Match Stats/Report - Edberg vs Krajicek, US Open first round, 1996

[Waspsting]

Stefan Edberg beat Richard Krajicek 6-3, 6-3, 6-3 in the US Open first round, 1996 on hard court

Edberg would go onto the quarter-final where he would lose to Goran Ivanisevic. Krajicek had recently won Wimbledon and was seeded 5th. This would be Edberg’s last Slam event

Edberg won 100 points, Krajicek 78

Edberg serve-volleyed off most serves, Krajicek all first serves and most seconds

Serve Stats
Edberg...
- 1st serve percentage (60/92) 65%
- 1st serve points won (47/60) 78%
- 2nd serve points won (17/32) 53%
- Aces 1
- Double Faults 7
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (38/92) 41%

Krajicek...
- 1st serve percentage (46/86) 53%
- 1st serve points won (31/46) 67%
- 2nd serve points won (19/40) 48%
- Aces 14 (1 second serve), Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 6
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (36/86) 42%

Serve Patterns
Edberg served...
- to FH 25%
- to BH 65%
- to Body 15%

Krajicek served...
- to FH 26%
- to BH 69%
- to Body 5%

Return Stats
Edberg made...
- 44 (9 FH, 35 BH), including 3 return-approaches
- 4 Winners (2 FH, 2 BH)
- 21 Errors, comprising...
- 3 Unforced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 18 Forced (5 FH, 13 BH)
- Return Rate (44/80) 55%

Krajicek made...
- 47 (14 FH, 33 BH), including 2 runaround FHs & 2 return-approaches
- 4 Winners (2 FH, 2 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 37 Errors, comprising...
- 6 Unforced (4 FH, 2 BH), including 1 return-approach attempt
- 31 Forced (5 FH, 6 BH)
- Return Rate (47/85) 55%

Break Points
Edberg 5/10 (5 games)
Krajicek 0/5 (4 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Edberg 18 (4 FH, 5 BH, 5 FHV, 2 BHV, 2 OH)
Krajicek 17 (7 FH, 5 BH, 2 BHV, 3 OH)

Edberg had 9 from serve-volley points -
- 5 first 'volleys' (3 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 BH at net)
- 3 second volleys (2 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 1 third volley (1 OH)

- 7 passes - 4 returns (2 FH, 2 BH) & 3 regular (1 FH, 2 BH)
- FH returns - 1 dtl, 1 inside-in
- BH returns - 1 cc, 1 dtl
- regular FH - 1 dtl
- regular BHs - 1 cc, 1 dtl

- regular (non-pass) FH - 1 cc

Krajicek had 6 from serve-volley points -
- 4 first 'volleys' (1 BHV, 1 OH, 1 FH at net, 1 BH at net)
- 2 second volleys (1 BHV, 1 OH)

- 1 other OH was on the bounce from no-man's land

- 9 passes - 4 returns (2 FH, 2 BH) & 5 regular (3 FH, 2 BH)
- FH returns - 1 cc, 1 inside-out
- BH returns - 1 cc, 1 dtl
- regular FHs - 1 inside-out, 1 inside-in/longline, 1 lob
- regular BHs - 1 dtl, 1 lob

- regular (non-pass) FH - 1 inside-out

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Edberg 18
- 8 Unforced (3 FH, 1 BH, 2 FHV, 2 BHV)
- 10 Forced (3 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 1 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 53.0

Krajicek 38
- 14 Unforced (5 FH, 2 BH, 4 FHV, 3 BHV)... with 1 BH at net & 1 swinging FHV
- 24 Forced (6 FH, 8 BH, 2 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 7 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 50.7

(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
Edberg was...
- 55/72 (76%) at net, including...
- 52/67 (78%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 40/52 (77%) off 1st serve and...
- 12/15 (80%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/3 (33%) return-approaching

Krajicek was...
- 31/57 (54%) at net, including...
- 28/52 (54%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 17/32 (53%) off 1st serve and...
- 11/20 (55%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/2 return-approaching
- 1/1 forced back

Match Report
Serve-volley match and some skilled, precisely placed block return-passing by Edberg is high point of his showing, in which nothing is bad (serve, return, volleys, passes, movement) but not much is stand-out good either. Krajicek fires down some untouchable serves but is otherwise, behind the average mark (on return, the pass, the volley, movement). Court is normal pace and bounce

It is a serve-volley match
1st serve-volley frequency - Edberg 88%, Kraj 100%
2nd serve-volley frequency - Edberg 60%, Kraj 61%

First serve ace/service winners - Edberg 1, Kraj 14. With Edberg’s sole ace being his last service point of the match. Clearer picture of relative strength of serves comes from first serve rate of ace/service winners, which read Edberg 1.7%, Kraj 30.4%

Clearly, Kraj with much, much bigger and more potent serve
And he’s serve-volleying more than Edberg
And Edberg’s double faulting more often (22% of second serves, Kraj has 15%). And yet…
Unreturned serves - Edberg 41%, Kraj 42%

How are unreturend serves even, given all the of the above?

One possible reason is Edberg mastering placing serves as to draw hard forced errors that don’t go for aces but still win the point. Pete Sampras is in the habit of doing this in matches where he’s out-aced by large margins

That’s not what’s happening here. Above average serve from Edberg, not well placed. Seems to be making effort to hit them with power, but still not powerful and Kraj on baseline not unduly rushed on the return. 15% serves to body and good deal more close to it (in other words, readily in reach). Wouldn’t come as a surprise to see returner regularly knocking away return winners against this kind of serve. Kraj’s second serve is of similar strength as Edberg’s first serves

Kraj simply doesn’t return it well to come up with 55% return rate. 65%-70% is achievable against this serve, returning with normal, counter serve-volleying force (i.e. powerful returns that don’t leave easy volleys first up)

Disappointing 55% return rate for Kraj, but how’s the force of his returns? Below average. Mostly comfy first volleys for Edberg. Shoelace volleys are very rare. Powerful, low-ish volleys occasionally are about the hardest stuff he has to deal with it from Kraj’s returns

All this would likely see Edberg hold like clockwork. He does go through the match unbroken but its exaggeration to say he holds like clockwork. Average service games last 7.1 points (that is, closer to deuce than 30), with 5 games going to deuce. Kraj has break points in 4 games

For Edberg to not hold like clockwork with such a big load of freebies and comfy volleys to make first up, must be that he doesn’t volley well. He’s got just 4 UEs, the high 7 double faults are a problem too, but most of all, he doesn’t volley with his usual authority. Good lot of volleys not fully punched through and placed where Kraj can reach them without much trouble

Kraj has 14 ground FEs for 5 passing winners (excluding returns). Would be a good figure against many Edberg volleying showings, with mostly hopeless passing chances. Not here. Kraj with normal looks at the pass. Just as a percentage, not good hit rate

Edberg winning massive 80% second serve-volley points - higher in fact than his firsts of 77% - another sign of Kraj returning and passing not well

Then there’s the contest between Kraj’s serve-volleying and Edberg’s return-passing. Fat lot of aces get Kraj off to good start, but his in count is just 53%. Its expected for it to be lower than the much smaller serving Edberg’s healthy 65%, but 53% is on low side. Not necessarily a problem as his second serve is good to serve-volleying behind and about as troubling as Edberg’s first serve

Edberg returning of the big serve is best thing in the match. He can’t do much with it, but blocks and guides and angles returns wide and low

He’s got not-bad 4 return winners, same as Kraj who has 15 more serve-volley points to face (which again, given discrepancy of quality of serves, speaks to Kraj being not good on the return). Otherwise, Edberg smartly gets the ball low and wide often enough to be troublesome

 

[Waspsting]

Kraj has 8 ‘volley’ UEs and 10 FEs to go with just 6 winners. A poor yield and strange enough to need explanation

So few winners can happen when player rarely gets volley to putaway. Kraj gets normal amount of routine volleys. 6 winners (2 of which are groundies at net, as is 1 UE) for 8 UEs is simply bad

More FEs than UEs though does garner some credit to Edberg’s returning and passing. They aren’t impossible volleys - wide and low-ish to low and Kraj being a bit slow (both to move forward and to get down) making them still harder. Possible to make more of them than not, though it would take some doing. Credit to Edberg for the lovely returns, and a note that they’re not unanswerable. And small blackmark against Kraj too because he barely makes any difficult volleys at all

Edberg with just 7 ground FEs (passing shots) for 3 passing winners (excluding 4 returns). If anything, he has worse looks at pass than Kraj though not terrible ones and that’s a decent result for him

Kraj with 42% unreturned serves, a first serve that sends down ace/service winner 30% of the time… to go with 53% first serve-volley points won and 55% second is serve-bot numbers. Guy who can’t volley and wholly reliant on serve shot. He’s a little slow, but form (as in, look of) on volleys is fine. Form and quality are two different things - he does not volley well

Non serve-volley points comprise -
- Edberg winning 6/7 first serve points
- Edberg winning 5/10 second serve points
- Kraj winning 7/13 second serve points

With good lot of return errors in Edberg’s 1st serves, partially product of surprise factor and Kraj going for a return assuming serve-volley. Not fully though as he misses a few returns where he seems to have picked up on Edberg staying back. Sans serve-volley, most of Edberg’s first serves wouldn’t qualify as forceful. Kraj being rushed at times is largely due to his taking serves on the baseline

Otherwise, equality on points starting on baseline. Ground to ground UEs -
FHs - Edberg 3, Kraj 5
BHs - both 1

Rallying to net is negligible (Edberg’s 2/2, Kraj 2/3). Small number of return-approaches (Edberg 1/3, Kraj 1/2) aren’t necessarily against opponent staying back, particularly Edberg’s

Non serve-volley not signficant factor in short. Only point of interest to arise from it is Edberg perhaps faltering in staying back so often off second serves, given he wins 80% serve-volleying behind it. Doesn’t seem like a bad ploy because as outlined earlier, nothing about the quality of his serve suggests big success like that and wouldn’t come as surprise to see the serve get pounded for return winners. Facts are facts though - serve-volleying wins 12/15 or 80%, not wins 5/10 or 50%. And 22% double faults is big price to pay for ensuring the second serves are good enough for him to be confident serve-volley behind

Some trivia around the match. This was rare time that Wimbledon champion was knocked out in first round of US Open with Edberg himself having been the last to do it in 1990. Edberg had been in excellent form and won number of tournaments in between the 2 Slams though, while Kraj had been ordinary. According to commentary, this event was Edberg’s 54th straight Slam appearance, a then record. From memory, contemporary Wayne Ferreira would break this record and the current one is 79 held by Feliciano Lopez

Match Progression
In first set, some sloppy play by Kraj, some nice, low chipped returns by Edberg and Kraj not doing a a lot on the return against a smackable serve

Edberg breaks to start. Does well to poke a return dtl and force BHV error on first point, and boldly chip-charges next point, making 2 difficult volleys in taking on Kraj at net. Kraj holds his nerve to come away with BHV winner. Poor stuff from Kraj for rest of game - missing routine FHV, double faulting and down break point, missing a high, slightly wide putaway volley

Some powerful returns from Kraj in game 4 gets him 2 break points. Kraj misses returns on both of them - the first against first serve-volley, the second against second serve staying back that he tries to go dtl for winner on. Enough hot returns that Edberg even stays back off a first serve in the game

2 more long games for Kraj. He holds 10 point game for 2-3 with big serves keeping him out of trouble, but is broken a second time to end the set. Misses FHs on both baseline points early in the game and can’t handle a lovely, dtl chipped return later on. Needless swing volley leads to a UE that raises break point. He’d play the occasional swing volley on his first volley later in the year at the YEC against Boris Becker also. And a second volley BHV UE wraps up the set

Second set is competitive and Edberg’s maybe even a little lucky to win it. Not only is it the only set with just a 1 break difference but Edberg serves 48 points or 9.6 per game for his 5 holds. Kraj serves 22 or 5.5 points per game for 3 holds and getting broken. Break points for set read Edberg 1/1, Kraj 0/3 (3 games)

Double faults and an error forcing return to the baseline have Edberg in a spot of bother to hold deuce game to open. Which he makes up for by breaking for 2-0 right away - a not convincing BH at net leaves Kraj open to be passed BH cc and nice wide, low return forces a BHV error. Kraj misses BH at net and double faults to give up the break to 15

Rest of set is Kraj holding readily and Edberg under the gun. Kraj has break point to get back on serve right away and on it, his return pops up off the net chord. Excellent by Edberg to adjust and put the volley in play and he goes on to win the point and game

Takes 12 points and another break point saved for Edberg to hold next go around, with low in count getting him in trouble, but he finds his first serve to hold for 4-1

Kraj suffers a nose bleed that requires a medical time out to deal with

Lovely point as Kraj holds for 3-5 where he makes an excellent low volley to the corner, only for Edberg to run it down and and nail a FH dtl pass winner

12 point serve-out with another break point. Wonderful BH lob winner by Kraj keep pace with unreturned serves and Edberg missing a very easy FHV, open door to break point. Kraj misses a normal look pass on it and Edberg finishes with 2 unreturned first serves (1 serve-volley, 1 not)

Similar action in third set, though it stays on serve to 3-3. Both players play quickly - Kraj a little more than he had been doing and his movements, which hadn’t been great, gets a little lazy

Edberg wins last 3 games, including 2 break to end the match. Couple of volleying UEs from Kraj gets the first ball rolling and Edberg finishes in style, nailing a perfect BH dtl pass winner from corner and forcing a low, wide BHV error with BH cc return

And more a game from Edberg than a bad one from Kraj to finish, though it ends with a double fault, after an Edberg FH dtl return pass winner

Summing up, a decent showing from Edberg. His chipped returning to get balls low and little wide is the high point of the match. His serve is middling and the volleying punched through below his norm, if not badly and not too decisively placed

Krajicek is considerably worse and plays like the kind of player one might think he is just to look at him. A big guy with a big serve whose a little slow and not very good at anything court related. Scope to do much better on both the return and the follow-up pass then he manages, prone to missing routine volleys, rarely able to make the difficult ones

Stats for the final between Pete Sampras and Michael Chang - Match Stats/Report - Sampras vs Chang, US Open final, 1996 | Talk Tennis (tennis-warehouse.com)