Match Stats/Report - Hurkacz vs Sinner, Miami final, 2021

[Waspsting]

Hubert Hurkacz beat Jannik Sinner 7-6(4), 6-4 in the Miami final, 2021 on hard court

It was the first Masters final for both players. Hurkacz was seeded 26, Sinner 21. Sinner was 19 years old

Hurkacz won 78 points, Sinner 69

Serve Stats
Hurkacz...
- 1st serve percentage (49/69) 71%
- 1st serve points won (34/49) 69%
- 2nd serve points won (7/20) 35%
- Aces 3
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (17/69) 25%

Sinner...
- 1st serve percentage (47/78) 60%
- 1st serve points won (26/47) 55%
- 2nd serve points won (15/31) 48%
- Aces 1
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (8/78) 10%

Serve Patterns
Hurkacz served...
- to FH 56%
- to BH 41%
- to Body 3%

Sinner served...
- to FH 53%
- to BH 42%
- to Body 4%

Return Stats
Hurkacz made...
- 65 (36 FH, 29 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 7 Errors, comprising...
- 6 Unforced (5 FH, 1 BH)
- 1 Forced (1 FH)
- Return Rate (65/73) 89%

Sinner made...
- 51 (30 FH, 21 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 14 Errors, comprising...
- 6 Unforced (5 FH, 1 BH), including 2 runaround FHs
- 8 Forced (6 FH, 2 BH)
- Return Rate (51/68) 75%

Break Points
Hurkacz 4/11 (7 games)
Sinner 3/3

Winners (excluding serves, including returns)
Hurkacz 10 (5 FH, 3 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Sinner 13 (7 FH, 4 BH, 2 OH)

Hurkacz' FHs - 2 dtl, 2 inside-out, 1 longline

Sinner's FHs - 1 cc, 1 dtl, 1 dtl/inside-out, 3 inside-out, 1 inside-in
- BHs - 1 cc return pass, 3 dtl

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Hurkacz 47
- 31 Unforced (11 FH, 19 BH, 1 FHV)
- 16 Forced (9 FH, 6 BH, 1 BHV)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 44.2

Sinner 46
- 35 Unforced (15 FH, 19 BH, 1 FHV)
- 11 Forced (5 FH, 5 BH, 1 FH1/2V)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 45.4

(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
Hurkacz was...
- 13/17 (76%) at net, including...
- 1/2 serve-volleying, both 1st serves

Sinner was 6/10 (60%) at net

Match Report
Iron consistent returning is the (quiet) decisive factor in a match varied action. Hurkacz resists Sinner’s brutal ball-bashing early on and later, sneaks in his own brand of quick dtl and approach attacking play to counter; good action, both ways. Court is slow

Unreturend serves - Hurkz 25%, Sinner 10%
Hurk also double faults once, to Sinner’s not insignificant 5
In all, Hurk wins 13 more points via freebies and handovers and leads total points won by 9. Sinner leads points won in rallies by 4

Slow court or not, returning healthy serve of Sinner at 89% takes some doing. It’s a quiet thing. ‘Just’ very high consistency at average force. Small and normal damaging returns. All other things being near equal and Sinner with normal return consistency showing of 75%, its decsisive

Very rare in this period to see someone with 1 ace, 5 doubles as Sinner has here. The doubles are what they are. 16% of second serves. Unnecessary, not good but also not too big a deal. Lot of credit to returner for just the 1 ace though

Hurkz also serves smartly, balancing strength of shot with eye for percentages. 71% first serves in is very good. Even he’s got just 3 aces and for him, 25% freebies is low. So that’s a good returning job by Sinner too, just not as good as the ‘iron consistent’ of Hurkz

6 & 4 scoreline, between players of this calibre sounds like it could be a point-here,-point-there matter
It isn’t, and Hurkz’ wins because he’s signifantly better, not unpredictable big-points stuff

Break points - Hurkz 4/11 (7 games), Sinner 3/3. Fair reflection of extent of Hurkz’ superiority

The gross difference in the way Hurkz’ gets better of things across 2 sets is almost amusing
He has 2 winners in 89 point first set. Takes him 2 points to rack up that many in second
He’s at net 4 times in first set (1 serve-volley). In set 2, he’s at net 6 points in a row (1 serve-volley), spread across 3 games

Hurkz in first set - 2 winners, 4 net points. Counter-punching against intense beat-down hitting from Sinner
Hurkz in second set - 8 winners, 13 net points. Attacking himself - largely through poking ball dtl and approaching, with a few big FHs thrown in

Sinner ball-bashes and looks to hit through opponent (as opposed to hit wide to open court, and then hit into open court to attack). Bang, bang, bang with the power groundies, with little let up, especially off the BH. Intense stuff and Hurk’s shot-tolerance is strongly tested. Not lively, but tough and good tennis, with contest of Sinner power vs Hurk resistance a good one, ending roughly even

Its kind of action that tends to yield low winners and high UEs
Hurkz has 10 winners, 31 UEs, Sinner 13 winners, 35 UEs
Those nominally poor differentials are product of playing dynamic, and deceptive if suggesting poor quality tennis

Its not the greatest tennis ever, but a lot better than those numbers might suggest at least

Serve & Return
Hurkz serves better (higher in count, more force), Hurkz returns better (better consistency, though against less intense opposition)

Its such a slow court that even Hurkz’ serve, let alone Sinner’s isn’t too effective. Its no picnic to return either; Both players return first serves from considerably far back - Sinner’s about a half-way back to the backboard, Hurkz a little further forward.

Hurkz serve more powerful than Sinner’s hefty. And Hurkz varying pace and placement of his serves more and better. Some slower, very wide ones, some wide ones at his stock, toned down but still pretty big pace for the match

First serve in - Hurkz 71%, Sinner 60%… good job by both, especially Hurkz. No sense full blasting serves, lowering in count when they’ll largely get returned anyway. Hurkz also doesn’t show game to capitilize on weak returns too thoroughly either, making it less worthwhile still. Sinner does, but probably wouldn’t be worth lowering in count over

Aces - Hurkz 3 or 6% first serves, Sinner 1 or 2%
Probably have to put the two on quicksand to get such low rates. The court is slow but doesn’t look that slow

The two are apparently regular practice partners and know each others game well
Both employ similar, unusual serving pattern of about 55% to FH, 40% to BH (rest to body)

Its justified for both too
6/7 Hurkz return errors are FHs. 9/14 of Sinner’s are against serves directed to FH too (he has a couple of runaround FH misses on top of that)

6/7 Hurkz return errors have been marked UEs. All are first serves. No trouble covering the ball, just simple, can’t-make-them-all thing to account for misses. Covered the ball yes and from cozily behind baseline, but they’re still healthy first serves - and his 89% return rate is fantastic

Sinner has 6 return UEs and 8 FEs. While returning from further back. Hurkz getting higher lot of damaging serves off than Sinner is main reason for big difference in return FEs. There isn’t much difference in each returners ability to handle difficult serves

Double faults - Hurkz 1 or 5% of second serves, Sinner 5 or 16%
Not a major drawback for Sinner, but Hurkz again, near perfect

Basic stats, springing from serve-return contests are telling and a bit odd

First serve won - Hurkz 69%, Sinner 55%
Second serve won - Hurkz 35%, Sinner 48%

- Those extra freebies and a few weak returns Hurkz draws handy for him in his first serve points

- Meanwhile, Sinner reduced to what looks like a 2 second serves showing. Iron consistent returning has a hand, but still, all Sinner’s freebies are from first serves and he has significant double faults

Sans double faults and unreturned serves, Sinner wins just 46% first serve points and 58% seconds
Weird. His second serve is if anything, below average. Wouldn’t be too hard to attack and Hurkz does successfully a little. His first serve is hefty and draws returns he can lead off with his ball-bashing

 

[Waspsting]

Much of Sinner’s service points turn into Sinner ball-bashing, and Hurkz correspondingly resisting. With a bit of Hurkz attacking second serves. Odd he’d win higher lot of second serve rally points in that light. Or that he’d be under 50% on first serve ones

Particularly in light of how high a lot of second return points he’s won

Hurkz’ second serve is better and would take pointed intent to attack. Sinner doesn’t particularly. Thumps the returns cozily, in line with much of the baseline rallies. Wouldn’t think it’d result in Hurkz winning just 35% of such points. Especially in light of him winning 54% first return rally points

Pretty weird all around and no solid explanation for any of it
Hurkz with stronger serve, Hurkz with commendably consistent returning
Nothing in serve or return quality or their interplay across serve type to promise the strange outcomes (Hurkz winning so many first return points, but losing so many second serve ones in particular)

Whatever the matter, Hurkz taking a 15% freebie lead into rallying, due to extremely solid returning. Sinner’s good too, but Hurkz is top class

Play - Baseline (& Net)
Ball-bashing, would-be beat-down pounding from Sinner, Hurkz resisting makes up first set. In second, Sinner lightens up some (just some), and Hurkz looks for net. Pushes or taps a dtl shot and comes in. With lot of success

In baseline rallies -
Winners - Hurkz 5 (all FHs), Sinner 10 (7 FHs)
Errors forced - Hurkz 2, Sinner 10
(aggressively ended points - Hurkz 7, Sinner 20)
UEs - Hurkz 30, Sinner 34

For starters, the staple hitting from Sinner is intense. He generates high end power, with small back swing and seemingly no pointed effort to be intense

He’s not quite as clinically easy with it as he is nowadays, but its minor difference. If rally goes on long enough and rarely, you can see him making an effort to hit harder. A small and rare difference from norm of matter-of-fact pounding ball after ball as if there’s nothing else to do with them

BH cc’s in particular are fierce. Its kind of hitting that can either crash through opponent to draw error and is likely to draw a weak ball sooner or later (probably sooner)
Hurkz handles it. He’s not even pushed into defence. He reacts rather than leads, but hits back firmly

Ground UEs -
- FHs - Hurkz 11, Sinner 15
- BHs - both 19

Neutral UEs - both 21

Nice symmetry in both BH and neutral UEs being dead equal
Its not even net modified much by different roles the two have in rallying due to another oddity of the match
Hurkz gives up not many, but noticeable number of routine third ball ground UEs, Sinner virtually 0. No pressure on the shot (unlike when on receiving end of power hitting)

For neutral UEs to be even, but Hurkz giving up higher lot to routine third ball shots, its Sinner whose blinking up UEs more often in the long rallies. Essentially, Hurkz just better at keeping one more ball in play (adapted, doing so while reacting). With Sinner not straining to breakthrough with harder still hitting

Maybe Sinner would be better off easing off the power hitting. In this match anyway, reacting seems to toughen Hurkz up to rally harder still, and he’s better at keeping it up than Sinner is lead hitting. Would simple, who-blinks-first neutral rallies (think old school Djokovic-Murray) serve Sinner better than beat-down / resist beat-down dynamic?

Remains to be seen if Sinner’s even able to ease off. He looks pretty one-dimensional, only-knows-1-way-to-hit-the-ball sort (that way being hard). As shortcomings go, not a bad one to have
Sinner not draw weak balls with his power hitting. If he draws a relatively weaker one, like to keep pounding away, instead of hitting wide for winner or more active attack

Winners - Sinner 10, Hurkz 5
Winner attempt UEs - Sinner 4, Hurkz 3

Errors forced - Sinner 10, Hurckz 2
Attacking UEs - Sinner 9, Hurkz 6

The extent to which Sinner is on front foot coming through

Both players movements are exemplary, with Hurkz needing it more. That and slow court makes forcing errors uphill work. Sinner’s significant load a combo of just crashing through with raw power and more conventional, hitting wide to draw running errors

Hurkz hitting doesn’t promise hot passing, so alternative for Sinner to banging away with groundies is to come to net. He doesn’t seem to consider it one

Rallying to net Hurkz 12/15, Sinner 6/10

As harder hitter, plenty of room for Sinner to come forward. Shows little interest. About a third to half of his net points are near token or would-be-crazy-not-to-approach points
Hurkz warms up to approaching in second set
In first set, the first ‘approach’ of match is on 41st point - and that’s a token approach (approach shot overwhelming, very likely would have drawn error anyway, and Sinner ambling to net, no volley needed). First bona fida approach is 6 points after that

In second set, Hurkz turns to active net seeking deftly. Picks his ball, and taps or pushes it dtl, usually FH and comes in. Its very nicely done and his success is self-evident. This is against an opponent whose groundies do promise a hot reception

Hurkz with 5 winners at net, 1 UE, 1 FE
Sinner’s only pass winner is a return in the first set. He’s got 8 passing errors though, 5 of them BHs. Well placed approach doing more of the work than volley, but presence at net important too (in other words, not overwhelming approach shot or token approach, like some of Sinner’s). Very nice net play and instincts from Hurkz

Gist - baseline rallies of Sinner looking to beat Hurkz down with raw, persistent power hitting. Hurkz resisting better than Sinner can persist. Good stuff from both
Both turn to FHs for more active offence - Sinner moves over to launch into few FHs, but only rarely plays BH dtl for finisher, Hurkz smartly tapping ball FH dtl and approaching
Honours about even. Against back-drop of Hurkz carrying significant serve-return advantage, honours about even means Hurkz winning the match

Match Progression
Early action is as described earlier

Hurkz breaks for 2-0, with Sinner giving up an error more from the back (and double fualting once)
Game after goes to deuce, with Hurkz giving up the ground errors, but Hurkz has 2 aces and draws 2 other return errors (1 with first serve, 1 with second, both marked UEs)

Couple more freebies aren’t enough to keep Sinner from breaking back for 2-3. BH cc - FH cc 1-2 ending with a winner and winning return to the baseline complete the break

3 long games after that (12 points, and two 8 pointers). Sinner has to save 3 break points across his 2 holds. In first game, meatily beats up Hurkz from baseline on 2 break points and game ends with Hurkz missing 2 routine first returns. Hurkz misses another such return on his only break point next go around

With tiebreak around corner, Sinner thrashes out a break to leave himself serving for set at 6-5; one of the best games of the match for him
Follows it up with the worst. Double fault, 2 quick UEs and a third one in a medium length rally see him broken to love

Tiebreak
A powering Sinner advances forward, but is met by deft (or lucky) shot that forces FH1/2V; Moving forward while outhitting opponen was sound move though. It puts him down 1-2 and a mini-break
Grabs it back with a return to the baseline for 2-3, with 2 serves to come
Loses them both - 1 to third ball mishit, the other to an unpressured BH UE. In time, misses an attacking FH to give up the ‘breaker

Its different Hurkz that appears for second set. I had taken him 11 games to get his first winner in the first set - and he was lucky to get that, after a bad drop shot - and he had 2 the whole set

He hits 2 winners first 2 points to start second set. First return to baseline sets up a FH inside-out winner and he finishes a long rally with FH dtl one. And goes on to break

Breaks again next go around. Starts game with big early FH return that sets up FH inside-out winner, end s game with very similar big early and this time he goes FH inside-in to set up approach and FHV winner
Holds to love with 4 net points for 4-0
Has Sinner on brink of 0-5, having to save 2 break points after that, but Sinner, comes through
Sinner grabs a break back, but down 0-4, his race is run and in time, Hurkz serves out to 15 in one last ground error filled game

Summing up, Hurkacz having better of both sides of serve-return complex drives the result
His serve is bigger and he has both higher in count and a particularly high
He can’t seem to miss a return, against a healthy serve

In court action, Sinner dictates baseline rallies with power hitting, leaving Hurkacz to hang in. Which he does well enough to win his fair share of points. In due time, winner does some nifty attacking himself by tapping balls dtl and taking net

Sinner is more powerful baseliner, and close to brutish with his hitting. Hurkacz as good at withstanding the power as Sinner is persisting with it cancels out, leaving Hurkacz’ superior returning and serving unanswered

 

[7thKingSlam]

Its kind of action that tends to yield low winners and high UEs
Hurkz has 10 winners, 31 UEs, Sinner 13 winners, 35 UEs
Those nominally poor differentials are product of playing dynamic, and deceptive if suggesting poor quality tennis

I’ve noticed this quite often reading your match reports; generally in matches you classify as “ball-bashing” or “closed court ball-bashing,” you qualify the match as very high level yet the winners+FEs/UEs ratio is poor. Like Djokovic/Sinner ATP Finals 2023 for example, or a lot of Federer/Djokovic matches.

Could you go into a bit more detail as to how this happens from a statistical standpoint? Why aren’t errors induced by hard hitting down the middle just marked as forced errors rather than unforced? How is it still a worthwhile strategy if it yields little attack potential but a lot of errors? I’m sure there’s an explanation, I’m just struggling to grasp it.

 

[Waspsting]

I’ve noticed this quite often reading your match reports; generally in matches you classify as “ball-bashing” or “closed court ball-bashing,” you qualify the match as very high level yet the winners+FEs/UEs ratio is poor. Like Djokovic/Sinner ATP Finals 2023 for example, or a lot of Federer/Djokovic matches.

Could you go into a bit more detail as to how this happens from a statistical standpoint? Why aren’t errors induced by hard hitting down the middle just marked as forced errors rather than unforced? How is it still a worthwhile strategy if it yields little attack potential but a lot of errors? I’m sure there’s an explanation, I’m just struggling to grasp it.

Say 2 right handers, X and Y, are playing a normal, FH cc rally
Both in center of their deuce courts, average pace, depth and width of shot (lets call combo of pace, depth and width 'force')

If they just keep playing cc shots at that force, point will end when someone gives up an error. At average force, that error will be marked a UE. If a guy has ball covered (that is, he's in good position to handle the shot), its a UE

So when does a shot become 'attacking', as opposed to 'normal'? In other words, what has to happen for the error drawn to be marked an FE, rather than a UE?
Its when 1 or more factors of force of shot goes up, beyond a certain threshold, right?

Theoritically and like a science experiment, varying just 1 factor, keeping the other 2 at average

- Extreme power, average depth and width
Think of the FHs del Potro unleashes at end of '09 US Open final
That level of sheer, overwhelming power is rare. Blake, Gonzalez sometimes indulged
Even with ball covered, ball is likely to crash through to 'force' an error

- Extreme depth, average power and width
This doesn't really happen
Average paced shot that lands on baseline... recepient can just move back and play normal shot, with ball covered. He can play in on up, even half-volley it too, which is a difficult shot, but that's his choice. Federer liked to half-volley balls like this
For depth to be cause of an FE, ball has to be at least above average power. Enough power that recepient can't readily just move back to play a normal shot
Otherwise, ball covered, if error occurs, probably gets marked UE

- Extreme width, average power and depth
This is the easiest one to gauge
Recepient has to play running shot. A thorough running shot if width is extreme obviously. Even against average power and depth, easy to gauge that as FE if he misses because he doesn't have ball covered

Above are theortical - practically, its usually more than 1/3 factors going up that takes any given shot beyond 'neutral' and into 'attacking' territory

To me, an 'attacking shot' is one with high liklihood of drawing an error against normal opponet or one that sets up shot after to be a very attacking or winner attempt. With particularly emphasis on if receipient has ball covered or not

For example, 2 right handers trading normal FH cc
Classic 1-2 is -
i) extra wide cc shot (attackign shot to open up the court)
ii) followed by shot into the now open court

Or an approach shot. It leads to situation where guy takes net, and then high liklihood of him finish point with winner or forcing an error (with force and threat of follow up finisher)

Now, closed court ball-bashing
By 'close court', I mean blunt angled rallies (think 2 guys standing around center of court trading 'crosscourt' shot... Murray-Djokovic works well for this example too)
By 'ball-bashing' or 'beat-down', I mean pretty powerful
Not something that prevents opponent from covering the ball. If they're hitting wide on top of powerfully, I'd just call that attacking, not ball-bashing

Not so powerful that any given shot is likely to end the point (like Delpo's haymakers at end of '09 US Open final), but enough that its not just consistency being tested, but shot tolerance

'Consistency' simply refers to how many neutral shots a guy can play before missing one. Everyone will miss sooner or later
'Shot tolerance' is a step behidn and refers to how much power they can withstand.

In most basic sense, they've got the ball covered (that is, its not wide, they're not running or on move and playing it from comfy, stable position), but ball is travelling enough that it takes some ability to not hit the ball back softly

Now a guy like Sinner and the way he's playing in this match, or Djokovic when he was doing his deep hitting thing
No 1 shot is likely to end the point (that is draw an error), ergo, if errors is drawn, I mark it UE
What's making their play 'high quality' is the persistence of the power-hitting or/and depth
No 1 shot is likely to end the point, but how long can an opponent hold out against considerable power and/or depth?

And the way they play, they limit what opponent can do in response. This is what makes it categroically different from a normal, neutral rally (you could ask the same thing - how long can oppoent hold out against normal, neutral hitting too)

Normal, neutral rally. If 2 players want to stick it out, that's their choice. Its just minor adjustment to change the dynamic by going longline or hitting wider, angling the ball more etc.
Ball-bashing, especially closed court ball-bashing is different. Changing directions or finding an wider angle is a task

This all makes sense in my head, I'm not sure how well I'm conveying it. Does it make sense?

Gist of it is
- 'attacking play' is hitting wide so opponent doesn't have ball covered and has to play his shot on the move. Errors drawn like that will tend to get marked FEs. Even if ball is put back in play, opponent is on move, which means one side of court is open to hit next attacking shot too - or opponent can be wrong footed
Its likely to lead to winners, which obviously, is step beyond forcing an error
Match with such action, played well is likely to have good winner-Ue differentials

- ball-bashing or beat-down play (more or less interchangable phrases for me), especially closed court (that is, with blunt angles)
Opponent will have ball covered, no problem... no one shot is particularly like to draw error
His options are limited (compared to a normal, neutral rally). Hit ball back where it came from. And because of power, hitting back firmly isn't easy
Its likely to lead to errors rather than winners
Match with such action, played well, is likely to have not good winner-UE differentials
Well played, its pressuring tennis, but I wouldn't call it 'attacking'. The point behind much of it is to keep opponent from attacking, rather than attacking oneself. Throttling, pressuring tennis, not attacking to my way of thinking

Is that clear?

 

[7thKingSlam]

Now a guy like Sinner and the way he's playing in this match, or Djokovic when he was doing his deep hitting thing
No 1 shot is likely to end the point (that is draw an error), ergo, if errors is drawn, I mark it UE
What's making their play 'high quality' is the persistence of the power-hitting or/and depth
No 1 shot is likely to end the point, but how long can an opponent hold out against considerable power and/or depth?

And the way they play, they limit what opponent can do in response. This is what makes it categroically different from a normal, neutral rally (you could ask the same thing - how long can oppoent hold out against normal, neutral hitting too)

Normal, neutral rally. If 2 players want to stick it out, that's their choice. Its just minor adjustment to change the dynamic by going longline or hitting wider, angling the ball more etc.
Ball-bashing, especially closed court ball-bashing is different. Changing directions or finding an wider angle is a task

This all makes sense in my head, I'm not sure how well I'm conveying it. Does it make sense?

Yeah, this is a really good explanation! That makes a lot of sense and also pretty effectively breaks down why Djokovic and nowadays Sinner are so good at what they do.