How to watch tennis

[GabeT]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/s...ed-states-open-trust-statistics-not-eyes.html

Very interesting article on what makes for a winning tennis strategy, based on data from last year's USO.

Despite all the talk of mindless and never ever ending baseline bashes 91% of all points in the men's matches were under 9 strokes. 71% were 4 strokes or less!

The numbers also show that serve and volley still remains the best way to win points.

More importantly, as the title of the article indicates, we tend to watch tennis and reach conclusions without checking the numbers.

 

[Bluefan75]

This is why whenever you hear people talk about any player in any sport and say "I watched that team", or "it just doesn't pass the eye test", what they are really saying is "I can't back up what I am saying, but dammit I say it is so."

Having said that, I'm not sure you are properly interpreting when you say S&V still remains the best way(did not read that statement in the article, apologies if I missed it.) After all, what percentage of points are aces/service winners? Can't volley when the serve isn't returned. And given how the hold percentage has gone way up in recent years, it would seem that those types of points would have become more frequent as well.

Not to mention, a number of players, including top players, actually get better with more strokes, so opponents have decided that one way or another, the rally is not lasting more than 9. So either they go for the winner, or lose the point, but it's ending quickly. Does not mean they are coming to net more often.

Mindless baseline bashing comes from the fact a number of the top players, whose matches are broadcast, thrive in such a style, so perception is skewed.

 

[tennisaddict]

Sad part of the article :

In addition, do not be enamored of winners. Quite often, the player that hits more winners loses the match. Reducing errors is the easier pathway to victory.

 

[Tshooter]

I'm telling you it's best with a beer and a hat.

 

[VamosBamos987]

Being a bore is the easiest way to win in tennis, unfortunately....I.e Djokovic and Murray

Federer and Nadal are once in a lifetime type of players that can be fun to watch and win matches. Doesn't work for most others.

 

[GabeT]

Sad part of the article :

In addition, do not be enamored of winners. Quite often, the player that hits more winners loses the match. Reducing errors is the easier pathway to victory.

yes, that one struck me as well. But it points to the importance of returning everything, I guess.

 

[Fedole]

Sad part of the article :

In addition, do not be enamored of winners. Quite often, the player that hits more winners loses the match. Reducing errors is the easier pathway to victory.

That is so grim. But we all know that's the way it works right now, unfortunately.

 

[GabeT]

This is why whenever you hear people talk about any player in any sport and say "I watched that team", or "it just doesn't pass the eye test", what they are really saying is "I can't back up what I am saying, but dammit I say it is so."

Having said that, I'm not sure you are properly interpreting when you say S&V still remains the best way(did not read that statement in the article, apologies if I missed it.) After all, what percentage of points are aces/service winners? Can't volley when the serve isn't returned. And given how the hold percentage has gone way up in recent years, it would seem that those types of points would have become more frequent as well.

Not to mention, a number of players, including top players, actually get better with more strokes, so opponents have decided that one way or another, the rally is not lasting more than 9. So either they go for the winner, or lose the point, but it's ending quickly. Does not mean they are coming to net more often.

Mindless baseline bashing comes from the fact a number of the top players, whose matches are broadcast, thrive in such a style, so perception is skewed.

Good point.

Here is the relevant text:

"Everyone plays on the baseline, but it is a tough place from which to gain an advantage. At the 2012 Open, only seven men had a percentage over .500 in baseline play, but only seven men had a losing record from the baseline. It is essentially a 50-50 battle. Even Novak Djokovic, last year’s men’s champion, who is widely recognized as the pre-eminent baseliner of our time, won only 56 percent of points from the back of the court last year (although that was significantly better than the men’s average of 46 percent). The women’s champion, Flavia Pennetta, won 53 percent of her baseline points.

The front of the court offers better percentages. Men who served and volleyed won the point 68 percent of the time; women won 59 percent of those points."

So he's not saying that most points are S&V but that players win more when they play S&V than when they play from the baseline.

 

[Tyler-James]

Of course, these data do not control for the quality of players engaging in 'baseline', 'approach', or 'serve and volley' tactics. It could be that the only players engaging in the latter tactics have the sufficient skill and coordination to be successful at first-strike tennis. The data simply correlate each strategy with winning point percentage. Without controlling for ranking or A-B type testing, there isn't much that can be gleaned from the data.

 

[Bluefan75]

Of course, these data do not control for the quality of players engaging in 'baseline', 'approach', or 'serve and volley' tactics. It could be that the only players engaging in the latter tactics have the sufficient skill and coordination to be successful at first-strike tennis. The data simply correlate each strategy with winning point percentage. Without controlling for ranking or A-B type testing, there isn't much that can be gleaned from the data.

Also known as correlation does not equal causation. As you say, it's one thing to win a point at the net because you came in after a short ball your opponent hit because he's way off in one corner, quite another to come to the net *every single time* like Edberg would do. Gary Duane probably has some info that would be instructive in this.

 

[Bluefan75]

Good point.

Here is the relevant text:

"Everyone plays on the baseline, but it is a tough place from which to gain an advantage. At the 2012 Open, only seven men had a percentage over .500 in baseline play, but only seven men had a losing record from the baseline. It is essentially a 50-50 battle. Even Novak Djokovic, last year’s men’s champion, who is widely recognized as the pre-eminent baseliner of our time, won only 56 percent of points from the back of the court last year (although that was significantly better than the men’s average of 46 percent). The women’s champion, Flavia Pennetta, won 53 percent of her baseline points.

The front of the court offers better percentages. Men who served and volleyed won the point 68 percent of the time; women won 59 percent of those points."

So he's not saying that most points are S&V but that players win more when they play S&V than when they play from the baseline.

Would strike me, though, that it is a very strong implication given how he started out saying 71% of points are four shots or less...

 

[tennisaddict]

I would like to see stats of set 1 separated from the rest.

Basically set 1 has become a war of attrition, lasting 45 minutes to an hour , with long drawn baseline rallies .

Set 1 mostly decides the outcome of matches.

So, I wouldn't place much weight to the article when the author says there are more points played 4 strokes or less .

 

[SumYungGai]

I'm telling you it's best with a beer and a hat.

My man.

 

[ChrisRF]

Federer and Nadal are once in a lifetime type of players that can be fun to watch and win matches. Doesn't work for most others.

Yes, you're right. I mean, apart from Nadal.

 

[NatF]

Good point.

Here is the relevant text:

"Everyone plays on the baseline, but it is a tough place from which to gain an advantage. At the 2012 Open, only seven men had a percentage over .500 in baseline play, but only seven men had a losing record from the baseline. It is essentially a 50-50 battle. Even Novak Djokovic, last year’s men’s champion, who is widely recognized as the pre-eminent baseliner of our time, won only 56 percent of points from the back of the court last year (although that was significantly better than the men’s average of 46 percent). The women’s champion, Flavia Pennetta, won 53 percent of her baseline points.

The front of the court offers better percentages. Men who served and volleyed won the point 68 percent of the time; women won 59 percent of those points."

So he's not saying that most points are S&V but that players win more when they play S&V than when they play from the baseline.

The front court offers better percentages in small doses, whether that would be true as the preeminent strategy across an entire match is a different kettle of fish. When most only come in on sitters or as a surprise tactic it's no wonder that the percentages are generally high.

 

[Moose Malloy]

Thanks for posting, it confirms the stats that @Nadal_Power took on all the matches from the QF on at all majors last year. It seemed like across the board, all players, all surfaces points were rather short(there were some outliers like Gilles Simon)
It's a shame that the media and fans will probably never catch on. I track a lot of stats and follow a lot of stats and pretty much every match I do even Murray and Djokovic, at least 30% of all points are won with one shot(ace or return errors)
It's understandable that the average viewer wouldn't notice that and just remember all the more exciting points with great rallies and think, "wow, points are so long today"

 

[Sartorius]

The front court offers better percentages in small doses, whether that would be true as the preeminent strategy across an entire match is a different kettle of fish. When most only come in on sitters or as a surprise tactic it's no wonder that the percentages are generally high.

There should be distinction in the stats between a "point won at the net" (or a volley) and a "putaway".

Rafa for one knows it, see at 2:46 (and @NatF, this is how sarcasm works ):

 

[wsk429]

I'm telling you it's best with a beer and a hat.

Just a beer and a hat. Nothing else.