What is the average ratio of the shot types in tennis?

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by HughJars, Apr 17, 2013.

  1. HughJars

    HughJars Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,078
    Just wondering what this might be on average, and if players, particularly pros who have developed their game, deliberately structure the focus and time allocation of their practice accordingly?

    My very rough and probably wrong guess

    Serve (including faults): 25%
    Return of serve: 18%
    Forehand ground: 25%
    Background ground: 12%
    Forehand Slice: 1%
    Backhand Slice: 9%
    Forehand volley: 4%
    Backhand volley: 4%
    Overhead: 1%
    Forehand lob/Backhand lob: 1%
     
    #1
  2. Mongolmike

    Mongolmike Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Messages:
    996
    Location:
    Ohio
    From my match last night, without actually keeping track, I would say your volley numbers are too low, same as overhead numbers too low... but that is assuming you come to the net. If you are strictly a baseliner, those numbers might be more accurate. Also, your total % does not equal 100%... you do not serve every game.

    That being said, I would pay someone to chart my shots for a match. I've always been curious about my winners/unforced error % and my service %. The breakdown of bh vs fh etc is not important to me, but I'm cool with it... I am more curious about the success of all the strokes/shots.
     
    #2
  3. Forbin

    Forbin New User

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    21
    Are you talking about % of shots in a real match, or during a practice session? And you said "particularly pros", right?

    I don't think average percentages are a good way to picture the spread of possibilities, for pros at least. I think you'd wind up with a mutli-modal distribution.

    The two (or four) biggest factors in percentages will be surface, and the two players play-style: how good are their serves, how good are their returns, and do they like to play long rallies?

    Isner vs. Anderson, I could easily see 30% of the strokes are serves.

    Nadal vs. Ferrer, no way. 10% serves, maybe.

    Also, forehand vs. backhand totally depends a player's preferences and handedness, and his opponent's ability to exploit weakness. I'll bet Federer has hit a lot more backhands against Nadal than anyone else.

    This is a neat thought experiment though. May I ask why you're asking?
     
    #3
  4. Forbin

    Forbin New User

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    21
    Oh, and the only reason it would even be this high is that Ferrer can't keep up with Nadal in rallies: most will end in 10 strokes.

    Nadal vs. Nadal on clay would be like 3% serves. :)
     
    #4
  5. Mongolmike

    Mongolmike Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Messages:
    996
    Location:
    Ohio

    I read-over the part "particularily pros"... sorry.

    Since that is what you were asking, the time-consuming but easy way to do this is to record a pro's match. Then record the data you are interested in as you view it at your own speed. You can chart EVERYTHING to great detail. Would be interesting to see the results, especially vs different styles of players, or men's games vs women's.
     
    #5
  6. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,166
    Like the Solomon-Dibbs days.

    I played a match a couple weeks ago where I was serving really well, my opponent was serving really well, and we both were having very bad days returning serve. Probably less than 10% of the serves were successfully returned. Some of those were volleyed, so probably around 2% of the shots were backhand groundstrokes and 2% forehands. (of course, it went to a tiebreak)
    Though this is an extreme example, in general, people don't practice their serves and serve returns enough. No excuse for not practicing your serve enough - for serve return, it helps to have someone serving to you.
     
    #6
  7. HughJars

    HughJars Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,078
    I guess why Im asking is that I was wondering if specialist coaches actually take note of these stats and prepare their atheletes accordingly? What is the depth of statistical analysis in tennis?

    For example, a coach may look at their player's draw for a hard court tournament, see that their likely opponents favour certain sides, and that the court is more conducive for certain shots than others, then plan practicing and preperation accordingly - going beyond subjective observation and getting more objective and statisitical - is this something coaches look at thses days in tennis? Has it got to this point yet?

    The same approach might be taken when a coach and a player plans their yearly schedules and conditioning schedules. What opponents they are likely to face, what surfaces, atmospheric conditions even.

    I know in certain sports, like Australian Rules Football, sports science is now a huge thing - every stat is micro-analysed and then that micro-analysis is then further analysed. GPS tracking, haeomoglobin levels, altitude training, HR monitoring, muscle biopsies, tracking the exact time athletes are performing certain drills and tasks..not to mention the use of extravgent peptides (which is getting some real bad press at the moment). And coaching, training and conditioning is tailored on objective stats, going away from more traditional methods to incorperate scientific evidence backed methods. Not to forget coaching psychology.

    I guess the big argument around is does this method work? Supreme atheletes are going around with amazing physical atttributes, but they lack the game based knowledge that develops from playing for 1000's and 1000's of hours.

    Where does the Uncle Toni fit in all this?
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2013
    #7

Share This Page