Match Stats/Report - Chang vs Berger, Canada final, 1990

[Waspsting]

Michael Chang beat Jay Berger 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(3) in the Canada final, 1990 on hard court in Toronto

It would be Chang’s only title at the event and among others, he beat Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras, who would contest the US Open final shortly after, en route to the title. This would be Berger’s only Masters final. He was seeded 4th, Chang 7th

Chang won 117 points, Berger 114

Serve Stats
Chang...
- 1st serve percentage (68/108) 63%
- 1st serve points won (42/68) 62%
- 2nd serve points won (17/40) 43%
- Aces 5 (1 second serve)
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (24/108) 22%

Berger...
- 1st serve percentage (63/123) 51%
- 1st serve points won (43/63) 68%
- 2nd serve points won (22/60) 37%
- Aces 9
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (21/123) 17%

Serve Patterns
Chang served...
- to FH 46%
- to BH 54%

Berger served...
- to FH 43%
- to BH 55%
- to Body 2%

Return Stats
Chang made...
- 100 (47 FH, 53 BH), including 3 runaround FHs
- 1 Winner (1 FH)
- 12 Errors, comprising...
- 7 Unforced (4 FH, 3 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 5 Forced (1 FH, 4 BH)
- Return Rate (100/121) 83%

Berger made...
- 82 (40 FH, 42 BH), including 2 runaround FHs & 8 return-approaches
- 19 Errors, comprising...
- 16 Unforced (8 FH, 8 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 3 Forced (2 FH, 1 BH)
- Return Rate (82/106) 77%

Break Points
Chang 6/21 (10 games)
Berger 6/12 (8 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Chang 28 (10 FH, 7 BH, 5 FHV, 1 BHV, 5 OH)
Berger 29 (7 FH, 4 BH, 6 FHV, 2 BHV, 10 OH)

Chang's FHs - 4 cc (1 return, 1 pass), 2 dtl passes (1 at net), 3 inside-out (1 pass), 1 lob
- BHs - 4 cc (3 passes), 1 dtl/inside-out, 1 drop shot, 1 lob

- 1 OH was on the bounce from the baseline

Berger's FHs - 2 cc, 3 dtl, 1 inside-in, 1 longline/down-the-middle pass at net
- BHs - 1 cc, 1 dtl, 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 longline pass at net

- 4 from serve-volley points - 3 first volleys (3 OH)... 1 OH can reasonably be called a FHV & 1 second volley (1 FHV)

- 3 from return-approach points (1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Chang 62
- 30 Unforced (14 FH, 13 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)... the OH was on the bounce from the baseline
- 32 Forced (17 FH, 14 BH, 1 OH)... the OH was flagrantly forced, on the bounce from the baseline against an at net smash
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 47.7

Berger 63
- 45 Unforced (22 FH, 19 BH, 3 BHV, 1 OH)... with 1 BH at net
- 18 Forced (8 FH, 8 BH, 4 BHV)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 51.1

(Note 1: All 1/2 volleys refer to such shots played at net. 1/2 volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke numbers)

(Note 2: the Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is an indicator of how aggressive the average UE was. The numbers presented are keyed on 4 categories - 20 defensive, 40 neutral, 50 attacking and 60 winner attempt)

Net Points & Serve-Volley
Chang was 20/24 (83%) at net

Berger was...
- 49/72 (68%) at net, including...
- 10/15 (67%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 9/14 (64%) off 1st serve and...
- 1/1 off 2nd serve
---
- 7/8 (88%) return-approaching
- 1/2 forced back

Match Report
Berger attacks - power-hitting, allying approaches to power hitting, going for winners from the back - and Chang responds - resists power, passes as needed. Chang’s a little better, especially towards end and Chang wins. Court is normal

Strange as it seems, above description and a few numbers capturing execution, pretty much covers entire match. There’s some variance in who has better of play at a given point in time, but very little in nature of action

Chang wins 50.6% of points, serving 46.8% of them
Break points Chang 6/21 (10 games), Berger 6/12 (8 games)

Points won being virtually same - going into deciding tiebreak, it stands Chang 110, Berger 111 - is clearest indicator of closeness of match. Substantial difference in points served (Chang serves 108, Berger 123) speaks to Berger having tougher time holding.

That difference is confined to the last set; After 2 sets, both players have won 64 points, Chang having served 68 points - including an extra game. Virtually equal, in short
In last set, Chang serves 35 points, Berger 58 in 6 regular games, with both players holding half of those games and break points read Chang 3/11 (4 games), Berger 3/4 (3 games)

In short, Berger enduring long service games and broken often as not. Chang short games, but also broken often as not. Chang with just 1 more game with break chances in it. Not much difference

Practically, longer games near the end slightly favours Chang. Match is about 3 hours, it’s a hot day and as finish line approaches, fitness is becoming a factor. One in Chang’s favour

Again, its not much. Berger isn’t ready to drop and Chang isn’t fresh as a daisy, but Berger is the one playing with seemingly harried un-ease. That’s a better way of putting it than ‘strained’. He’s been power hitting and coming to net all match, but near the end, is pointedly in rush to do so, not executing as well as earlier. Hitting harder than opponent, but Chang more at ease in holding up than before, and coming in closer to off anything than in commanding, measured way and Chang having better of passing than earlier. And not serving as strongly too

In short, longer games at end favour Chang; stats aside, it’d probably benefit him if his service games were longer, thus wearing Berger out that little bit more, contrary to common sense of serving fewer points to hold as often being a good thing. His serve is also more effective than earlier (because Berger’s more hit and miss with the return, not because Chang serves any stronger), but his serve has been 2 ‘second serve’ quality all match

By the time final tiebreak starts, odds favouring Chang as he’s fitter and with Berger getting more harried and strained in his play

That’s progression. Nature of action though is very consistent Berger attacking (power baselining coupled with approaches), Chang reacting (resisting power hitting and passing). Kind of match that one would say is the proactive players’ to win or lose. His execution falls just short of what’s needed - and more credit for the unsurprising, stern resistance that Chang meets it with than discredit to Berger’s level of play, which could be better but is well within the good and winning range

Serve & Return
Berger with better first serve (his is normal, good to give advantage after the return, Chang’s is weak, a virtual second serve), Chang with corresponding higher in count
Berger looking to return aggressively often, including against first serves not small amount of time, while Chang returns orthodoxly. Some success for Berger, but more fail

Unreturned serves - Chang 22%, Berger 17%
First serve ace rate - Chang 6%, Berger 14%
First serve in - Chang 63%, Berger 51%

The ace rate is fair reflection of relative quality of first serves. If anything, it overrates Chang’s. About 60-70% of the time, he’s sending down harmless first serves, with the rest cranked up to potentially troubling - and even those are usually returned and not particularly troubling

Bad in counts for both players, given quality of serves. And it is important, given vast differences in points won across serves (Chang wins 19%, Berger 31% more first serve points than seconds) and low second serve points won for both players (Chang 43%, Berger 37%)

Return UEs - Chang 7, Berger 16
Return FEs - Chang 5, Berger 3
(Aced - Chang 9, Berger 5)

That’s a lot of UEs for Berger. At least they’re ‘good’ ones (as in, aggressive), with potential reward for the risk, but still, basically bad outcome
He returns much as he plays; Looking for big power or straight out winners. About 6-9 bona fida, winner attempt UEs on the return for Berger. He has no winners (Chang has 1)

Powerful returning would have a hand in Chang winning just 43% second serve points, but no return winners for 6-9 attempts is a bad job of judgement. He doesn’t miss by miles, but neither does it need a replay to tell every miss was out

Second serve points won varies for both players across match
First 2 sets - Chang 13/27 or 48%, Berger 12/28 or 43%
Last set - Chang 4/13 or 31%, Berger 10/32 or 31%

Its not a match where serve-return is on frontlines, but clearly the contest has shaped action
Particularly, few more winning returns by Berger (as opposed to misses trying) or even pressured double faults from Chang (he has just 2 - while regularly getting fired at), and result probably changes

Is that discredit to Berger? Or credit to Chang?

Chang’s serve is weak enough that going for winning returns is a good option. He doesn’t seem to be baiting Berger to mess up with the gentle second serves. Worth going for, but 0 winners for 6-9 attempts at them is clearly, a fail for Berger. And Chang’s akept a pretty cool head to double fault negligibly

Berger’s also 7/8 return-approaching, without an error trying. Big, thumped returns, not chips. So there’s your alternative to straight going for a winner and clearly, one where he’s far more successful, Presumably, he could smack the same kind of return-approaches instead of going for winners - and probably wins higher lot of points (it’d be impossible to lose more)

Call it discredit to Berger for his choices in how to attack with the return than. Same dubious choice pervades court action too

Play - Baseline & Net
From baseline, Berger attacks with power groundies, with an eye to approaching behind them. Takes on winners from the back too, including on the run. Chang counter-punches and passes as needed. Action is dual winged

 

[Waspsting]

In baseline rallies -
Winners - Chang 9 (5 FH, 3 BH, 1 OH), Berger 10 (6 FH, 4 BH)
Errors forced - Chang 5, Berger 7
(Aggressively ended points - Chang 14, Berger 17)
UEs - Chang 28 (14 FH, 13 BH, 1 OH), Berger 40 (22 FH, 18 BH)

… with UE types -
neutral - Chang 14, Berger 12
attacking - Chang 8, Berger 14
winner attempts - Chang 6, Berger 14

Few points coming out of these numbers

- dual winged natured of action coming through, with both winners and UEs balanced across wings. Which is particularly pertinent for the aggressor Berger. Looking to be as aggressive with BH as FH isn’t a common game, especially when being as aggressive as he is

- virtually even aggressively ended points. There’s nothing in the basic numbers to point to Berger being aggressor
Those numbers look more like a contest for control and Chang being more secure the key difference. Off both wings

- the UE types clears up the dynamic
For starters, the neutral UEs are different for two players - Chang with more pressured UEs that are beaten out of him, Berger with more straining for power UEs with which he’s trying to beat errors out of Chang

Relatively small chunk of neutral UEs because they don’t stay in neutral long, with Berger upping things to attacking
Much of what is ‘neutral’ is Berger pressing to get on front foot, Chang resisting
Bona fida neutral - where the two simply trade groundies - are mostly BHs. Berger occasionally playing BHs with high net clearance. He tends to give up short ball, and Chang’s not slow to move in and smack ball early against it (usually approaching after doing so)

How rest of action goes is simple efficiency matter - and Berger is far worse here

Forcing errors - Chang with 5, at cost of 8 attacking UEs, Berger 7 at cost of 14
Striking winners - Chang with 9 at cost of 6 misses trying, Berger with 10 at cost of 14 misses

Those numbers and ratios speak for themselves. Throw in Berger’s FEs often being winner attempts. He likes to go for counter-attacking winner on the run instead of defence
Those numbers are also half a story because net play is interwoven with baseline, especially for Berger. Much of his baseline play is about gaining ground in rallies and using it to come in

Rallying to net - Chang 20/24 or 83%, Berger 32/49 or 65%
Just like the going for return winners vs return-approaching thing for Berger; he’s done a lot better hitting his way forward than he has trying to flame winners from the back

Berger’s net play is a combo of powerful approaches + volleying; he’s not chipping his way to net or manufacturing slice approaches, but coming in with authority, so staying on front foot from the back is necessary part of his success

Berger also serve-volleys 26% of the time off first serves, winning 9/14 so doing. Plus 7/8 return-approaching

At net, Berger with 18 winners, 5 UEs, 4 FEs
Chang on the pass has 9 winners, 25 errors

Good figures for Berger on volley. He punches volleys well and looks to place them wide. The punch is better than the placement, which isn’t bad. Good quality volleys in short
Chang’s passing numbers aren’t so good. That’s due to strength of approaching shot leaving him in bad position to start with. Credit Berger’s ability to out-hit Chang from the back for much of it. Chang is typically quick, tenacious and resourceful in his passing

Chang’s even more successful at net, though not coming in much and unlike Berger, not really looking to. He’s open to smacking short ball and coming in, especially off the BH. And occasionally eases a FH dtl into open court to approach behind. Good approaches, and at least, he’s not baseline stuck, if not actively looking for net. And nicely effective when there - 10 winners, 2 UEs. Berger on pass has 2 winners (1 at net), 9 FEs

In all rally points, net and baseline -
Winners - Chang 28, Berger 29
Errors forced - Chang 18, Berger 32
(Aggressively ended points - Chang 46, Berger 61)
UEs - Chang 30, Berger 45

Literally, dead even, 91 won points apiece when return is made
Which overall favours Chang, who has 5% advantage in freebies

Berger’s probably erred in going for winners from the back as much as he has. He’s well in the negatives doing that - and he does it a lot. Not as often as hit hard + approach, where he’s been much more successful

If its viable to go for a straight winner from the back, its viable to hit hard and approach from same ball. Berger not striking the best of balances in his attacking choices there. Not unlike what he does on the return

Finally, a note on fitness and movement
Chang’s typically quick. Berger less so, but he’s not slow
As match ticks on, Chang appears to be fitter. Again, Berger isn’t bad, but Chang is better

Match Progression
Action doesn’t change much across match and first set is as described above. Berger straining to overpower Chang from the back, mixing up going for winners from the back and coming in from pounded groundies. Serve-volleys a bit, powerfully return-approaches a bit, takes on a few dtl winners from the back. Chang not fully at ease in just handling ball-bashing. He gets the odd dtl attack off too. His second serve is weak and invites a thrashing

Break points in first set - Chang1/5 (2 games), Berger 2/7 (4 games), so 6/10 games with break points in them. Tough tennis

First 3 games all have break points in them. Berger starts as he ends up continuing, overpowering Chang on first point to come in and smash a winner and adds a big return-approach couple of points later to reach 0-40. Chang ends up holding in 12 points, saving 4 break points in all

Berger’s down 15-40 in second game and takes net last 5 points to hold, including 2 serve-volleys
Its mostly net play that gets Berger the break for 2-1 after that, that he completes with a running FH cc winner
Ground errors hand the break back for 2-2

The spate of break point games cease, though games remain competitive. Berger snatches decisive break by drawing pressured UEs and a winning return-approach to reach 5-4. Serves out the set to 30 with 4 net points, including 2 serve-volleys

Similar second set. As it goes on, Berger scales back some on looking to overpower Chang and opts for more attacking dtl shots instead. Chang looks to approach off attacking dtl shots when he gets a short ball
Break points for set - Chang 2/5 (4 games), Berger 1/1

Games 2-4 all have break points in them, with each scoring one break
Berger’s at net 4 points in a row in saving break point and holding for 1-1
Two trade breaks after that, with Chang missing a pair of attacking or more third ball FHs to lose game 3, but breaking right back with some approaching against short balls himself

Berger’s service percentage does a nosedive for rest of set and he finishes on a run of making just 2/13 first serves across his last 2 games. Escapes being broken first time, but isn’t so lucky next go around, where he misses attacking groundies

Couple of aces and 4/5 points won with unreturned serves by Chang on the serve out; looks a bit like a throwaway game by Berger

Set 3 is uphill work for Berger, who has to serve 63 points in it (Chang serves 40), but they both break 3 times. Berger’s more harried in his play and takes to coming in earlier in rallies, without pointedly overpowering Chang to do so

44/72 Berger’s net points come in the 103 point set. As opposed to 28 approaches from 128 points in first 2 sets

Opening game takes 20 points and Berger’s already saved 4 break points at deuce. A phone goes off just as Berger delivers a first serve, but he’s settled into short rally and simply misses a worthwhile FH cc winner attempt. He’s not happy about the distraction, understandably and goes on to get broken after being forced back from net serve-volleying

Next 2 games are breaks to - Berger using net to break back, and missing winner attempts from the back to again go down a break after that
Pair again trade 3 breaks in a row in games 6-8 to once again level at 4-4; with Berger having saved break points to hold the game before the run

Things eventually end up in tiebreak, with Chang looking fresher off the two

Chang’s always on top in the ‘breaker, with Berger missing attacking dtl shots on the first two points (1 of each wing) to fall behind 0-2

He wins his next 2 return points with strong return-approaches, but also loses the 2 service points in between those with a double fault and a badly placed volley that allows a winning, wrong footing pass to make score 4-2

Chang makes it 5-2, despite a damagingly powerful return by Berger
Couple points later, Chang wraps up with one of his best serves of the match that doesn’t come back

Summing up, good tough match of all court action. Berger dictates action with power groundies (including the return) and looks to finish aggressively with both winners from the back and by coming to net from strong approaches, including not infrequent serve-volleying and powerful return-approaching. Chang reacts accordingly, looking to resist power and pass as needed. He’s not slow to attack against short balls when chance comes up though, particularly coming to net behind dtl shots

As such, its mostly Berger’s match to win or lose and how successfully he can execute his aggressive forays is key to result, with Chang making it that as difficult as he can

Things end up very tight, Chang being slightly fitter nudges odds his way as match nears its third hour and ultimately, Chang prevails. His defending and counter-punching is that little bit better than Berger’s power-hitting and net charging, helped by sub-optimal attacking choices by the loser

Stats for Chang’s semi-final with Pete Sampras - Match Stats/Report - Chang vs Sampras, Canadian Open semi-final, 1990 | Talk Tennis

 

[Galvermegs]

Chang definitely was always a prospect. His rg win was unlikely but surely not a fluke.. too bad he never quite managed a 2nd slam. Great on hardcourts, very good on clay and indoors, but never had the game for grass.

Berger would surely have lost to agassi or sampras.. oh excuse me : these super 9 events always had a surprise or 2 to offer.

 

[HBK4life]

Berger to me seemed like a guy that knew what he was (not a contender) and wanted to make as much money as he could and get out

 

[jrepac]

I did not see this....online somewhere? sounds like a good match. Berger could be a tough opponent when he was on his game.

 

[Waspsting]

Berger would surely have lost to agassi or sampras.. oh excuse me : these super 9 events always had a surprise or 2 to offer.

I'd tend to agree, only...
... if you told me Chang would beat Agassi and Sampras back to back (and gave me just their results immediately before and after the event to go on), I'd have thought "very unlikely"

I have a lot of respect for Chang, from what I've seen recently - meaning, watched very, very closely - regardless of result. He's a dog on a bone and beyond toughness, he's almost insanely tough

In semis here, he essentially outlasts Sampras. Still, pulls off at least 2 blinding plays

Sampras is serve-volleying off all first serves. As in, approaching net after every first serve looking to play a volley
This is common enough
Its also common for a server of Sampras' pace to serve, move toward net and have the return land out when he's far from service line (half way to or less)
As long as its clear that guy is looking to take net after the serve, I think of all such points as "serve-volleys", without a second thought
On this point, Sampras serves his biggest, flat serve and Chang, standing 2 paces inside court, smacks it hard as can
The return reaches Sampras when he's a pace inside court, looking to 'serve-volley'. He's barely come down from jumping for the serve
How can you possibly call that a serve-volley? - Sampras misses the third ball - a half-volley from a pace inside baseline, when he's trying to serve-volley
Never seen anything like that

Another point, Sampras is lining up an easy, at net smash on the bounce
If I were playing that shot and Rafael Nadal was on other end, I'd be amused at his doing anything other than hopelessly losing the point
Chang?
He charges the net. And blocks the ball back for a passing winner. Its beyond ridiculous

Of course a fluke. Any 'greatest shot every played' candidate is - back-to-net flick lob by Federer, Agassi's over-the-shoulder pass winner, any tweener etc.... but those are at least forced. This is a choice. I haven't seen anybody even try to play a shot like this
I've seen Boris Becker hit the dirt as Sampras is about to put away a smash on the full. This is on the bounce. And Chang does that and pulls it off

He's not a 'scary' guy like Agassi or Sampras in particular could be, but I think you'd have to be a fool to underestimate him or think he's easy meat, compared to a player with bigger game

 

[Galvermegs]

I'd tend to agree, only...
... if you told me Chang would beat Agassi and Sampras back to back (and gave me just their results immediately before and after the event to go on), I'd have thought "very unlikely"

I have a lot of respect for Chang, from what I've seen recently - meaning, watched very, very closely - regardless of result. He's a dog on a bone and beyond toughness, he's almost insanely tough

In semis here, he essentially outlasts Sampras. Still, pulls off at least 2 blinding plays

Sampras is serve-volleying off all first serves. As in, approaching net after every first serve looking to play a volley
This is common enough
Its also common for a server of Sampras' pace to serve, move toward net and have the return land out when he's far from service line (half way to or less)
As long as its clear that guy is looking to take net after the serve, I think of all such points as "serve-volleys", without a second thought
On this point, Sampras serves his biggest, flat serve and Chang, standing 2 paces inside court, smacks it hard as can
The return reaches Sampras when he's a pace inside court, looking to 'serve-volley'. He's barely come down from jumping for the serve
How can you possibly call that a serve-volley? - Sampras misses the third ball - a half-volley from a pace inside baseline, when he's trying to serve-volley
Never seen anything like that

Another point, Sampras is lining up an easy, at net smash on the bounce
If I were playing that shot and Rafael Nadal was on other end, I'd be amused at his doing anything other than hopelessly losing the point
Chang?
He charges the net. And blocks the ball back for a passing winner. Its beyond ridiculous

Of course a fluke. Any 'greatest shot every played' candidate is - back-to-net flick lob by Federer, Agassi's over-the-shoulder pass winner, any tweener etc.... but those are at least forced. This is a choice. I haven't seen anybody even try to play a shot like this
I've seen Boris Becker hit the dirt as Sampras is about to put away a smash on the full. This is on the bounce. And Chang does that and pulls it off

He's not a 'scary' guy like Agassi or Sampras in particular could be, but I think you'd have to be a fool to underestimate him or think he's easy meat, compared to a player with bigger game

Yes you are quite right. I suppose petes words on him in 'a champions mind' made me appreciate the guy even more. His drawn out decline post 97/98 over shadows how hard he was to beat most of the season, when he still had the wheels and the aura.