Match Stats/Report - Chang vs Mancini, Miami final, 1992

[Waspsting]

Michael Chang beat Alberto Mancini 7-5, 7-5 in the Miami final, 1992 on hard court

Chang, who had recently won Indian Wells, beat Jim Courier and Pete Sampras among others en route to this title. This would Mancini’s only hard Masters final and he beat Boris Becker and Richard Krajicek among others in reaching it

Chang won 72 points, Mancini 66

(Note: 1 point has been tracked via audio and post-point footage
Set 2, Game 6, Point 3 - a first serve that drew a return error. Probably a BH UE, but this has not been marked)

Serve Stats
Chang...
- 1st serve percentage (50/75) 67%
- 1st serve points won (30/50) 60%
- 2nd serve points won (15/25) 60%
- Aces 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (12/75) 16%

Mancini...
- 1st serve percentage (36/63) 57%
- 1st serve points won (26/36) 72%
- 2nd serve points won (10/27) 37%
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (8/63) 13%

Serve Patterns
Chang served...
- to FH 27%
- to BH 73%

Mancini served...
- to FH 17%
- to BH 82%
- to Body 2%

Return Stats
Chang made...
- 53 (7 FH, 46 BH), including 3 return-approaches
- 8 Errors, comprising...
- 7 Unforced (3 FH, 4 BH)
- 1 ?? (against a first serve)
- Return Rate (53/61) 87%

Mancini made...
- 63 (19 FH, 44 BH), including 4 runaround FH
- 10 Errors, comprising...
- 7 Unforced (5 FH, 2 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 3 Forced (3 BH)
- Return Rate (63/75) 84%

Break Points
Chang 5/7 (5 games)
Mancini 3/4 (4 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Chang 9 (2 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Mancini 17 (7 FH, 4 BH, 2 FHV, 3 BHV, 1 OH)

Chang FHs - 1 dtl, 1 inside-in
- BHs - 1 cc, 2 dtl, 1 inside-out/dtl

Mancini's FHs - 2 cc (1 pass), 1 inside-out, 3 inside-in, 1 inside-in/cc
- BHs - 2 cc passes, 2 dtl

- 1 FHV was a non-net, dtl/inside-out

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Chang 41
- 28 Unforced (10 FH, 14 BH, 2 FHV, 2 BHV)
- 13 Forced (6 FH, 7 BH)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 45

Mancini 49
- 36 Unforced (25 FH, 8 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
- 13 Forced (5 FH, 7 BH, 1 FHV)... the FHV was a lob
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 47.2

(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 18/26 (69%) at net, including...
- 1/2 serve-volleying, both 1st serves
---
- 2/3 (67%) return-approching
- 1/2 forced back

Mancini was 15/19 (79%) at net

Match Report
Grindy baseline struggle. Chang’s more composed, patient, balanced across wings. Mancini’s more powerful, has heavier shots, but less sound of shot choices and slower around court. Though Chang wins, he isn’t able to demonstrate significant superiority. Court is very slow

So slow, action is best thought of as like a classic clay match. ‘Like a clay match’ doesn’t do justice to the similarity. Its more clay court of style than most actual clay court matches. And Mancini is clearly a born and bred clay courter

Mancini is thickly built. Kicks almost all serves, directs 82% of them to BH. Slow paced, high bouncing serves. Easy to cover, but to Chang, they come at head height.
Unusually push-slices good few FH returns, slice-drives BH returns. Consistent with it, against Chang’s weak serve

Prefers to play FHs, but strong BH too. Mixes up his shots (pace, spin, trajectory) off both wings. Very heavy top spin off the FH; Muster and Bruguera don’t spin it this much. Slices to slice-drives fair few BHs, but also drive-spins them flatter than the FH. Occasionally takes on dtl point ender on the BH

Moves over to play FHs some. Its not necessary as his BH is reliable, varied shot. And its not the best move. Doesn’t hit overly damaging inside-out or inside-in and thus leaves himself open to BH dtl or FH cc counter

If there’s a method to ground game, its beyond me. Looks to just be cycling through spin, pace, trajectory, back-away FH or BH and seeing what’ll stick. He does dictate rallies and is more able to overpower Chang than other way around

He’s not quick. Slow enough that would probably be vulnerable to be moving around, but dictates enough that Chang isn’t in position to do so

Finally, isn’t the most patient of players and is prone to frustration; that’s a big mental flaw to go with spinny, grindy game. And Chang is one of the last players one would like to have such a mentality against, especially on a clay-slow court

Two players combine for 26 winners, 64 UEs. Its not a bad match, but its that kind of match where UEs and keeping ball in play one shot longer than opponent is frontline. And Chang’s better on that frontline. He has 28-36 UE advantage. But Mancini has exact same 17-9 on winners, so not decisive

Chang plays a solid, dual winged counter-punching game. Ability to handle high ball is crucial and Chang’s great at it. Balls up around his head, let alone shoulder much of the time, but his response packs normal punch. Unlike Mancini, he’s not moving over to play FHs and leaving court open. He’s typically quick and can run down balls, which Mancini isn’t tested on as much

Match is close
Mancini’s up a break twice in first set
And he breaks to start the second
Everytime, Chang hits back before long and ends up breaking again to win both sets on cusp of tiebreak
Break points - Chang 5/7 (5 games), Mancini 3/4 (4 games).

Amidst gritty, gruelling who-blinks-first dynamics, its essentially a mental game of who can keep shoulder to the wheel of tough rallying without flinching. Chang’s commitment to the grind is phlegmatically regular, Mancini gets frustrated, lashes out, loses patience at times. In other words, flinches

Some strangeness to the match. There are easy holds and easy breaks. Not much tough holding or tough breaking

Weak serves from both players. Chang’s stronger, with rare, testingly powerful serve. And Chang leads in in count by 10%
Chang has 2 aces, Mancini 0
Chang forces 3 return errors, Mancini 0 (both draw 7 return UEs)
Chang doesn’t double fault, Mancini does twice
Chang with 4 more unreturned serves and 2 fewer aces. And Chang ends up leading total points 72-66. Could say thin lead in back-ground serve-return contest is difference between the players

Chang wins exact same 60% points across his two serves; which is what one would expect, since the two serves are off same calibre
Mancini wins 72% first serve points and 37% second serve points, which is not what one would expect. He kicks the first serves more viciously is extent of difference between his serves. It is a significant different, but wouldn’t think it would lead to 35% difference in points won. Chang able to return second serves less uncomfortably as they’re not climbing to his head, but merely around chest, shoulder level

But those stats are telling tale of match, though its not exactly what it looks like

Chang winning 60% of both of his service points and 63% of Mancini’s second serve ones. All of these are 50-50 prospect points. Chang winning that many is a very clear indicator of him being better player

But Mancini with large 72% first serve points won. Would normally put it down to a big serve. Its as far from a ‘big serve’ in the normally understood, pace-based sense of the term, but the ferocious kick it has sets things up for him like one

He doesn’t get a lot of freebies with it. But even Chang’s ability to pack a punch to head high ball spinning that viciously is limited. Few early winners from Mancini on these points (not putaways, but from commanding start) and he’s able to pound down and overpower Chang to win such a large lot of points

Its also not full baseline match. Both players primarily use net to finish, though they reach it in different ways. But lets start with baseline

 

[Waspsting]

In baseline rallies -
Winners - Chang 6, Mancini 9
Errors forced - Mancini 3
UEs - Chang 24, Mancini 33

+6 aggressive success for Mancini, +9 on UEs for Chang (as in, he has fewer)

Breakdown of UEs -
Neutral - Chang 18, Man 20
Attacking - Chang 2, Man 6
Winner attempts - Chang 4, Man 7

… and UEs-Winners by shot -
- Man BH 8-2
- Chang FH 10-2
- Chang BH 14-4
- Man FH 25-6
(Man has a non-net FHV winner also)

- Neutral UEs being near equal is relative win for Man, as he’s more directing action. Those stay near equal and he can score aggressively more, he probably wins

- near equal neutrals being a Man win comes through in Chang with barely an attacking error, and forcing no errors. He’s not in less position to do so as he’s more counter-punching, but that’s half the story (full story includes approaching net, which we’ll get to in a bit). But Man’s net negative attacking too

Not surprising against Chang and on such a slow court. So far, Man not being able to make most of his being director

- Winners and winner attempt UE differentials identical +2, with the director Man having more of both. Another relative loss for Man
He has not been able to make most of leading action

- Man’s FH with by far match high UEs and his BH with match low UEs is related to his moving over to play FHs in lieu of BHs. 5/6 of his winners are back-away type shots (inside-in or inside-out based). More simply, it has most errors because its playing most shots, and conversely BH has fewest because its playing fewest. Chang by contrast is dual winged with both sides taking even amount of balls

Rallying to net - Chang 15/21 at 71%, Man 15/19 at 79% brings up the full picture
Excellent net numbers for both players and a lot better than either does trying to finish from back
Chang doesn’t force errors from back because he doesn’t look to; when in position to attack, he comes to net. It’s a much better way to finish and his success rate speaks for itself

Man has director has more ready chances to come in, but ends up doing so less. And his attacking inefficiencies stand out more for it. Why not hit strong approach and come in, rather than try to finish with power shots from the back? He hasn’t chosen as well as Chang. This is manifestation of the occasional rattled, lashing out aspect of his showing alluded to earlier

Chang’s also 1/2 serve-volleying and 2/3 return-approaching
Both are good enough in the forecourt, neither are outstanding. Chang looks more comfy

At net -
- winners - Chang 3, Man 5
- UEs - Chang 4, Man 3 (all of Chang’s are attacking shots, all of Man’s winner attempts)
- Passing errors forced - Chang 13 (including a lob volley), Man 10
- Passed - Chang 3 times (that is, Man’s passing winners)

All the numbers accurately hinting at Man coming in from stronger approach shots
He does more of this and less trying to smack winners and otherwise aggressively end points from back, he probably ends up doing better

To be clear Mancini ‘directing’ or ‘leading’ action isn’t flagrant. This isn’t a Man power-hitting, Chang resisting power encounter. If Mancini has more chances to attack, based on how stock rallies go, its to limited degree

Match Progression
5 breaks in first set, and Mancini’s the one that’s up a break twice

Breaks in 8 point game to start, with Man’s BH dtl winner the only point not ending with UE. Tough rallies leading to them, and some aggressive errors in there for both players

Two trade breaks, to leave Man still 1 up in moving from 2-1 to 3-2
Chang with a well constructed point, ending with BH cc winner and a taking advantage of Man persisting with not pressuring enough FH inside-outs to approach BH dtl to win another point. Man with a couple of FH UEs complete job for 2-2
Man breaks back to love - finishing a great rally by coming in for a BHV winner and drawing UEs on other points

Chang breaks for 4-4 awhile later, also to love

From 5-5, Chang survives a break point to hold 12 point game, with points decided by UEs from tough rallies
And breaks to finish. A bad game off aggressive UEs from Man, who looks like previous game has frustrated him

Man breaks to open second set
And follows up with a unique-for-the-match burst of overt aggression. He strikes 4 winners in the next 6 points (Chang strikes one too). There were only 9 winners in the entire 69 point first set to contextualize

Chang breaks for 2-2 next go around in 12 point game, in a relatively aggressive game. Man again erring on break point by not being strong enough with his back-away FHs. This time, not strong enough inside-in is turned away FH cc, putting Man on defensive and Chang putsaway his get with BH inside-out/dtl winner from up the court

Game 7 is important. At 30-30, Man makes complete hash of an OH and hits it close to the backboards. Chang misses couple of routine volleys too - including the point after the smash miss while serve-volleying. In other words, if Man makes the smash and all other things remaining the same, he breaks (its doubtful Chang would serve-volley were he down break point)

Chang attacks net more as set nears its end. The end itself is a good game

Weird inside-out/longline slice miss by Man to start
Chang wins a stunning point, where he defends hardily but is outgunned and in hopeless position outside court as Man looks to wrap up with easy drop shot at net. Only for Chang to race to reach the ball and win the net-to-net point

Man strikes couple of winners in a row after that (BH cc pass against return-approach and third ball FH inside-out) to reach 30-30, before Chang raises break/match point with a surprise BH dtl winner
Man blinks up attacking FH inside-out error to end things

Summing up, arduous stuff on painfully slow court. Mancini leads baseline action, Chang reacts.
The amount of spin Mancini imparts on his FHs in particular is extreme. It’s a Chang thing to be able to handle head high balls as well as he does (its also a Chang thing for balls to reach head height in the first place)

Tough, attritional rallies, with Mancini occasionally overpowering opponent, while Chang is a little steadier. Not the best choices by Mancini to attack from the back rather than approach net when in charge; Chang, whose in charge less often, strikes much better balance

Even so, that’s not entirely why result is what it is. Chang’s less put off by the hard grind and maintains tough spirit through it all, Mancini occasionally gets worn down/frustrated by it all - and Chang wins