PDA

View Full Version : who has (or had) the highest aggressive game + lowest unforced errors?


Rozroz
12-12-2011, 12:12 PM
forgive me if it was answered before.
i just watched Connors Lendl 1982 US final (which was recommended here).
besides the fact it was just a nice match (not 'great' for my eye),
i started to wonder about the attacking/low errors 'ratio'.
he had VERY low unforced errors % in that match.
and he's considered an attacker, no? (maybe not by today's standards).

so i was wondering if he is one of the high ranked players that answers my question, or there is a higher one (or a few)?

thanks.

kishnabe
12-12-2011, 12:21 PM
Connors to my eyes has allways been a counterpuncher though he had great flat hard shots and an acceptable net game!

Fernando Gonzales 2007 AO semis with three unforced errors and bullet loads of winners is a winner in terms of one match.

However Federer during his whole career takes the cake with the numerous winners he created as a shotmaker and low number of errors. Though the latter part of his career the errors are creaping up to the winners.

yellowoctopus
12-12-2011, 12:27 PM
I think the most appropriate way, if one prefers, to look at this is through a particular statistic ratio between the number of winners and unforced errors per match.

http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/sexy-nerds-hot-women-geeks-14.jpg?w=500&h=500

Rozroz
12-12-2011, 12:30 PM
federer again? ;)
well ok.

Rozroz
12-12-2011, 12:34 PM
I think the most appropriate way, if one prefers, to look at this is through a particular statistic ratio between the number of winners and unforced errors per match.

well i did mean consistency through a career..
i thought there might be a less obvious answer though. ;)

Towser83
12-12-2011, 12:39 PM
MacEnroe get a shout? In that final where he destroyed conners wasn't there hardly any unforcd errors from him?

Rozroz
12-12-2011, 12:44 PM
actually, after seeing some classics again,
it's a more complicated question, cause then it looks like they made less errors because the racquets provided less power and more control. am i wrong?

The Bawss
12-12-2011, 01:50 PM
actually, after seeing some classics again,
it's a more complicated question, cause then it looks like they made less errors because the racquets provided less power and more control. am i wrong?

Less power = less winners = lower W/UE ratio.

Rock Strongo
12-12-2011, 01:51 PM
Joachim Johansson?

Max G.
12-12-2011, 03:05 PM
Less power = less winners = lower W/UE ratio.

Not necessarily true - less power also meant that people finished points off at net, which means more winners (either volley winners or passing shot winners). Less power also means that you have to worry about setting the point up - you CAN'T just go for a running-forehand-winner and expect to get it past the opponent, so you don't go for those sorts of shots and thus don't make UEs.

It also depends on how you count UEs. I can easily imagine a match between two serve-volleyers where there's simply no chance to make an UE at all, other than a double-fault or maybe the occasional easy volley. Because from the very first ball, there's pressure, so an error isn't unforced. So that match will end with like 2-3 UEs per set even if both players aren't playing particularly great, just because all the errors are forced.

TopFH
12-12-2011, 03:12 PM
Gonzales-Haas AO 07.

Moose Malloy
12-12-2011, 03:33 PM
forgive me if it was answered before.
i just watched Connors Lendl 1982 US final (which was recommended here).
besides the fact it was just a nice match (not 'great' for my eye),
i started to wonder about the attacking/low errors 'ratio'.
he had VERY low unforced errors % in that match.


I don't know what broadcast you were watching, but late in the match in CBS's broadcast Connors was credited with more unforced errors than winners.

Connors generally made more unforced errors per match than Borg & Lendl, his flat groundstrokes had little margin for error. I think he made over 100 vs Krickstein at the '91 USO.

Unforced errors is not something that has ever been officially recorded over the years(& it is purely subjective, what you consider an error I might not), but I think its clear that unforced error counts have gotten lower as racquet technology has gotten better(hitting winners on clay with wood racquets or early graphite wasn't common at all, the unforced error counts were quite high in the 70s/80s on that surface)

You should search some of the threads I or krosero started if you really have an interest in this, we have been recording stats on various matches for many years.

here is a thread on the '82 USO final

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=196950

It also depends on how you count UEs. I can easily imagine a match between two serve-volleyers where there's simply no chance to make an UE at all, other than a double-fault or maybe the occasional easy volley. Because from the very first ball, there's pressure, so an error isn't unforced. So that match will end with like 2-3 UEs per set even if both players aren't playing particularly great, just because all the errors are forced.

In many matches at Wimbledon in the 90s, there were very low error to winner ratios (even in those matches that were called 'boring' by the media like Goran vs Sampras)
In a big serving contest, there is little opportunity to make errors(Isner-Mahut had a great ratio as well), since both players are 'forcing' the action(very few statisticians mark down return errors as unforced errors, & certainly not if a player is coming to net)

Sampras was credited with 68 winners, 7 unforced errors(all double faults) in the '95 Wimbledon final(vs Becker)

Rozroz
12-12-2011, 11:42 PM
Connors generally made more unforced errors per match than Borg & Lendl, his flat groundstrokes had little margin for error. I think he made over 100 vs Krickstein at the '91 USO.

oh, well.
so now i know.
most of the 82 final he was rock solid.

Andres
12-13-2011, 01:04 AM
I don't know what broadcast you were watching, but late in the match in CBS's broadcast Connors was credited with more unforced errors than winners.

Connors generally made more unforced errors per match than Borg & Lendl, his flat groundstrokes had little margin for error. I think he made over 100 vs Krickstein at the '91 USO.

Unforced errors is not something that has ever been officially recorded over the years(& it is purely subjective, what you consider an error I might not), but I think its clear that unforced error counts have gotten lower as racquet technology has gotten better(hitting winners on clay with wood racquets or early graphite wasn't common at all, the unforced error counts were quite high in the 70s/80s on that surface)

You should search some of the threads I or krosero started if you really have an interest in this, we have been recording stats on various matches for many years.

here is a thread on the '82 USO final

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=196950



In many matches at Wimbledon in the 90s, there were very low error to winner ratios (even in those matches that were called 'boring' by the media like Goran vs Sampras)
In a big serving contest, there is little opportunity to make errors(Isner-Mahut had a great ratio as well), since both players are 'forcing' the action(very few statisticians mark down return errors as unforced errors, & certainly not if a player is coming to net)

Sampras was credited with 68 winners, 7 unforced errors(all double faults) in the '95 Wimbledon final(vs Becker)
Regarding UE, as far as I know, a first serve return error isn't marked down as an unforced error, while a 2nd serve return error is. Passing shots are never counted as unforced errors, even if they sail 70 feet long. That's why grass tennis (or doubles, for that matter) have such discrepancy between winners and UEs. Didn't Isner-Mahut have like 400 winners vs. 70 errors or something like that?

There seems to be a consensus regarding those hit-or-miss strokes on the run not being unforced errors, but forced errors. That's debatable, but the concept sounds rather logic.

Rozroz
12-13-2011, 01:41 AM
oh....
so i was misunderstood.

i am addressing UE to:

-every miss within a game (on the run, not on the run, whatever)

UE are NOT-

-double faults
-opponent winners

does this change the statistics a bit ;) ?

Moose Malloy
12-13-2011, 10:01 AM
Regarding UE, as far as I know, a first serve return error isn't marked down as an unforced error, while a 2nd serve return error is

a 2nd serve return error is not a UE if the server is S&Ving on the 2nd serve(like you say missed passing shots aren't ue's, if someone is S&Ving on a 2nd serve, the return is a passing shot attempt as well as a return)
Or going for a huge 2nd serve(Sampras, Goran etc had a lot of 2nd serve service winners - balls that were barely touched, etc)

See my Sampras-Becker example above. Sampras misssed 15 2nd serve returns vs Becker, but was only credited with 7 unforced errors for the match(& all were double faults). Becker S&Ved on every 2nd serve in that match.

There is a similar pattern in many Wimbledon matches involving S&V on all points by both players. I believe the only UE's in the '87 W final(Cash-Lendl) were doubles & missed volleys(both players were S&Ving on 1st & 2nd serves, and missed some 2nd serve returns that don't seem to have been counted as UE's)

Same with Fed-Philippoussis(Philippoussis was S&Ving on 1st & 2nd serves, & Fed certainly missed some 2nd serve returns, but had a very low UE count in that match, if I recall correctly)


i am addressing UE to:

-every miss within a game (on the run, not on the run, whatever)

UE are NOT-

-double faults
-opponent winners



If that's your definition of unforced error, I having even more trouble believing your OP. did you actually take stats on Connors in the '82 USO final? or are just speaking from your impressions after watching it?
I would bet anything that Connors had many 'misses -on the run, not on the run, whatever' in that match, certainly more misses than winners.

Lsmkenpo
12-13-2011, 10:07 AM
If i had to take a guess from the baseline I would say Agassi.

dannykl
12-13-2011, 10:20 AM
For women, it is probably Steffi Graf.

Very aggressive game but very low UE.

Moose Malloy
12-13-2011, 10:38 AM
For women, it is probably Steffi Graf.

Very aggressive game but very low UE.

She made a lot of winners & a lot of errors(often more errors than winners)

from published boxscores:

66 UE's vs Seles at '92 RG
33 UE's vs Seles at '93 AO
72 UE's vs Sanchez at '96 RG
40 UE's vs Sabatini at '90 USO
32 UE's vs Seles at '95 USO
33 UE's vs Sabatini at '88 USO
51 UE's vs Sanchez at '91 RG(a 60, 62 loss)
71 UE's vs Sanchez at '89 RG
45 UE's vs Seles at '89 RG

Her errors were a lot lower vs Navratilova because of what was said earlier(matches with a S&V player generally have less errors since missed passing shots are not counted as UE's)

Rozroz
12-13-2011, 10:54 AM
If that's your definition of unforced error, I having even more trouble believing your OP. did you actually take stats on Connors in the '82 USO final? or are just speaking from your impressions after watching it?
I would bet anything that Connors had many 'misses -on the run, not on the run, whatever' in that match, certainly more misses than winners.

look, what i was referring to was -
while watching the match,
it mostly looked like Lendl made MANY UE's, and Connors was very stable, in regard to that. yes i might be a bit wrong on the 3rd set.
and because i compared it to today's gameplay Connors SEEMED to play with minimum misses. also, the fact i didn't enjoy this game much, made me miss your points.
sorry.
but basically my question is the same, putting Connors aside ;)

pc1
12-14-2011, 05:34 AM
Isn't it all relative? Because nowadays with the equipment they play with that it is easier to keep the ball in play and have less unforced errors. Where in the past with wood racquets there were more errors than winners.

For one match my first thought would be the McEnroe-Connors 1984 Wimbledon final. I don't think McEnroe made many errors and had a ton of winners. Anyone have the stats for that match?

In today's game my first thought that over the past few years that Nadal would have the lowest unforced errors.

helloworld
12-14-2011, 06:04 AM
Your question is confusing. If one can have the highest agressive game with lowest unforced errors at the same time, that player will NEVER LOSE! The truth is agressive game and low unforced errors can't be in the same sentence! The closest player to your question is probably Sampras. He was agressive player, yet won 14 grand slams.. It must take some amazing consistency to win that much, with such risky type of game...