PDA

View Full Version : Stats for 1985 W SF(Becker-Jarryd)


Moose Malloy
04-01-2008, 12:11 PM
Becker d. Jarryd 2-6,7-6(7-3),6-3,6-3

Don't have the complete match, but I do have NBC's stats for the 1st 3 sets & did stats for the last set.

1st Set

Jarryd -14 winners, 1 unforced error
Becker - 5 winners, 7 unforced errors

after 2 sets:

Jarryd - 30 winners, 5 unforced
Becker - 26 winners, 15 unforced

after 3:

Jarryd - 41 winners, 8 unforced, 3 double faults, 4 aces
Becker - 42 winners, 19 unforced, 7 double faults, 10 aces

My stats for the 4th:

Becker - 12 non service winners, 2 aces, 4 service winners, 4 double faults
Jarryd - 10 non service winners, 1 ace, 1 double fault

So for the match Becker had 60 winners, Jarryd 52(including service winners)

Very high quality, entertaining tennis imo, Jarryd was a great returner & good all court player, S&Ving a lot himself as well. His great returns caused Becker to actually stay back on a few 1st serves.

The match was rained out at 1-1 in the 3rd, so players had to complete the match before the ladies final on Saturday(commentators mentioned that Becker earlier in the event had to play another 2 day match vs Nystrom)

Becker seemed like a different player the next day, while Jarryd couldn't get back in the zone like he had been for most of the 1st 2 sets.

In retrospect the 9th game of the 2nd set(w/Becker serving down 4-5) could be viewed as one of the most important games of his career. It was a long game, Becker had to save 2 sets points(which would have put him down 2 sets to 0) he saved one with an ace, another with a tough 2nd serve & volley off a good Jarryd return. He finished the game with 2 aces(had 3 total in that game, while had only 2 total in the match up until that point)

It never ceases to amaze me how 'clutch' Becker was at 17, many today probably don't know how good some of the players he beat were that year(Jarryd was the #5 seed), they certainly didn't give it to him.

anyone have any recollections of this match?

krosero, did you do stats on the Becker-Curren final? am curious to compare, since Jarryd got so many more balls back, I would think there were less winners in the final compared to this match.

krosero
04-01-2008, 10:56 PM
after 3:

Jarryd - 41 winners, 8 unforced, 3 double faults, 4 aces
Becker - 42 winners, 19 unforced, 7 double faults, 10 aces

My stats for the 4th:

Becker - 12 non service winners, 2 aces, 4 service winners, 4 double faults
Jarryd - 10 non service winners, 1 ace, 1 double fault

So for the match Becker had 58 winners, Jarryd 53(including service winners)Adding your winners, aces and service winners to NBC's winners, Becker is actually at 60 winners for the match, Jarryd at 52.

Also there may be a problem with adding up winners like this, because you may have counted service winners differently than NBC did.

Let me stress that I don't know exactly what NBC was doing in 1985. But look at what they did for the 1984 final. McEnroe had 9 clean aces. NBC credited him with 11 aces because Connors lightly nicked two serves with the edge of his racquet.

NBC kept a running count of the 11 aces during the match. Enberg and Collins called them aces, though the graphics referred to "aces/service winners". In their final graphic summarizing the match, NBC referred to the 11 serves merely as McEnroe's "aces."

I think the category "service winner" in NBC's graphics at this time was restricted to just a very few serves that the statistician actually judged as aces, ie, serves that were barely nicked by the receiver. McEnroe had many other serves against Connors that you and I -- correct me if I'm wrong -- would have called service winners: that is, serves on which the receiver actually does something significant to the ball, more than merely nicking it on its way to the backstop.

I judge serves that are returned into the stands, or into the ground on the same side of the court as the receiver, to be service winners. From your numbers it looks like you're doing something similar.

NBC was also being conservative in the 1984 FO final. Their set-by-set summaries of the winners included only serves by McEnroe and Lendl that were judged aces, which is to say, clean aces plus one McEnroe serve that barely tipped off Lendl's racquet. McEnroe had many other service winners by our own standards, none of them included in the graphics concerning the winners.

If NBC was just as conservative with service winners in 1985, then their stats for the first three sets of the Jarryd match may have included only two or three service winners in total. By contrast you found four service winners in just one set, just for Becker.

krosero, did you do stats on the Becker-Curren final? am curious to compare, since Jarryd got so many more balls back, I would think there were less winners in the final compared to this match.I haven't done that match. I'd be extremely curious to see the stats, though.

Whatever total number of winners we might get for that match, could only be compared to the Jarryd match generally, since we don't know exactly how many service winners NBC counted.

Moose Malloy
04-02-2008, 09:16 AM
Adding your winners, aces and service winners to NBC's winners, Becker is actually at 60 winners for the match, Jarryd at 52.


thanks. don't know what I was counting there when I posted that.

I judge serves that are returned into the stands, or into the ground on the same side of the court as the receiver, to be service winners. From your numbers it looks like you're doing something similar.


what about serves where the returner barely gets a racquet on the ball(they are basically diving for it) & it floats way wide or long? There were a few of these & can't see how they shouldn't be counted as service winners. One of Jarryd's returns almost made it to the stands on Becker's side of the court. I think a return just crossing the net shouldn't automatically disqualify it from being called a service winner.

Also there may be a problem with adding up winners like this, because you may have counted service winners differently than NBC did.


Dick Enberg said "that's a service winner' right after I jotted one down in the 4th. So who knows.

If NBC was just as conservative with service winners in 1985, then their stats for the first three sets of the Jarryd match may have included only two or three service winners in total. By contrast you found four service winners in just one set, just for Becker.


I do have the complete 3rd set as well, I could take stats for it & compare what winners NBC had for that set(by subtracting the total after 3 sets from the total after 2)

And going just by NBC these were Becker's winners by set:

5, 21, 16

And I had Becker for 18 in the 4th, that doesn't seem that out of place, does it? Like I said(& the commentators as well) Becker really picked up his level of play in the last 2 sets. And I mentioned in that 4-5 game in the 2nd he had 3 aces in that game alone, while only having 2 total up to that point, he was capable of hitting many service winners all of a sudden, there isn't as much patterns to his level of play compared to a Lendl(did stats on the '91 AO final, & the stats show just how different players they were. Lendl was very consistent in his winners throughout, while Becker went almost an entire set with not many winners & then in the last game of that set he would make more than he had in the entire set)

Whatever total number of winners we might get for that match, could only be compared to the Jarryd match generally, since we don't know exactly how many service winners NBC counted.

I just popped in the DVD for the final(it has chapters by set for easy searching, I wish all my dvds had that), & Becker already had 60+ winners after 3 sets in the final. From my memory of this match, there were a lot less non-service winners in this match, & neither guy returns like Jarryd, so I imagine the service winner counts were high. Becker really picked it up from the 2nd to 3rd set, according to NBC he had like 25 winners in the 3rd set alone.

As far as what you said about Mac, you have to admit that Becker(& Curren for that matter) were probably on another level than Mac as far as service winner counts, so maybe that's why his counts were low in '84.

I don't think the sport ever had one player that played so differently than the rest of the tour emerge in just one year like Becker in '85. The increase in the pace of shot from the '84 W final to the '85 W final is pretty amazing.

krosero
04-02-2008, 09:33 PM
what about serves where the returner barely gets a racquet on the ball(they are basically diving for it) & it floats way wide or long? There were a few of these & can't see how they shouldn't be counted as service winners. One of Jarryd's returns almost made it to the stands on Becker's side of the court. I think a return just crossing the net shouldn't automatically disqualify it from being called a service winner.I fully agree with your reasoning. I'll tell you, the reason I'm doing it the way I am is simply because I wanted to decide on a simple method for counting service winners, as close to an "objective" method as possible, as I go from one match to another. I did it just to simplify my own counting, so I don't have to stop and think too hard about individual serves. Also, anyone looking at my data in the future will not need to ask how I judged McEnroe's serves or Borg's or Edberg's; a simple explanation for how I counted will be right there in my posts.

What you're doing is more subtle and I'm all for it if what you want is to judge how many unreturnable serves any given player delivered.

Dick Enberg said "that's a service winner' right after I jotted one down in the 4th. So who knows.I wanted to get into this above but I thought my post was already overly long with that discussion of NBC's graphic displays of stats. But yeah, when Enberg and Collins spoke the term "service winner", they were using it as you and I would -- referring to serves that are not aces.

But that happens to be different from what I see in NBC's graphics, so I'll try to keep this as short as possible but I'm going to go into the detail.

You probably remember, sometimes Enberg and Collins actually said that their statistician declined to "give" an ace to the server after he blasted a serve that the receiver barely touched. For example they do that in the Jan. '84 Masters final. In the RG final, McEnroe hit a few unreturnable serves in one game and Enberg called them all "service winners". I wish I had marked down which game it was; but I do remember that these serves, though Enberg called them "service winners", were not included in the graphics that displayed the total winners by set. Those totals are all accounted for. They included regular winners in rallies, clean aces, plus one or two serves barely touched by the receiver but judged by the statistician as an ace. I know that because I followed closely their running count of aces and their summaries of winners. In the RG final, the set-by-set totals of winners match up with mine if I add all the winners I counted in rallies plus the clean aces and any other serves that Enberg or Collins, on the spot, called an ace. But what Enberg and Collins called "service winners", in the RG and W finals, never got included in the totals of the winners.

What makes it more confusing is that occasionally NBC's graphics would refer to the ace total at a certain point in the match with the term "aces/service winners." I kept a running count, so I know that those serves were the ones that Enberg and Collins called aces. Those graphics did NOT include those serves that Enberg and Collins referred to as "service winners".

Probably the term "aces/service winners" was used in the graphics simply because the statistician wanted to indicate that his total included clean aces plus some judgment calls.

Whatever the case, according to my scoresheet those serves that the statistician was referring to were all judged as aces and were entirely separate from the serves that Enberg and Collins casually referred to as service winners.

I think hardly any viewers would have been aware that when they saw "aces/service winners" flashed on screen it did not refer to any serves that Enberg and Collins called service winners. But that's how it looks. At least, this explanation I've given seems to explain everything on my sheets for the '84 finals at RG and Wimb.

It might sound improbable that the term "service winner" was used in two different ways, but I think it's not so surprising given what I posted in the Smith-Nastase thread, ie, the different ways of judging aces and near-aces.

Still, it would be good to have some kind of explanation from someone who knows for sure. Not that anyone, at this point, is likely to remember how these things were done in detail over twenty years ago, but I will try to get some answers.

I do have the complete 3rd set as well, I could take stats for it & compare what winners NBC had for that set(by subtracting the total after 3 sets from the total after 2)Bring on the data :) I'd like to see what NBC was counting as winners in 1985.

And going just by NBC these were Becker's winners by set:

5, 21, 16

And I had Becker for 18 in the 4th, that doesn't seem that out of place, does it? Like I said(& the commentators as well) Becker really picked up his level of play in the last 2 sets. And I mentioned in that 4-5 game in the 2nd he had 3 aces in that game alone, while only having 2 total up to that point, he was capable of hitting many service winners all of a sudden, there isn't as much patterns to his level of play compared to a Lendl(did stats on the '91 AO final, & the stats show just how different players they were. Lendl was very consistent in his winners throughout, while Becker went almost an entire set with not many winners & then in the last game of that set he would make more than he had in the entire set)I also hope you get a chance to post your Becker-Lendl data.

I've found the same thing with Becker; he's much more hot and cold than Lendl. My only point about the Jarryd match is that you have a different way of counting total winners than NBC did, if we go by the '84 data. I only see three serves in the RG and W finals that you and I would call service winners (ie, touched by the receiver) but that were included in NBC's winner totals -- and they were included because they were judged aces. When you presented your own totals for the fourth-set winners in Becker-Jarryd, you were using a far more generous method; you count as winners not just clean aces and near-aces, but also returns that float long or wide. For your total winners, you include serves that you call service winners. NBC's total winners only included whatever they called an ace; a much more restrictive method. You're using a more current method than what NBC was using (for the onscreen stats) in '84.

As far as what you said about Mac, you have to admit that Becker(& Curren for that matter) were probably on another level than Mac as far as service winner counts, so maybe that's why his counts were low in '84.I wouldn't dispute what you say about the serving power. I'm just saying that Mac's total winner counts in '84 included only what NBC judged as aces, that is, clean aces plus only a few serves that were almost clean aces (just one at RG and two at W). It could even be that NBC did the same for Becker in '85. His extra power in comparison to McEnroe might have little to do with it one way or another. It's even possible that Becker wasn't lucky enough to serve a ball that the receiver barely touched with his racquet, so that in the end NBC's count of his total winners only included his clean aces.

If you take more '85 data we'll know more.

urban
04-03-2008, 11:18 AM
Boris had many close escapes that year, against Nystrom he was twice break down in the fifth, against Mayotte he was actually out, he wanted to give up after a fall, was on his way to the umpires chair, but Tiriac held him back.I recall, that Jarryd zoned in the first two sets, but couldn't close out the second. Then as Moose said, the rain break came to Boris' rescue.The next day, Jarryd had lost his touch on the return.

Moose Malloy
04-03-2008, 12:10 PM
Boris had many close escapes that year, against Nystrom he was twice break down in the fifth,

Tennis World called this the best match of '85 in their Year in Review issue. They said Nystrom twice served for the match(at 5-4 & 6-5). Bud Collins called it the match of the tournament during the Jarryd match.

I've heard their rematch at the '85 USO was a great match as well.

krosero
04-03-2008, 12:14 PM
Tennis World called this the best match of '85 in their Year in Review issue. They said Nystrom twice served for the match(at 5-4 & 6-5). Bud Collins called it the match of the tournament during the Jarryd match.

I've heard their rematch at the '85 USO was a great match as well.Very disappointing match for me, I thought Becker played terribly.

Now, I only saw the match once. And i was 15 at the time, and had seen probably less than ten tennis matches in my life.

Moose Malloy
04-03-2008, 12:20 PM
^Rick has that match, was thinking of getting it. I think Becker in '85 must be one of the most exciting players ever, I really enjoy watching his matches from that year, he really has quite a prescence.

The Nystrom win at the Open did ruin the chance for one of the most anticipated matches in USO history, I imagine(Mac vs Becker in the QF)

krosero
04-03-2008, 12:26 PM
Also, going back to our talk of service winners in the other thread, I recall NBC putting Gomez at a noticably higher winner count than I had after the 1st set of that match (when I did that thread I was only counting aces & non-servive winners) so I may take another look at it, to see their definition of service winner back then. I do recall, Edberg saying 'service winner' rather frequently during that set for Gomez's serves.I can tell you that by 1988 I'm pretty certain that NBC was going beyond their ace count when adding up the total winners. In the Graf-Navratilova final, my stats line up with theirs in all their midmatch displays for total winners, and for the aces. Yet their total winners exceed mine unless I include my service winners: 3 for each woman as of early in the third set when NBC presented its match summary.

Unfortunately NBC gave no winner counts for the two Cash matches I did in '87.

But I have a feeling that somewhere between 1984 and 1988, NBC started including more than their ace counts, in the total winners.

CBS is a differently story, because as I posted somewhere recently, in that Lendl-Agassi USO semi in '88, I get the exact number of winners for both men that CBS gave near the end of the match -- but only if I exclude service altogether.

krosero
04-03-2008, 12:27 PM
The Nystrom win at the Open did ruin the chance for one of the most anticipated matches in USO history, I imagine(Mac vs Becker in the QF)Who do you think would have won it? I think Mac. In '86 at Stratton Mountain he was up 6-3 on Becker in the third-set tiebreak, with two serves coming (one of the few instances I'll call a choke), and Becker was already a better player then.

Moose Malloy
04-14-2008, 04:28 PM
I can confirm NBC was tracking service winners in 1985. After 2 sets of the Connors-Curren SF, Curren was credited onscreen with 14 aces, 9 service winners(score was 6-2,6-2)

As of 2-1 in the 3rd set of the men's final, NBC said Curren had 9 aces, 9 service winners, while Becker had 14 aces, 10 aces, 10 service winners.

I did the stats for the 3rd set, subtracting the winner total after 3 from the total after 2. NBC said Curren had 27 winners after 2, & 43 after 3, presumably giving him 16 winners for the set. I came up with 7 non service winners, & 6 aces, which would leave him with 3 service winners(which I actually counted as well before adding up the total)

Becker was a strange case though, subtracting set 3 from set 2 he is given 24 winners. I counted 18 non-service winners, 6 aces, which adds up to 24but I also counted 3 service winners, which I counted the way you do(returns that bounce on his side of the court or into the stands), so maybe NBC undercounted.

Going back to Jarryd-Becker, they had Becker at 16 winners for the 3rd. I had Becker at 10 non service winners, 2 aces(though NBC gave him 4 aces for the set, including 2 serves that just nicked Jarryd's racquet), which would give Becker either 4 or 2 service winners for the set.

My stats for the 4th:

Becker - 12 non service winners, 2 aces, 4 service winners, 4 double faults

Going by your method, I would revise the service winner count to 2.

I fully agree with your reasoning. I'll tell you, the reason I'm doing it the way I am is simply because I wanted to decide on a simple method for counting service winners, as close to an "objective" method as possible, as I go from one match to another. I did it just to simplify my own counting, so I don't have to stop and think too hard about individual serves.

I really want to check out the '98 or '94 W final, I recall a very high winner total, with very few non-service winner totals, maybe they counted service winners differently or maybe Goran just got a heck of a lot more of them than just about any other player in recent times (which is a possibility)

Unfortunately NBC gave no winner counts for the two Cash matches I did in '87.

Very strange. I wonder if they counted winners in '86.

krosero
04-14-2008, 09:31 PM
I can confirm NBC was tracking service winners in 1985. After 2 sets of the Connors-Curren SF, Curren was credited onscreen with 14 aces, 9 service winners(score was 6-2,6-2)

As of 2-1 in the 3rd set of the men's final, NBC said Curren had 9 aces, 9 service winners, while Becker had 14 aces, 10 aces, 10 service winners.Yes, this is different from what they were doing in 1984. I didn't see any graphics that year that separated aces from service winners.

I did the stats for the 3rd set, subtracting the winner total after 3 from the total after 2. NBC said Curren had 27 winners after 2, & 43 after 3, presumably giving him 16 winners for the set. I came up with 7 non service winners, & 6 aces, which would leave him with 3 service winners(which I actually counted as well before adding up the total)

Becker was a strange case though, subtracting set 3 from set 2 he is given 24 winners. I counted 18 non-service winners, 6 aces, which adds up to 24but I also counted 3 service winners, which I counted the way you do(returns that bounce on his side of the court or into the stands), so maybe NBC undercounted.It's possible that NBC gave Becker no service winners for that set. I don't think that's likely, though. Some sort of undercount of winners or service winners is possible. In the '84 final, if you subtract NBC's aces from their total winner counts, they've undercounted each player's non-service winners by 1.

I really want to check out the '98 or '94 W final, I recall a very high winner total, with very few non-service winner totals, maybe they counted service winners differently or maybe Goran just got a heck of a lot more of them than just about any other player in recent times (which is a possibility).I plan to do a full breakdown of the '98 winners, esp. to compare with SI's boxscore.

Unfortunately NBC gave no winner counts for the two Cash matches I did in '87.
Very strange. I wonder if they counted winners in '86.Actually I overlooked one stat. NBC said nothing about winners in the final, but after 11 games in the semifinal, they had Cash at 14 winners and Connors at 3. I have them at only 13 and 2, including aces, so it looks like each player was credited with one service winner.

bluetrain4
04-15-2008, 10:14 AM
Nystrom and Jarryd were such great "second tier" players, who competed at a high level, reached top 5 or top 10, but never won a Slam.

Moose Malloy
04-15-2008, 01:11 PM
plan to do a full breakdown of the '98 winners, esp. to compare with SI's boxscore

I was thinking of getting that as well, you seem to be getting to some of the matches I planned on doing before me lately('69 USO was another one I thought of doing) But you do a much more thorough job than me(I can't believe how detailed your stats now are) so its probably better that you do them. I did start doing the '95 W SF between those 2, but its in Japanese, so I don't have available winner stats to compare with my own.

I also wanted to do the '98 F, not just because of the SI score, but to see how the winner total compared with NBC(they flashed a rather high number for Goran in the 4th set, & there were very few non service winners from my recollection, so I'm guessing his service winner was pretty high. Have you done a Goran match yet?)

Going back to service winners, do you think your numbers for the '96 Masters final were correct? I recall you didn't have that high a number for either player, but their ace counts/winner counts were high. I think that was before you were sure of how SWs were counted?

and going back to '85 W, are you surprised at all by some of the SW counts? Curren already had 9 after 2 sets in the semis vs Connors. What did you have Mac at in the '84 final? And some of the Laver, Newcombe, Smith numbers seem quite low in comparison as well, I guess it reflects the increased power on serve in the 80s, that Becker & Curren could have so many more.

also with your defintion of SW, what if the returner hits a return that floats slowly to the net, but bounces before going into the net, is that a service winner?

krosero
04-15-2008, 05:23 PM
I was thinking of getting that as well, you seem to be getting to some of the matches I planned on doing before me lately('69 USO was another one I thought of doing) But you do a much more thorough job than me(I can't believe how detailed your stats now are) so its probably better that you do them. I did start doing the '95 W SF between those 2, but its in Japanese, so I don't have available winner stats to compare with my own.

I also wanted to do the '98 F, not just because of the SI score, but to see how the winner total compared with NBC(they flashed a rather high number for Goran in the 4th set, & there were very few non service winners from my recollection, so I'm guessing his service winner was pretty high. Have you done a Goran match yet?)Haven't done any Goran matches yet, and the '98 match is the only one I'm planning. I'm looking forward to seeing statistically how much he lived on service winners.

I will be comparing with NBC's midmatch counts, as well as the SI stats.

Going back to service winners, do you think your numbers for the '96 Masters final were correct? I recall you didn't have that high a number for either player, but their ace counts/winner counts were high. I think that was before you were sure of how SWs were counted?Yeah, that might have been the first match in which I counted SW's. And I don't recall exactly how I did it. This is the issue I mentioned before, about why I wanted to stick to a fixed definition, as objective as possible, for counting them. Otherwise, I can't even recall for myself how I counted SW's in some matches, much less explain it to someone else. And forget about comparing the count to another match.

I gave Sampras 14 SW's, Becker 4. You might remember, the German TV network gave winner totals for the first four sets. It looks like they gave Sampras 6 service winners, and Becker 5, for the first four sets. I gave them 11 and 4, respectively. So in this case, compared to the network, I got a little trigger-happy with Sampras, but not with Becker.

and going back to '85 W, are you surprised at all by some of the SW counts? Curren already had 9 after 2 sets in the semis vs Connors. What did you have Mac at in the '84 final? And some of the Laver, Newcombe, Smith numbers seem quite low in comparison as well, I guess it reflects the increased power on serve in the 80s, that Becker & Curren could have so many more.I'd expect Curren and Becker to have high counts like that, above the numbers I have for the older matches. Service power and consistency did go up in the 80s. Now, I gave Mac 4 service winners in the '84 final; that's another case where I was just starting to count SW's, and I don't recall exactly how I did them. If I did that match today, I might get more than 4; and I would count the return errors all around.

If you get time and you want to do it, it would be an interesting stat, although I know you already took that stat for their '80 sf.

also with your defintion of SW, what if the returner hits a return that floats slowly to the net, but bounces before going into the net, is that a service winner?Yes. I've seen a lot of those.