Match Stats/Report - Djokovic vs Sinner, Wimbledon semi-final, 2023

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Novak Djokovic beat Jannik Sinner 6-3, 6-4, 7-6(4) in the Wimbledon semi-final, 2023 on grass

Djokovic, who had won the last 4 editions of the event, would go onto lose the final to Carlos Alcaraz. This was Sinner’s first Slam semi-final. The two had met in the quarter-final the previous year, with Djokovic winning from 2 sets to love down en route to the title

Djokovic won 106 points, Sinner 96

Serve Stats
Djokovic...
- 1st serve percentage (65/112) 58%
- 1st serve points won (49/65) 75%
- 2nd serve points won (28/47) 60%
- Aces 11 (1 second serve), Service Winners 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (33/112) 29%

Sinner...
- 1st serve percentage (54/90) 60%
- 1st serve points won (41/54) 76%
- 2nd serve points won (20/36) 56%
- Aces 8
- Double Faults 3
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (22/90) 24%

Serve Pattern
Djokovic served...
- to FH 45%
- to BH 52%
- to Body 4%

Sinner served...
- to FH 32%
- to BH 54%
- to Body 14%

Return Stats
Djokovic made...
- 65 (29 FH, 36 BH)
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 4 Unforced (1 FH, 3 BH)
- 10 Forced (3 FH, 7 BH)
- Return Rate (65/87) 75%

Sinner made...
- 79 (32 FH, 47 BH), including 1 runaround FH & 1 return-approach
- 2 Winners (2 BH)
- 21 Errors, comprising...
- 7 Unforced (4 FH, 3 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 14 Forced (9 FH, 5 BH)
- Return Rate (79/112) 71%

Break Points
Djokovic 2/9 (4 games)
Sinner 0/6 (4 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Djokovic 20 (9 FH, 4 BH, 6 FHV, 1 OH)
Sinner 35 (22 FH, 6 BH, 4 FHV, 1 BHV, 2 OH)

Djokovic's FHs - 3 cc, 1 dtl pass, 3 inside-out, 2 running-down-drop-shot at net (1 dtl, 1 lob)
- BHs - 1 cc, 2 dtl passes (1 return), 1 drop shot

- 1 FHV was a non-net, swinging longline

Sinner's FHs - 3 cc (1 at net), 2 cc/inside-in, 8 dtl (4 passes), 4 inside-out (1 with Djokovic on the floor), 1 inside-out/dtl, 2 inside-in, 1 longline, 1 drop shot
- BHs - 1 cc pass, 5 dtl (2 returns, 1 at net)

- 1 from a serve-volley point, a first volley FHV

- 1 other FHV was a swinging inside-out

Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Djokovic 39
- 24 Unforced (11 FH, 12 BH)
- 15 Forced (6 FH, 7 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.1

Sinner 50
- 37 Unforced (22 FH, 15 BH)
- 13 Forced (7 FH, 5 BH, 1 FH1/2V)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.5

(Note 0: Djokovic's Hindrance UE has been excluded from his UEFI score)

(Note 1: all half-volleys refer to such shots played at net. Half -volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke counts)

(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
Djokovic was 12/21 (57%) at net, with...
- 0/1 retreated

Sinner was...
- 16/22 (73%) at net, including...
- 2/4 (50%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves
---
- 1/1 return-approaching

Match Report
Who-plays-the-big-points-better match and one of the those lovely grass court straight setters that could just as readily have been straight sets the other way. Both players are on top of their games and both play very well. Djokovic’s biggest weapons are his first serve, and he backs it up with masterful, clinical but flexible ground game. Sinner scores with some heavy returning and is even more powerful off the ground, while being more adventurous, if not as masterful. Only thing between the players are those ‘big-points’, on which sparkling FH lets him down

First serve in - Djoko 58%, Sinner 60%
First serve won - Djoko 75%, Sinner 76%
Second serve won - Djoko 60%, Sinner 56%

Can you tell who won the match looking at that?

Sinner wins 6 more points than he serves, Djoko 6 less. There are no outlier long games (2 longest games of match last 10 points). Any closer to being able to tell who won the match from now?

Break points - Djoko 2/9, Sinner 0/6 with both having them in 4 games. The ‘big points’ thing

Djoko does break early in sets - he goes up 2-0 in first set and 2-1 in second with his breaks - but doesn’t ease up in return games afterwards to account for Sinner holding readily rest of time
He’s got worse of the regular part of third set and is down 1-3 in tiebreak courtesy of a banged return winner by Sinner. Rare double fault turns that around and Sinner falters after that to go down in straights

Enough of a falter that word ‘choke’ isn’t unfair take, a cluster ground UEs off both wings

As for rest of match -
- he has 2 break points in opening game, losing 1 to FH UE
- he’s broken game after, missing 3 FHs in a row to round off game (the last against a deep ball, admittedly)
- he has1 more break point in the set, where he misses a FH cc winner attempt
- in second set, is broken on a FH UE, and misses inside-in FH winner attempt on break point game after after outplaying Djoko to reach that position
- has 2 both break points of third set, misses adventurous FH cc winner attempt on second one

Sinner’s FH has by far match high 22 winners - more than Djoko’s all shot total of 20 and almost double the 13 rest of his shots have. Also match high 22 UEs, up against powerful opposition of Djoko’s rock solid shot which has half that number. And clearly, at disproportionate lot of them at most crucial times

That’s zooming in. Big picture is even match, 2 equally (and very well) playing guys - and 1 guy has better of small number of big points to win in straights. Not too rare for grass
Djoko with 20 winners, 24 UEs (and forcing 13 errors), Sinner 35 winners, 37 UEs (and forcing 15 errors). Very good stuff

Most unusual thing to happen is Djoko incurring a hindrance call to lose a point. It’s a good call. Djoko lets out a roar as he strikes an error forcing BH dtl. ‘After he strikes’ to be more accurate. Its more a celebratory roar than an effort-shot grunt. Not too important a point, he wasn’t grunting in general around this time. No real reason for the roar, shot would very likely have ended point anyway, but not so surely that Chair’s Call isn’t the right one. He gets a warning for taking too long to serve in same game shortly after too, which is again, fully deserved. That’s a great Chair

Serve & Return
Both return well in different ways (Djoko shining more in difficult returns, Sinner in big cut attacking returning), and serving quality is close to equal. Combo of the two result in razors edge advantage for Djoko

First serve in - Djoko 58%, Sinner 60%
Aces/Service Winners - Djoko 12 (1 a second serve), Sinner 8
First serve ace/SW rate - Djoko 17%, Sinner 15%

Not much in it. And Sinner’s not as good at moving for wide returns goes some way to accounting for slightly better rate of aces for Djoko. 3 of Djoko’s aces come in a row in same game, which is good to win the game obviously, but its worth just 1 game so so slightly distorting how above stats look

Both with healthy paced serves. Sinner’s probably a bit pacier, but its splitting hairs; Call it equal
Djoko placing the serves better, wider. Occasionally very wide and lower pace, while Sinner bangs down pacey serves all the time

On the return, Djoko quicker to meet, tough wide serves. When Sinner bangs down an especially big, effort serve, Djoko invariably thumps it back seemingly even harder than it came. Sinner’s troubled more by wide serves and doesn't seem to have a read direction

Proportion of return UEs and FEs are virtually same - both with 2 FEs for every UE (Literally true for Sinner, 1 UE short of it for Djoko)

Sinner’s more aggressive returning second serves.
Djoko with personal par returning - good depth on first returns, some lot of very deep, down-the-middle ones against second serves. All clinically done
Sinner’s more pointed in looking to attack second serves. Stepping in and particularly hammering them early and within inches off the baseline. And not down the center like Djoko, but wide on top of that
He’s got couple of return winners (Djoko’s sole one is a pass), and plenty more potentially point ending ones. Djoko does very well to chase and dig such returns out

Djoko second serve vs Sinner return becomes a tasty, strategic contest. Djoko occasionally sending down a big one and serving at the body, but usually, just a normal second serve. And Sinner not holding back

7 Djoko second serves don’t come back (including an ace and a wide one marked an FE), so 15% second serves unreturned.
4 Sinner ones don’t too (1 marked FE), so 11%

Extra damage done by Sinner’s return is probably worth 4% balance there. It would be more than worth it if Djoko weren’t so good at digging out defensive third balls, and purely in serve-return contest, Sinner’s second returning might even give him edge (bearing in mind, Djoko’s not exactly blocking and pushing returns softly)

Both players have done very well to win such a high lot of second serve points, given the hot returning on show

Double faults - Djoko 0, Sinner 3 or 8% of second serves
Every little bit helps and no double faults for Djoko is one of those things. And with everything so close, more important still

The final word comes in pure numbers - unreturned serves - Djoko 29%, Sinner 24%
Throw in 3 double faults, and Djoko winning a significant lot more points with serve, but there’s not much in any of it - serving quality or returning quality

Gist - Djoko placing serves a little better, Sinner with a bit more pace on the first shot
Djoko better at making tough returns (against particular pace or wide ones), Sinner more aggressive in attacking with the second returning
No double faults from Djoko, small would-be insignificant from Sinner
Little in it. Djoko getting a few more points out of the whole thing
 

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Play - Baseline & Net
High quality, hard hitting based action. Djoko’s close to his best and Sinner’s right there with him

Djoko in clinical, hard-hitting mode. Not unduly aggressive (in the going for winners or taking net sense), but hitting everything hard, deep while barely missing. Potentially, one of his roll-over-opponent showings

Sinner isn’t to be rolled over. He hits back hard himself, with matching depth. He is more apt to give up ground error, but he’s also more openly aggressive in looking to overtly attack

Winners - Djoko 20, Sinner 35
Errors Forced - Djoko 13, Sinner 15
UEs - Djoko 24, Sinner 37

Neutral UEs - Djoko 13, Sinner 22
The base of action, and in context of elite ball-striking from both players. Take at face value - Djoko just that much more secure. Sinner missing a routine ball is common enough to not come as a surprise, though he’s far from sloppy. He does give up a few errors early in rallies. Djoko is very secure while hitting splendidly

Attacking UEs - both 6 (Djoko’s hindrance hasn’t been counted in UEFI, it would go here if it had been)
Errors forced - Djoko 13, Sinner 15

Some beautiful, measured moderate attacking from Djoko. Going just wide enough or particularly deep when short of attackingly wide. Usually hits such ball less hard, but measured just so to win point or draw weak ball. Sinner’s attacks are more blunt - standard dtl usually, less often wider cc shots

Sinner is very good from defensive position. He hits counter-neutralizing shots when on run with excellent depth. Sometimes deep enough to potentially put Djoko on defensive even. Very similar to how younger Djoko used hit in same situation. Much of Djoko’s defence is to deal with Sinner’s big 2nd returns that land near baseline and usually wide. He’s quick to cover them and bop them back with enough authority as to not to leave Sinner easy continuation of attack. Dampening the attack, if not neutralizing it. He’s not as quick as Sinner but like much of his game, movement is clinically efficient

Winner attempt UEs - Djoko 4, Sinner 9
Winners - Djoko 20, Sinner 35

Excellent efficiency. Especially from Sinner who takes on more chancey finishers. Focus of action isn’t about finishing, its about creating chances for them, which with the exemplary stock hitting and good defence proves difficult

Sinner plays classic dtl attacking shots from stock position. Both moderately attacking and for the winner. He’s got 4 FH dtl winners, 2 BHs (+ 2 more returns). Djoko moves Sinner around more and pushes him back with particular depth to set up his finishing, and is more apt to take net to finish than Sinner

Rallying to net - Djoko 12/21 or 57%, Sinner 14/18 or 78%

Sinner’s vigour in defence present in passing too
Djoko’s got 6 net volley winners, 2 FEs, while Sinner has 5 passing winners. Powerful shots from not good looks (if not hopeless). A big spanner in Djoko’s finishing to be kept down to 57% net points won. And Sinner’s thumped returning keep Djoko away from serve-volleying that he’d taken fancy to during this period (particularly against returners who stay deep, which Sinner doesn’t). All that with Djoko volleying very neatly, putting the volleys where he wants and 0 UEs

Sinner doing superbly at net without looking to approach. Down-the-line shots off both wings is how he gets on attack and looks to finish. Milder, safer shot to approach behind isn’t his thing. Doesn’t have much work to do on volley, but with 78% winnings there and coming in almost as much as Djoko, who actually look to finish at net, worth considering adding the piece to his game. In general, he’s not a convincing volleyer, but with groundies like his, probably doesn’t have to be to have success

Sinner FHs 22 winners put everything else in shade. Djoko has 20 total, Sinner has from all other shots. Its effective both dtl (4 winners) or inside-out (5 winners). it also has match high 22 UEs though

Ground UEs -
- Djoko FH 11, Djoko BH 12
- Sinner BH 15
- Sinner FH 22

… with attacking UEs equal at 6, and Sinner having 5 more winner attempt UEs

35/60 UEs are neutrals. Most winner attempt misses by Sinner being FHs to account for it having a few more than his BH, which he doesn’t use as much for shot-making
And Djoko just that much more secure in the hard-hitting stock stuff. At best, Djoko can’t seem to miss a ball. Sinner being outdone is credit to Djoko, not discredit to Sinner, especially with hard hitting play

Gist - hard hitting, dual winged play, both players striking the ball very well and with good depth. Djokovic more consistent off the ground, Sinner a little more powerful on whole when straining to attack (Djokovic plays clinically and never strains). Both players defending very well, to extent to neutralizing opponent from bad positions, especially Sinner, who also passes superbly against precise volleying opponent

Sinner more the aggressor, getting on the attack with dtl shots off both wings and hitting lots of FH winners in multiple directions to make up for his consistency disadvantage

Match Progression
Good opening set. Djoko’s powerful of shot and goes whichever way he wants with FHs, along with strong stock BH cc’ng. Some neat volleying to go with it and well placed serves. Sinner’s right there with him. More on his toes, not as consistently clean of hitting but more aggressive in his shot choices

FH inside-out winner by Sinner raises break point in opening game, which Djoko slaps away with a winning FH inside-in. Sinner counter-attacks with a wide FH cc to turn next point around and come away with FH dtl winner to raise another break point, in which he blinks up a FH UE, before Djoko goes on to hold

And then breaks. Good depth from Djoko to get it, but not good shot choices from Sinner. No easy alternatives though against steady stream of deep shots from his opponent

Sinner has the only other break point in the game, which he brings up with a brilliant BH dtl winner from normal position. He’s on the move as he lashes a FH cc for attempted winner but misses before Djoko holds again

In time, Djoko serves out to 15, with 4 unreturned serves in a row (the first 3 aces)

Second set goes the same way as first - both of action and outcome
Djoko holds for 1-1, making 1/6 first serves
Then breaks, with Sinner making 1/6 first serves. Nice winning BH dtl by Djoko to get ball rolling, Sinner double faults and Djoko out-toughs Sinner for errors to finish the job

Djoko’s down break point in consolidating and makes 4/10 first serves. The roar he lets out after hitting a winning BH dtl early in the game gets him hindrance call and loss of the point. He queries the call, but doesn’t protest much. Sinner has break point later in the game and Djoko on defensive on the point, but misses his attempted FH inside-in finisher. Djoko’s given a warning for taking too long to serve point after, and typically, responds well with a strong third ball FH setting up an OH winner before holding

2 trade deuce holds soon, with Sinner saving 2 break points in his. The tennis is good. Djoko’s reaching stage where when he misses a regulation third ball groundie, it comes as a surprise. He serves out to 15 in due time, starting and ending the game with aces

Action doesn’t change much in third set either. Sinner does up the aggression of his returning and blasts a number of them to the baseline, sometimes wide on top of that

Lovely, BH dtl slice by Djoko in game 3 wins him a point and a Sinner BH dtl miss later, score is 0-40. Sinner gets out the hold with good serves to hold and takes Djoko to deuce game after

Sinner’s blasted returning gives him edge for rest of set and he’s got 2 break/set points at 5-4 in a game filled with deep returns. Gets another blasted return off on the second one, which Djoko does well to defend and neutralize. Sinner ultimately misses a not obviously there FH cc winner attempt. ‘Not obviously there’, but he’s made many such shots all match. Djoko goes on to hold, fiishing with a swinging longline FHV winner from no-man’s land

Set goes to tiebreak and Sinner knocks away BH dtl return winner to take 2-0 lead. Hands back the mini-break with a rare double fault

Djoko’s drawn in to net awhile later and anticipates upcoming power pass that he deftly puts away for a FHV winner to take his first lead at 4-3. Sinner levels with a third ball FH inside-out winner, with Djoko having slipped and on the floor

Sinner’s not the only one who can strike returns to baseline. Djoko sends one there, which Sinner’s able to handle, but he misses simple BH in the follow-up rally. And misses 2 more in succession after that to close out the match

Summing up, high quality match, close straight setter. Not difficult to see the match being straight sets the other way even

Djokovic placing his serves a little better, Sinner’s a little more powerful
Djokovic returning tough serves better, Sinner punishing ordinary ones more

Djokovic with exemplary ball-striking at all times, usually very secure and when he wants, able to go whichever direction he feels like. Sinner more apt to give up routine error, and with the odd mishit but right there with his opponent on stock power and depth, while being a lot more direct in his aggression
Both players defend well and are able to neutralize the others powerful attacks from off-balance or running positions. Sinner passes very well too

All comes out near even, with a point-here, a point-there deciding matters. Djokovic stays tough and takes those points, with Sinner’s generally potent FH cracking

Stats for the final between Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz - Match Stats/Report - Alcaraz vs Djokovic, Wimbledon final, 2023 | Talk Tennis
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
A more positive view than the match thread at the time..
We know why.

There are 100s of members who till last year cried weak era on every post. They have shifted tune just when Djokovic stopped winning slams this year. Same competition. Nole beat this guy in straights last year.
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
That day Djokovic won the match rather comfortably although overall it was very balanced, for two specific reasons above all;

1) He was much more solid in managing the important moments of each individual set.

2) He abused Sinner's forehand which was still quite unstable at the time.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
We know why.

There are 100s of members who till last year cried weak era on every post. They have shifted tune just when Djokovic stopped winning slams this year. Same competition. Nole beat this guy in straights last year.
They still think it's weak but just happy that Djokovic isn't winning anymore. Actually maybe not Sinneraz fans.
 

Pheasant

Legend
This match was closer than the score line indicated. I have a feeling that Sinner will be a threat next year at Wimbledon, provided he's healthy.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
The board was in full meltdown mode as the threat of Novak CYGS was looming and people had little face in Carlos on grass. Not exactly TTW at its most levelheaded.
You also have to consider the context of Sinner having taken Djokovic to five in the previous edition. There was some hope that he might improve on that result.
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
I think your great match report fits the perception of Sinner himself. He was lambasted for stating that he felt closer to Djokovic in his straight set defeat than in his five-set loss the year before.

The battle was one a knife’s edge, falling every set to the experience and coolness of Djokovic. However it was also easy to imagine that if Sinner continued on his steady upward path things might increasinly turn around…
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
I think your great match report fits the perception of Sinner himself. He was lambasted for stating that he felt closer to Djokovic in his straight set defeat than in his five-set loss the year before.

The battle was one a knife’s edge, falling every set to the experience and coolness of Djokovic. However it was also easy to imagine that if Sinner continued on his steady upward path...
He should be lambasted.

This was his first slam semi on the back of weak path to semis and at age close to 22 he was yet to win even a masters. Then he calls match vs Djokovic who just won 23rd as close.
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
He should be lambasted.

This was his first slam semi on the back of weak path to semis and at age close to 22 he was yet to win even a masters. Then he calls match vs Djokovic who just won 23rd as close.

In this case we do differ. Even the stats broadly fit his view, not only the match report by @Waspsting. Nole was better overall and more so in the decisive moments but we saw shades of things to come…

3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassSF
8​
2​
(2)Novak Djokovic [SRB] d. (8)Sinner6-3 6-4 7-6(4)(ch)
0.97​
8.9%​
3.3%​
60.0%​
75.9%​
55.6%​
7/9​
2:47​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassQF
8​
92​
(8)Sinner d. Roman Safiullin [RUS]6-4 3-6 6-2 6-2(ch)
1.57​
15.9%​
2.3%​
54.5%​
89.6%​
55.0%​
3/5​
2:14​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR16
8​
85​
(8)Sinner d. Daniel Elahi Galan [COL]7-6(4) 6-4 6-3(ch)
1.86​
13.6%​
1.1%​
54.5%​
85.4%​
70.0%​
4/5​
2:37​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR32
8​
79​
(8)Sinner d. Quentin Halys [FRA]3-6 6-2 6-3 6-4(ch)
1.39​
9.2%​
8.2%​
49.0%​
83.3%​
62.0%​
2/4​
2:25​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR64
8​
98​
(8)Sinner d. Diego Schwartzman [ARG]7-5 6-1 6-2(ch)
1.62​
18.1%​
1.2%​
56.6%​
80.9%​
58.3%​
4/5​
2:02​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR128
8​
111​
(8)Sinner d. Juan Manuel Cerundolo [ARG]6-2 6-2 6-2(ch)
3.19​
12.1%​
0.0%​
69.0%​
82.5%​
88.9%​
2/2​
1:30​
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
In this case we do differ. Even the stats fit his view, not only the match report by @Waspsting .

3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassSF
8​
2​
(2)Novak Djokovic [SRB] d. (8)Sinner6-3 6-4 7-6(4) (ch)
0.97​
8.9%​
3.3%​
60.0%​
75.9%​
55.6%​
7/9​
2:47​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassQF
8​
92​
(8)Sinner d. Roman Safiullin [RUS]6-4 3-6 6-2 6-2 (ch)
1.57​
15.9%​
2.3%​
54.5%​
89.6%​
55.0%​
3/5​
2:14​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR16
8​
85​
(8)Sinner d. Daniel Elahi Galan [COL]7-6(4) 6-4 6-3 (ch)
1.86​
13.6%​
1.1%​
54.5%​
85.4%​
70.0%​
4/5​
2:37​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR32
8​
79​
(8)Sinner d. Quentin Halys [FRA]3-6 6-2 6-3 6-4 (ch)
1.39​
9.2%​
8.2%​
49.0%​
83.3%​
62.0%​
2/4​
2:25​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR64
8​
98​
(8)Sinner d. Diego Schwartzman [ARG]7-5 6-1 6-2 (ch)
1.62​
18.1%​
1.2%​
56.6%​
80.9%​
58.3%​
4/5​
2:02​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR128
8​
111​
(8)Sinner d. Juan Manuel Cerundolo [ARG]6-2 6-2 6-2 (ch)
3.19​
12.1%​
0.0%​
69.0%​
82.5%​
88.9%​
2/2​
1:30​
I agree about stats.

I am saying there is finite patience we tennis fans can have. And sinner had already crossed the limit and tested our patience. Now in 2024 everything is good but he was dangerously coming closer to be a has been. Even if the match was close his career till the was embarrassing compared to what he could achieve (what he has already done in 2024).

No one wants another Murray.
 

aldeayeah

G.O.A.T.
I think your great match report fits the perception of Sinner himself. He was lambasted for stating that he felt closer to Djokovic in his straight set defeat than in his five-set loss the year before.
He was closer. 2022 was a very slow start from Djokovic, he dominated Sinner easily starting in the 3rd.
 
Last edited:

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
(noting Djokovic winning high 60% second serve points)

That's even better (and surprising) than it looks because his second serve gets some very rough treatment from Sinner's returning
Quite often, not just blasted back to baseline, but wide as well as that deep and powerful. Its more intense than typical Djoko, easy hits right to baseline showing

Excellent digging and counter-neutralizing responses from Djoko to cope. It has to be


I think your great match report fits the perception of Sinner himself. He was lambasted for stating that he felt closer to Djokovic in his straight set defeat than in his five-set loss the year before.

The battle was one a knife’s edge, falling every set to the experience and coolness of Djokovic. However it was also easy to imagine that if Sinner continued on his steady upward path things might increasinly turn around…

it sound strange, but not too abnormal for that to be (feeling a straight setter is more even than a 5 setter)

Recently, I watched Sampras-Korda from '97 Wimbledon
Going into 5th set, Sampras had served at 70%, Korda 48% and Sampras had healthy lead in both first and second serve points won
You watch a match like that and marvel at how it could possibly be even. When sets come down to a point here, a point there, that can happen

As for the players' reactions, which are gut level takes, based as much on my own playing experience and hearing the reactions of players, how even a match was or who was better player is usually just about who was leading rallies, who was reacting. They're not doing fine-tune statisitcal analysis here

For example, right after 2013 US Open win over Wawrinka, Djokovic stated that opponent had been the better player and that he'd been lucky to win
Statistically, that's bollocks. For last 2 sets, Djoko had been holding much more comfortably than Stan
But I understood where he was coming from. Stan was leading the rallies (most on his own service games, which I think mentally gets lost in the wash when rallies are quite long, as they were there), Djoko reacting

Here, rallies are hard hitting from top to bottom and contest for control. Sinner leading as often as not, and being more aggressive in them
If he were a different kind of guy, he might even have opined "I was the better player"... how often have you heard players lose and say that?

Also, when players talk about "being better player" or "playing well" or comparing how they played relative to opponet, they usually seem to be discounting the serve from the assessment and are thinking about rallies. Where Sinner, if anything has better of things


In this case we do differ. Even the stats broadly fit his view, not only the match report by @Waspsting. Nole was better overall and more so in the decisive moments but we saw shades of things to come…

3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassSF
8​
2​
(2)Novak Djokovic [SRB] d. (8)Sinner6-3 6-4 7-6(4)(ch)
0.97​
8.9%​
3.3%​
60.0%​
75.9%​
55.6%​
7/9​
2:47​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassQF
8​
92​
(8)Sinner d. Roman Safiullin [RUS]6-4 3-6 6-2 6-2(ch)
1.57​
15.9%​
2.3%​
54.5%​
89.6%​
55.0%​
3/5​
2:14​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR16
8​
85​
(8)Sinner d. Daniel Elahi Galan [COL]7-6(4) 6-4 6-3(ch)
1.86​
13.6%​
1.1%​
54.5%​
85.4%​
70.0%​
4/5​
2:37​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR32
8​
79​
(8)Sinner d. Quentin Halys [FRA]3-6 6-2 6-3 6-4(ch)
1.39​
9.2%​
8.2%​
49.0%​
83.3%​
62.0%​
2/4​
2:25​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR64
8​
98​
(8)Sinner d. Diego Schwartzman [ARG]7-5 6-1 6-2(ch)
1.62​
18.1%​
1.2%​
56.6%​
80.9%​
58.3%​
4/5​
2:02​
3‑Jul‑2023WimbledonGrassR128
8​
111​
(8)Sinner d. Juan Manuel Cerundolo [ARG]6-2 6-2 6-2(ch)
3.19​
12.1%​
0.0%​
69.0%​
82.5%​
88.9%​
2/2​
1:30​

What are the headings for these figures?
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
Here, rallies are hard hitting from top to bottom and contest for control. Sinner leading as often as not, and being more aggressive in them
If he were a different kind of guy, he might even have opined "I was the better player"... how often have you heard players lose and say that?

Also, when players talk about "being better player" or "playing well" or comparing how they played relative to opponet, they usually seem to be discounting the serve from the assessment and are thinking about rallies. Where Sinner, if anything has better of things

Good writing to explain how players might approach analysis. Makes sense that he would speak thinking about the compartment ‘rally‘ to compare it specifically to that performance in the last three sets of last year in which he had no chance.

Headers are the following. Your work is especially valuable because it offers a critical independent assessment, giving us a knowledgeable different point of view:


Date​
Tournament​
Surface​
Rd​
Rk​
vRk​
Score​
DR​
A%​
DF%​
1stIn​
1st%​
2nd%​
BPSvd​
Time​
02-Oct-2024Shanghai MastersHardF
1​
4​
(1)Sinner d. (4)Novak Djokovic [SRB]7-6(4) 6-3
1.03​
11.9%​
0.0%​
61.2%​
75.6%​
65.4%​
0/0​
1:37​
02-Oct-2024Shanghai MastersHardSF
1​
33​
(1)Sinner d. (30)Tomas Machac [CZE]6-4 7-5
1.33​
14.5%​
1.4%​
66.7%​
73.9%​
60.9%​
2/3​
1:43​
02-Oct-2024Shanghai MastersHardQF
1​
5​
(1)Sinner d. (5)Daniil Medvedev [RUS]6-1 6-4
1.94​
18.0%​
0.0%​
66.0%​
84.8%​
58.8%​
1/1​
1:24​
02-Oct-2024Shanghai MastersHardR16
1​
16​
(1)Sinner d. (14)Ben Shelton [USA]6-4 7-6(1)
1.31​
10.6%​
0.0%​
69.7%​
87.0%​
65.0%​
7/7​
1:28​
02-Oct-2024Shanghai MastersHardR32
1​
37​
(1)Sinner d. (31)Tomas Martin Etcheverry [ARG]6-7(3) 6-4 6-2
1.30​
13.0%​
1.1%​
69.6%​
78.1%​
53.6%​
4/5​
2:39​
02-Oct-2024Shanghai MastersHardR64
1​
93​
(1)Sinner d. Taro Daniel [JPN]6-1 6-4
1.91​
24.5%​
2.0%​
77.6%​
84.2%​
45.5%​
0/0​
1:17​
26-Sep-2024BeijingHardF
1​
3​
(2)Carlos Alcaraz [ESP] d. (1)Sinner6-7(6) 6-4 7-6(3)
0.86​
4.7%​
3.1%​
55.0%​
66.2%​
53.4%​
12/15​
3:21​
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
Thanks

DR is 'dominance ratio', right?
What exactly is that?

Yes, it stands for ‘dominance ratio‘ DR and is calculated by dividing a player’s rate of return points won by his rate of service points lost (his opponent’s rate of RPW) with 1.0 being the equal outcome.*

A good discussion about it on this very forum.

*Funnily Alcaraz leads 7-4 in the H2H with Sinner but they have a perfect 1.0 in DR.
 
Last edited:
Strictly speaking it's % of points won on opponent's serve divided by % of points lost on your own serve.
Yes, it stands for ‘dominance ratio‘ DR and is calculated by dividing a player’s rate of return points won by his rate of service points lost (his opponent’s rate of RPW with 1.0 being the equal outcome.*
is there anything lost by describing it as "ratio of players' return points won %"? also iirc it isn't even as well correlated with match win rate as simply total points won % so i'm a little unsure nowadays of how useful it is
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
is there anything lost by describing it as "ratio of players' return points won %"? also iirc it isn't even as well correlated with match win rate as simply total points won % so i'm a little unsure nowadays of how useful it is

Good observations:

If you look at a single match it would be indeed easier to say that if the match behind it is clear. So if Sinner and Alcaraz play each other and win 0.4 of their return points we have 0.4/0.4 a DR of 1.0. Markedly different games lengths should still result in a higher amount of points won and questions.

This explains also the value of DR as it allows us to explore more of the serve/return dynamic of a match and of a player over a longer arc. For a single match it is more jittery and helps us to investigate while in the latter case thinking in terms of ‘rates of return points versus rate of serve points lost‘ is more useful.
 

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Strictly speaking it's % of points won on opponent's serve divided by % of points lost on your own serve.

Is there a non-strict adaptation of it?

is there anything lost by describing it as "ratio of players' return points won %"? also iirc it isn't even as well correlated with match win rate as simply total points won % so i'm a little unsure nowadays of how useful it is

Good observations:

If you look at a single match it would be indeed easier to say that if the match behind it is clear. So if Sinner and Alcaraz play each other and win 0.4 of their return points we have 0.4/0.4 a DR of 1.0. Markedly different games lengths should still result in a higher amount of points won and questions.

This explains also the value of DR as it allows us to explore more of the serve/return dynamic of a match and of a player over a longer arc. For a single match it is more jittery and helps us to investigate while in the latter case thinking in terms of ‘rates of return points versus rate of serve points lost‘ is more useful.

I go into this by giving percentage of total points won & percentage of total points served

That has the advantage of clearly showing who won more points, which as AB noted, is best predictor of who won match
Both DR and what I give shows the trend of match, i.e. who's getting further into return games on average

If I'm reading this right, serve-bots will tend to have good DRs, is that correct?

Someone like Karlovic, holding a lot to love and 15 might lose to someone like Ferrer in tiebreaks or 1-break sets... but at end, Karlovic will have won higher lot of his service points than Ferrer has. Is that what we see?
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
I go into this by giving percentage of total points won & percentage of total points served

That has the advantage of clearly showing who won more points, which as AB noted, is best predictor of who won match
Both DR and what I give shows the trend of match, i.e. who's getting further into return games on average

I think it is a useful approach. Should sits mostly between TPW% (total points won %) and DR (dominance ratio) but I would have to check that.
If I'm reading this right, serve-bots will tend to have good DRs, is that correct?

Someone like Karlovic, holding a lot to love and 15 might lose to someone like Ferrer in tiebreaks or 1-break sets... but at end, Karlovic will have won higher lot of his service points than Ferrer has. Is that what we see?

Looking at greater samples there seems to be a tendency that more sever-dominant have on average a slightly higher DR than their TPW% would suggest.

However keep in mind that a servebot DR of 1.0 might derive from (0.3/0.3) while the same DR of 1.0 for a better returner Minaur is more likely the result of (0.35/0.35). Smaller numbers makes DR jump around more.

A servebot like Perricard could for example win with a DR of 0.66 against Huesler in this years AO…
 

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
I think it is a useful approach. Should sits mostly between TPW% (total points won %) and DR (dominance ratio) but I would have to check that.


Looking at greater samples there seems to be a tendency that more sever-dominant have on average a slightly higher DR than their TPW% would suggest.

However keep in mind that a servebot DR of 1.0 might derive from (0.3/0.3) while the same DR of 1.0 for a better returner Minaur is more likely the result of (0.35/0.35). Smaller numbers makes DR jump around more.

A servebot like Perricard could for example win with a DR of 0.66 against Huesler in this years AO…

now I'm wondering what the lowest dominance ratios for a win would be
First match that came to my mind as a 'how-the-hell-did-he-win-that?' case is Nadal-Ljubicic, '05 Madrid final

For Nadal
percentage of return points won/percentage of service point lost comes to
44/140 divided by 58/123
or 0.665

... or conversely, Ljubicic losing with DR 1.50
1 players DR is always reciprocal of the other, right?

Can we find one lower?

Also remembered where I first heard about this. It was from @Moose Malloy , regarding Becker-Edberg '90 Stockholm final, where Becker had DR of 4.45 -

54/110 divided by 6/54

 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
now I'm wondering what the lowest dominance ratios for a win would be
First match that came to my mind as a 'how-the-hell-did-he-win-that?' case is Nadal-Ljubicic, '05 Madrid final
Roddick-Johansson at the 2004 US Open would be my pick. Roddick had a DR of 1.65 and still lost.

That would actually be a fun one to chart at some point.
 

Garro

Rookie
stats.png


@Waspsting The lowest DR in a winning match appears to be by Zverev, of all people. The other "low DR" match wins are not surprisingly mostly from big servers. The aforementioned Roddick/Johansson match is the lowest in a slam.

The interesting thing about DR as it relates to this match is that 1.03 is Djokovic's lowest DR in any straight set slam win.
I've never seen this match but perhaps it was a sign of things to come for Sinner? The match was obviously closer than the score would indicate.

Edit: my stats include matches as far back as 1990.
 
Last edited:

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
We know why.

There are 100s of members who till last year cried weak era on every post. They have shifted tune just when Djokovic stopped winning slams this year. Same competition. Nole beat this guy in straights last year.

No, we still call it a weak era we're in lol
 

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
stats.png


@Waspsting The lowest DR in a winning match appears to be by Zverev, of all people. The other "low DR" match wins are not surprisingly mostly from big servers. The aforementioned Roddick/Johansson match is the lowest in a slam.

Awesome, thanks

I'd think "low DR, but wins match" would tend even more to be against big servers than by them
Something like -
- break big server once
- rest of the time, big server holds easily
- hold on to your own serve normally (as opposed to easily) or even with difficulty

... confounded by big servers usually not having great return games, so if they're on losing end, they're unlikely to getting into return games regularly

The interesting thing about DR as it relates to this match is that 1.03 is Djokovic's lowest DR in any straight set slam win.
I've never seen this match but perhaps it was a sign of things to come for Sinner? The match was obviously closer than the score would indicate.

Its a very good match from both players. Sinner plays like an unfiltered Djokovic, hence all the extra winners
'Unfiltered' isn't necessarily a compliment. It is one only one when a guy zones - and there's a reason its called 'zoning' (as opposed to normal), it usually doesn't come off

But yeah, going on just this match, Sinner's got his game up to potential top-dog standard. Getting shot choices just so against master of it like Djokovic isn't reasonable expectation especially for young player, and he falters very little, if at at all on that front anyway. Despite, Djoko typically giving him lots and lots room to do so

Just a few points here and there. Sinner's impressive FH under-performing at those choice times and giving up errors (with Djoko consistently strong with his pressuring FH play throughout)


keep in mind that a servebot DR of 1.0 might derive from (0.3/0.3) while the same DR of 1.0 for a better returner Minaur is more likely the result of (0.35/0.35). Smaller numbers makes DR jump around more.

Makes sense. This is why I think presenting trend as I like to do gives clearer picture, without getting complex

Djokovic with DR 1.03
vs
Djokovic won 52.4% of points, serving 55.4% of them


DR is tidier, 1 neat figure
Way I do it is simple enough to be easily understood. Throw in break points to capture 'big points' - and that's nutshell summary of a match
 
Top