Match Stats/Report - Krajicek vs Washington, Wimbledon final, 1996

[Waspsting]

Richard Krajicek beat MaliVai Washington 6-3, 6-4, 6-3 in the Wimbledon final, 1996 on grass

It would turn out to be the only Slam final for both players. Both were set to be unseeded, but Krajicek took the 7th seed’s position in the draw after that player withdrew prior to the tournament and was said to be “seeded 17th” (under a 16 seed system)

Krajicek won 93 points, Washington 66

Krajicek serve-volleyed off all serves, Washington about half the time off first serves and a third off seconds

Serve Stats
Krajicek...
- 1st serve percentage (41/71) 58%
- 1st serve points won (36/41) 88%
- 2nd serve points won (18/30) 60%
- Aces 15 (1 second serve), Service Winners 1 (a second serve)
- Double Faults 3
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (33/71) 46%

Washington...
- 1st serve percentage (57/88) 65%
- 1st serve points won (35/57) 61%
- 2nd serve points won (14/31) 45%
- Aces 5
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (21/88) 24%

Serve Patterns
Krajicek served...
- to FH 31%
- to BH 62%
- to Body 7%

Washington served...
- to FH 40%
- to BH 52%
- to Body 8%

Return Stats
Krajicek made...
- 65 (29 FH, 36 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 16 Errors, comprising...
- 3 Unforced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 13 Forced (6 FH, 7 BH)
- Return Rate (65/86) 76%

Washington made...
- 35 (9 FH, 26 BH)
- 3 Winners (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 17 Errors, all forced...
- 17 Forced (9 FH, 8 BH)
- Return Rate (35/68) 51%

Break Points
Krajicek 5/11 (6 games)
Washington 1/2 (1 game)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Krajicek 29 (13 FH, 3 BH, 3 FHV, 3 BHV, 7 OH)
Washington 23 (4 FH, 7 BH, 6 FHV, 4 BHV, 2 OH)

Krajicek had 13 from serve-volley points -
- 8 first 'volleys' (3 BHV, 2 OH, 3 FH at net)
- 5 second volleys (2 FHV, 3 OH)... 1 OH possibly not clean

- 11 passes (8 FH, 3 BH)
- FHs - 2 cc, 2 dtl and 4 inside-out
- BHs - 1 cc return, 1 inside-out and 1 lob

- regular FHs - 1 dtl and 1 inside-in

Washington had 8 from serve-volley points -
- 7 first 'volleys' (3 FHV, 2 BHV, 1 OH, 1 FH at net)
- 1 fourth volley (1 BHV)

- 1 other BHV was a non-net, third ball BHV

- 6 passes (2 FH, 4 BH)
- FHs - 1 dtl and 1 inside-out return
- BHs - 2 cc (1 return), 1 dtl and 1 inside-in return

- regular FH - 1 dtl
- regular BHs - 1 cc, 1 dtl and 1 dtl/inside-out

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Krajicek 19
- 8 Unforced (1 FH, 2 BH, 3 FHV, 2 BHV)
- 11 Forced (4 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 2 BHV)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 53.8

Washington 29
- 12 Unforced (5 FH, 3 BH, 2 FHV, 2 BHV)
- 17 Forced (5 FH, 5 BH, 5 FHV, 1 BH1/2V, 1 OH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 54.2

(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
Krajicek was...
- 41/55 (75%) at net, including...
- 38/52 (73%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 22/27 (81%) off 1st serve and...
- 16/25 (64%) off 2nd serves

Washington was...
- 30/56 (54%) at net, including...
- 21/35 (60%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 14/25 (56%) off 1st serve and...
- 7/10 (70%) off 2nd serves
---
- 1/2 forced back

Match Report
Krajicek unleashes a flurry of big serving, all out serve-volleying and vapourizing FHs to bulldoze the all-court attacking game of Washington. Biggest difference between the two players is the serve - Krajicek’s in the super-heavyweight category, Washington a middleweight

Kraj serve-volleys 100% of the time, Wash 48% off the time off first serve, 34% off seconds, so there’s sufficient baseline play. The bounce looks good and comfortable for groundstrokes with ball rising to stomach height and more (not always clinging to shin/knee level), though slices and drop volleys hug the floor

Not much subtlety to Kraj’s game. Huge first serve. Huge second serve. Serve-volley behind all of it. Whole buncha’ aces (34% off the first serves). Whole buncha’ otherwise unreturneds (46%). Not many double faults (10% off second serves - and just 1 more than second serve unreturnables). Drawing weak returns. Obliterating putaway third balls at net (5/8 first ‘volley’ winners are FH at net or OHs) or easily volleying to corner to leave hopeless passes (4/6 second volleys are OHs, responses to desperate lobs thrown up by Wash). Otherwise, he likes to finish with drop volleys

Good for thorough domination on serve. He averages 5.1 points per service game. Is broken just once, which is also the only game he faces break points - and that happens when he’s up 2 sets and 2 breaks in the third

Mal has no answer for any of it. There aren’t many answers possible. He gets better read of the serve as match goes on. All at sea to start but by second set, he’s moving in right direction to take 2nd returns and trying to move forward a bit to get momentum behind the second shot (with little success). Best returning is in the third where Kraj fairly often has to make low and low-ish first volleys

Kraj is up to whatever he has to do on the volley. Just the 3 FEs, and he makes more difficult volleys than he misses (admittedly, while not facing too many). 5 UEs to go with it… just the odd miss here and there, not a problem

Given the timing of Mal’s sole break (down 1-4 and 2 breaks in the third set), one might put it down to nerves from Kraj. Perhaps, but it’s a good game by Mal and all credit to him for it. Rest of Kraj’s serve games are -
- 5 holds to love
- 4 to 15
- 3 to 30
- 1 to deuce (8 point game)

In return games, the standout shot is Kraj’s FH. He looks to hit the fluff off the ball with it - both on return and in baseline rallies. No return winners, but plenty of difficult volleys for Mal to make on sheer power alone. Couple of baseline-to-baseline winners, otherwise point ending shots or at least, complete taking charge of points ones, including counter-attackingly on the run. Just the 1 UE doing all that (Mal has 5)

He edges BH consistency too, where he has 2 UEs to Mal’s 3

Good handling of the difficult volley by Mal, but not the best serve direction. If ever play warranted serving overwhelming bulk to one side, this is it, with Kraj obliterating FHs, while just returning normally off the BH. Mal serves 40% to FH, 52% to BH (Kraj by contrast serves 31% to FH, 62% to BH). Lot of shoelace and half-volleys of the bullet variety to make for Mal - and he usually does

Doesn’t save him from the follow up pass, on which Kraj is on point. Still with vapourizing, brute power. He’s got 8 FH passing winners (Mal has 3 across both wings + 3 returns), for just 4 FEs. The weak volleys he forces gives him time to move over and play FHs, and 4/8 of his passing winners off that side are inside-out shots

 

[Waspsting]

In all, Kraj’s FH with 13 winners, 5 errors (1 UE, 4 FE). More baseline-to-baseline winners than UEs, more passing winners than FEs - and that’s just the point ending stuff. Throw in the take-charge or turn-rally-upside-down with a stroke value, and this is a top class FH showing

The power returns keeps Mal down to winning 56% first serve-volley points (Kraj’s 2nd serve-volleying is 64%, to give basis of comparison). Surprise element of 2nd serve-volleys (Mal induges 10/29 second serves) does see him win very healthy 70%, but given how powerfully Kraj returns and even with Mal volleying well, probably wouldn’t be a good idea for Mal to regularly come in behind second serves

Nothing wrong with Kraj’s movement. Runs after everything with exemplary effort and gets down well, though looking a touch awkward as tall players can, for the low volleys

When not serve-volleying, Mal still plays an aggressive game. Goes for potentially point ending powerful shot off the third ball off both wings. If that comes back, he usually approaches behind a powerful, not chippy, shot

Its sound, aggressive play. Execution has room for improvement and he misses fair few big groundies

His rallying to net 21 times to Kraj’s 3 is indicator that Mal keeps aggressive position on points starting from baseline

Unfortunately for him, there’s still Kraj’s power passing and blistering counter-attacking FHs to deal with. He wins just 9/21 rallying to net, which along with his aggressive misses (his UEs comprise 7 winner attempts, 3 attacking and just 2 neutral shots) and Kraj’s counter-attacking plays sees him lose enough points to be in danger of getting broken

Off first serve, Mal wins 56% serve-volleying and 59% not (sans aces), so not much difference and with relatively few aces (5 or 9% of the time), not good enough to be secure

Off second serve, Mal wins 7/10 serve-volleying and 7/19 or 36% not (excluding small 2 double faults). Way even first serve-volleying goes, excess 2nd serve-volleying seems a bad idea, but the alternative isn’t working well either. Kraj returns with enough heat to make it difficult to take charge off third ball, Mal’s attacking efficiency off third ball isn’t great and if things hit neutral, Kraj is liable to take charge or end the point with a blistering FH

All in all, pretty good from Mal. Certainly sound gameplan of mixing up serve-volleying and staying back, given strength of his serve and Kraj’s returning power. Good handling of difficult volleys, but nothing to be done against the following unaswerable pass. And very soundly bold attacking play to start baseline rally, but execution is a bit off and Kraj’s counter-attacks provide formidable, dangerous competition to it

Realistically, what more or else can Mal do? Nothing comes to mind, beyond more pointedly avoiding Kraj’s FH. To serve or not to serve there is Mal’s choice and he doesn’t make a good one. As for the rest, he’s not always in control of volleys enough to make that choice (due to Kraj’s return or first pass), but to the extent that he is, he also doesn’t look for the BH either

Match Progression
Mismatch is at its most pronounced in first set. Kraj bombs down serves, and dispatches what little comes back with first OHs and easy volleys. He loses 3 points for 5 holds. Breaks to 15 to move up 2-0 and proceeds to get into every return game after that (they last 14, 10 and 8 points respectively

On other end, Mal mixes up serve-volleying and staying back off both serves. His serve is average to slightly above and gets hammered by Kraj’s return. Mal gets a lot of shoelace and 1/2volleys first up (which he makes very well), but follow-up pass is lined up for Kraj, who doesn’t falter on it

In baseline rallies, not overly aggressive from Mal, and Kraj blasting FHs every chance he gets is the standout. He rarely misses despite going for them even from routine positions

Kraj breaks for 2-0 by forcing 2 volleying errors, striking a BH inside-out pass winner and coming to net to dispatch an OH. Mal does well to keep it to just one break, and holds tough games from thereon

Kraj serves 4.6 points per game, Mal 9.25 - and that’s including a break to 15

Better from Mal in second set, who seems to be gaining some read on the serve. He moves over to play BHs to body serves in ad court, and tries to move forward to hit second returns (hitting a FH inside-out winner once so doing). On serve, continues mixing up serve-volley and staying back, but he keeps his foot on pedestal while doing the latter. First groundie is a big one (FH and BH) and if that doesn’t end the point, he soon comes to net behind another power groundie. Sometime comes in off third ball, again, always behind a well hit shot

Better from Mal, but the fat serving and vapourizing storm at other end is still unabated. Added to it due to Mal’s improvement is Kraj running for everything, with surprising quickness

Just the 1 break, right at the end. Mal serve-volleys just once in the all first serve, 6 point game (gets forced into 1/2volley error on it). Another wide return forces an error. Mal misses an appraoch shot and on break point, a high, slightly wide BHV

Competitive set. Kraj serves 29 or 5.8 point per game, Mal serves 28

If that was the best Mal’s got, the third set is the best Kraj which is frightening because it scarcely seems possible he could get better

He goes into the hallowed ‘zone’ when it seems he can’t miss anything - a volley, a pass or a even a return

After Mal hold to love to open, Kraj wins 16/17 points to move to 4-0. Highlights include a lovely drop BHV winner against a wide return to his feet and a BH lob one on the move. 11 winners in 17 points from Kraj (including 2 aces), 2 other unreturned serves and the rest are forced errors (including a FHV from Kraj)

Mal breaks to end the run with strong passes and returns - a return pass winner, 2 forced volleyng errors, just the 1 easy FHV miss in the game. Just a ripple across Kraj’s clear pool and he wraps up soon after with another break, finishing by outmanuvering Mal and coming to net to draw passing error

Summing up, almost perfect match from Krajicek. The monster serving alone would see him hold most of time, but he’s excellent when called on to volley to - both in dispatching the easy ones and resisting the tough low ones. Meanwhile on return, he blasts FHs in all situations - off the return, in baseline rallies and on the pass - while scampering around as needed, never giving up anything easy

A smart and interesting showing from Washington who mixes up serve-volleying and staying back. Good volleying against difficult returns/passes in particular (which he faces a good amount of), and wisely necessary aggression off the bat when staying back (execution has room for improvement, but strategy is perfect), but his serve is average enough that Krajicek can not just make the return regularly, but do so at least testingly and often damagingly

Krajicek FH stars in baseline rallies, a brute of an overpowering shot, and he barely misses with it to boot. Bad things happen to Washington if he steps off the gas even for a shot, as his opponent seizes the chance to replace him as attacker -and even worse things happen after that

An underrated showing by Krajicek, likely due to his opponent not being a celebrated name. Washington plays well enough, but is simply out of his weight class. Krajicek’s all but perfect. Few have played as well and none better at a Wimbledon final

Stats for Krajicek’s quarter-final with Pete Sampras - Match Stats/Report - Krajicek vs Sampras, Wimbledon quarter-final, 1996 | Talk Tennis (tennis-warehouse.com)

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

An underrated showing by Krajicek, likely due to his opponent not being a celebrated name. Washington plays well enough, but is simply out of his weight class. Krajicek’s all but perfect. Few have played as well and none better at a Wimbledon final

So you would put Rick’s performance over Sampras 95 and 99?

 

[Milanez82]

So you would put Rick’s performance over Sampras 95 and 99?

Except for Pete-Krajicek qf that was one underwhelming and forgettable Wimbledon with top favorites falling to no names one by one.

Has to be one of worst semi finalist fields ever.

 

[jrepac]

I figured Krajicek would win at least one more Wimby....shows what I know....his game was so impressive that year.

 

[Milanez82]

I figured Krajicek would win at least one more Wimby....shows what I know....his game was so impressive that year.

The irony is he only advanced twice past 4th round throughout his career making him quite an underachiever on the surface.

In any case he earned it by taking out Pete while he was still at his best.

 

[King_olaf_the_hairy]

Spoiler: GREATEST. FINAL. EVER.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

The irony is he only advanced twice past 4th round throughout his career making him quite an underachiever on the surface.

In any case he earned it by taking out Pete while he was still at his best.

He also beat Stich in the fourth round (coincidentally by the exact same score as Stich beat Becker in the 91 final) and, as Wasp describes above played a top-notch match in the final (regardless of the opponent). I maintain the view that Rick’s level in 96 is up there with the very best in history and his win against Pete wasn’t a fluke.

 

[NedStark]

The irony is he only advanced twice past 4th round throughout his career making him quite an underachiever on the surface.

In any case he earned it by taking out Pete while he was still at his best.

3 times actually, 1996-1998-2002

 

[Waspsting]

An underrated showing by Krajicek, likely due to his opponent not being a celebrated name. Washington plays well enough, but is simply out of his weight class. Krajicek’s all but perfect. Few have played as well and none better at a Wimbledon final

So you would put Rick’s performance over Sampras 95 and 99?

Not necessarily

My first comment was to convey that this was a Top calibre showing (which I haven't heard it spoken of - usually, its good showing vs weak opponent), not to compare it to other Top calibre showings such as the two you mentioned (among others)

There have been a few Top calibre showings at Wimby - Mac '83, '84, Cash '87 readily come to mind

Some get due credit for it, some don't

When they don't, its usually for shallow reasons - Cash, Krajicek don't have career success on par with other players (irrelevnat for comparing a match or a single run), the opponent is a journeyman not a big name (like here, or '83), it wasn't straight sets (like '95) and so on

If Sampras had played the exact same match he did in '99 final against MaliVai Washington instead of Andre Agassi (and Washington and Agassi's actual showings are of similar standard), no one would mention it as a Greatest Ever showing and it'd just get slotted in like the '97 final between Sampras and Cedric Pioline. Or for that matter, if Krajicek played this match against Agassi - up goes its reputation

Similarly, Chris Lewis doesn't play any worse in '83 than Connors did the year after - and Mac's similar sky high of playing strength. Which one gets ballyhooed, which one doesn't?

Same thing with matches. Switch names and rounds of the '77 Wimby semi Borg-Gerulaitis and '80 final Borg-McEnroe, while keeping the action exactly same... the real '80 final will get rememembered for the oddity of the ending of 4th set amidst general routineness (because who cares about Gerulaitis?), while the real '77 match skyrockets in value (because its Borg-McEnroe wooo-hoo)