves in tennis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 135-142.
    16. Ely, Jeffrey & Gauriot, Romain & Page, Lionel, 2017. "Do agents maximise? Risk taking on first and second serves in tennis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 135-142.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:5:p:413-427 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Paserman, M. Daniele, 2023. "Gender Differences in Performance in Competitive Environments? Evidence from Professional Tennis Players," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 590-609.
    19. Romain Gauriot & Lionel Page, 2019. "Does Success Breed Success? a Quasi-Experiment on Strategic Momentum in Dynamic Contests," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(624), pages 3107-3136.
    20. Anthony Glass & Karligash Kenjegalieva & Jason Taylor, 2015. "Game, set and match: evaluating the efficiency of male professional tennis players," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 119-131, April.
    21. Ester Gutiérrez & Sebastián Lozano, 2020. "Benchmarking Formula One auto racing circuits: a two stage DEA approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 2059-2083, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    loss aversion; sports; risk;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • L67 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Other Consumer Nondurables: Clothing, Textiles, Shoes, and Leather Goods; Household Goods; Sports Equipment
    • Z31 - Other Special Topics - - Tourism Economics - - - Industry Studies

    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:ejw:journl:v:16:y:2019:i:1:p:114-123. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Jason Briggeman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edgmuus.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.