Daniil Medvedev beat David Goffin 7-6(3), 6-4 in the Cincinnati final, 2019 on hard court
It was Medvedev’s first Masters title and he would win the next one in Shanghai also. In between, he’d finish runner-up at the US Open in his first Slam final. To date, its Goffin’s only Masters final
Medvedev won 78 points, Goffin 57
Serve Stats
Medvedev...
- 1st serve percentage (30/57) 53%
- 1st serve points won (27/30) 90%
- 2nd serve points won (17/27) 63%
- Aces 10 (2 second serves), Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (27/57) 47%
Goffin...
- 1st serve percentage (42/78) 54%
- 1st serve points won (28/42) 67%
- 2nd serve points won (16/36) 44%
- Aces 5
- Double Faults 7
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (14/78) 18%
Serve Pattern
Medvedev served...
- to FH 41%
- to BH 55%
- to Body 4%
Goffin served...
- to FH 54%
- to BH 42%
- to Body 4%
Return Stats
Medvedev made...
- 57 (29 FH, 28 BH), including 1 runaround BH
- 1 Winner (1 FH)
- 9 Errors, comprising...
- 5 Unforced (3 FH, 2 BH)
- 4 Forced (3 FH, 1 BH)
- Return Rate (57/71) 80%
Goffin made...
- 29 (14 FH, 15 BH)
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 16 Errors, comprising...
- 4 Unforced (2 FH, 2 BH)
- 12 Forced (7 FH, 5 BH)
- Return Rate (29/56) 52%
Break Points
Medvedev 2/5 (3 games)
Goffin 1/3 (2 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Medvedev 10 (7 FH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Goffin 15 (8 FH, 3 BH, 3 FHV, 1 OH)
Medvedev's FHs - 3 cc (1 return pass), 1 cc/OH on the bounce, 1 inside-out, 1 inside-in, 1 drop shot
- the OH was on the bounce from near the baseline
Goffin's FHs - 4 cc (1 pass), 2 dtl (1 pass), 1 inside-in, 1 drop shot
- BHs - 3 dtl (1 return)
- the OH was on the bounce
Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Medvedev 27
- 13 Unforced (9 FH, 4 BH)
- 14 Forced (5 FH, 9 BH)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net & 1 other BH was a failed challenge to ball that was put back in play
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 44.6
Goffin 34
- 25 Unforced (17 FH, 8 BH)
- 9 Forced (4 FH, 4 BH, 1 BHV)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.4
(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
Medvedev was 7/12 (58%) at net, with...
- 1/2 forced back/retreated
Goffin was...
- 11/16 (69%) at net, including...
- 1/2 serve-volleying, both 1st serves
---
- 1/1 forced back
Match Report
Efficient and impressive, if not exciting showing by Medvedev. His serve dominates proceedings and he’s better at the who-blinks-first baseline rallies that follow. Court is quick
This is about as one-sided a match as you’ll find with a scoreline of 6 & 4
Med wins 58% of the points, serving 42% of them
Med’s second serve points won of 63% is up there with Gof’s firsts of 67% - while he seems incapable of losing a first serve point if he tried (he loses 3/30)
Forget first serve point. He seems to have a hard time losing any serve points. 7/11 service games are love holds. Wins 16 straight service points in second set, despite just 6 of them being first serves
Unreturned serves - Med 47%, Gof 18%
Huge serving from Med, and court is quick. 53% in-count isn’t much, but about as often as not, he sends down first serve calibre second serves. He has 2 aces off second serves for just 1 double fault. According to commentary, his average second serve in the deciding set of his semi-final win over Novak Djokovic was 120 mph
Gof’s serve is average, Med usually returns from deep position and has little trouble putting ball in play with authority. Some nice slice serves down the middle that curve away for aces are only troubling ones
7 double faults for Gof is terrible, given Med doesn’t usually threaten with the return
Then they rally. And its dull, who blinks first stuff. Good lot of long rallies - 20+ shots, with neither player looking to take charge or attack. Angles on cc shots are normal, with room for either player to do something more without much risk. ‘Pushing’ is fair description of the rallies. When Med hits out powerfully late in a rally and Goff’s pushed back and just dealing with pace of shot is a challenge, it brings home just how little of that kind of power has been on show all match
BH rallies are good, both players solid. Gof slices some. Gof’s FH is sometimes poor in giving up errors readily
Ground UEs -
- Med BH 4
- Gof BH 8, Med FH 9
- Gof FH 17
Neutral UEs - Med 8, Gof 14
Gof’s drop shots are biggest attacking spice. They’re not good ones and usually lead to both players being at net
With 47% freebies, Med could count on holding regularly regardless of court action almost. Throw in pushing rally dynamics and Med being considerably steadier, and he’s in safe as houses territory
With Gof’s small 18% freebies, 19% second serves being double faults), Med returning close to neutralizingly, Gof not inclined to do much to keep things from getting neutral - and the same, pushing dynamics and how that plays out, Gof’s done well to not be broken more often
Two players combine for 25 winners and 23 FEs, to compare with 38 UEs. Consistency and pushing dynamics are there, but match isn’t devoid of aggression either. Seems like less because rallies tend to be long, even when finishing is aggressive - and rallies tend to be pushy for good while before someone takes up attacking role. And also because winners tend to be clustered together - short interruptions before base of steady baseline exchanges returns
Gof, as he must, is the more aggressive and has 5 more winners and forces 5 more errors (while trailing UEs (as in, he has more of them) by 12
Nowhere vaguely near enough to compensate for 29% handicap in freebies. He’s done well, or been a bit lucky to not lose more convincingly
Match Progression
First few games are a microcosm of the whole match
Med holds to love with 4 unreturned serves to open. His second hold is also to love, with 3 unreturned serves (including a second serve ace)
In between, Goff gets a couple freebies himself, double faults and there are a couple of very long rallies as he holds. And he’s broken second time around in a FH error riddled game from both players which keeps things 30-30 before Goff double faults again. Med seals the break with a winning BH dtl after a long rally
Goff finally wins a return point, after losing the first 11 before Med holds again. So it’s a surprise when Goff’s able to break back for 3-4 in a well played game, where he spanks a couple of BH dtl winners (1 return) and on break point, a quick-dash approach draws an error
Tough hold to consolidate, lasting 12 points with a lot of long rallies ending in UEs, particularly FHs. Near end, Gof turns to drop shotting and it sees him hold
Aggressive burst from Gof to hold next time with 4 winners (2 FH cc, 2 FHV). Maybe it frustrates Med, who responds with a particularly brutal third ball winner at net to putaway ball - the shot is a cross between a FH cc and an OH on bounce - the unplayability of the shot being that he hits it hard enough to bounce well over Gof, so more the nature of an OH. He
Tiebreak is strange, with just 2 points being won by server, both of them Med. There are Goff’s drop shots and some good returns and both players take net (both forced and otherwise). Med’s at net 5/10 points. He’d only been there 4 times the whole set prior - once having retreated, another time forced back and a third time forced back and then dragged to net again
Gof’s at net 3 times, including a serve-volley that Med’s backward returning position invites. Invites cruelly it turns out, as he smacks a perfect FH cc return winner. Particularly good returns from Med are feature of the breaker, which ends with another Gof double fault
Is Goff downcast by the set? He plays a weak, poor game to be broken to 15 to start the second, missing routine groundies in short rallies. And he remains flat returning. Med holds to love 4 times in a row, despite in-count of 6/16. In regular games (i.e. sans tiebreak), his run of service points won is 24 going back to first set
Meanwhile, Med gets a foot into every return game - 2 going to deuce, 2 to 30 - without seeing break point
All that leads to Med stepping up to serve for the match. Gof comes alive, taking net to win first two points, and then dispatching a poor drop shot after being aced to reach 15-40
Med responds with 4 huge serves - the first, an error forcing, big second serve, and the rest aces to close out the match
Summing up, efficient showing from Medvedev. His serve is by far the dominant shot of the match - and includes big second serves to go along with expected fat firsts - and Goffin has no answer to it. Meanwhile, he’s able to return his opponents average serve with comfort and get a neutral rally going regularly
With such a wide gap in serve-return complex - about half of Medvedev’s serves don’t come back, to about a fifth of Goffin’s - the winner has luxury of not taking risks, keeping the ball in play safely and waiting for errors, as his way. Its not rock ‘n’ roll, but his consistency is more impressive than Goffin's is unimpressive, and more than enough to get the job of winning done
It was Medvedev’s first Masters title and he would win the next one in Shanghai also. In between, he’d finish runner-up at the US Open in his first Slam final. To date, its Goffin’s only Masters final
Medvedev won 78 points, Goffin 57
Serve Stats
Medvedev...
- 1st serve percentage (30/57) 53%
- 1st serve points won (27/30) 90%
- 2nd serve points won (17/27) 63%
- Aces 10 (2 second serves), Service Winners 1
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (27/57) 47%
Goffin...
- 1st serve percentage (42/78) 54%
- 1st serve points won (28/42) 67%
- 2nd serve points won (16/36) 44%
- Aces 5
- Double Faults 7
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (14/78) 18%
Serve Pattern
Medvedev served...
- to FH 41%
- to BH 55%
- to Body 4%
Goffin served...
- to FH 54%
- to BH 42%
- to Body 4%
Return Stats
Medvedev made...
- 57 (29 FH, 28 BH), including 1 runaround BH
- 1 Winner (1 FH)
- 9 Errors, comprising...
- 5 Unforced (3 FH, 2 BH)
- 4 Forced (3 FH, 1 BH)
- Return Rate (57/71) 80%
Goffin made...
- 29 (14 FH, 15 BH)
- 1 Winner (1 BH)
- 16 Errors, comprising...
- 4 Unforced (2 FH, 2 BH)
- 12 Forced (7 FH, 5 BH)
- Return Rate (29/56) 52%
Break Points
Medvedev 2/5 (3 games)
Goffin 1/3 (2 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Medvedev 10 (7 FH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Goffin 15 (8 FH, 3 BH, 3 FHV, 1 OH)
Medvedev's FHs - 3 cc (1 return pass), 1 cc/OH on the bounce, 1 inside-out, 1 inside-in, 1 drop shot
- the OH was on the bounce from near the baseline
Goffin's FHs - 4 cc (1 pass), 2 dtl (1 pass), 1 inside-in, 1 drop shot
- BHs - 3 dtl (1 return)
- the OH was on the bounce
Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Medvedev 27
- 13 Unforced (9 FH, 4 BH)
- 14 Forced (5 FH, 9 BH)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net & 1 other BH was a failed challenge to ball that was put back in play
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 44.6
Goffin 34
- 25 Unforced (17 FH, 8 BH)
- 9 Forced (4 FH, 4 BH, 1 BHV)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.4
(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
Medvedev was 7/12 (58%) at net, with...
- 1/2 forced back/retreated
Goffin was...
- 11/16 (69%) at net, including...
- 1/2 serve-volleying, both 1st serves
---
- 1/1 forced back
Match Report
Efficient and impressive, if not exciting showing by Medvedev. His serve dominates proceedings and he’s better at the who-blinks-first baseline rallies that follow. Court is quick
This is about as one-sided a match as you’ll find with a scoreline of 6 & 4
Med wins 58% of the points, serving 42% of them
Med’s second serve points won of 63% is up there with Gof’s firsts of 67% - while he seems incapable of losing a first serve point if he tried (he loses 3/30)
Forget first serve point. He seems to have a hard time losing any serve points. 7/11 service games are love holds. Wins 16 straight service points in second set, despite just 6 of them being first serves
Unreturned serves - Med 47%, Gof 18%
Huge serving from Med, and court is quick. 53% in-count isn’t much, but about as often as not, he sends down first serve calibre second serves. He has 2 aces off second serves for just 1 double fault. According to commentary, his average second serve in the deciding set of his semi-final win over Novak Djokovic was 120 mph
Gof’s serve is average, Med usually returns from deep position and has little trouble putting ball in play with authority. Some nice slice serves down the middle that curve away for aces are only troubling ones
7 double faults for Gof is terrible, given Med doesn’t usually threaten with the return
Then they rally. And its dull, who blinks first stuff. Good lot of long rallies - 20+ shots, with neither player looking to take charge or attack. Angles on cc shots are normal, with room for either player to do something more without much risk. ‘Pushing’ is fair description of the rallies. When Med hits out powerfully late in a rally and Goff’s pushed back and just dealing with pace of shot is a challenge, it brings home just how little of that kind of power has been on show all match
BH rallies are good, both players solid. Gof slices some. Gof’s FH is sometimes poor in giving up errors readily
Ground UEs -
- Med BH 4
- Gof BH 8, Med FH 9
- Gof FH 17
Neutral UEs - Med 8, Gof 14
Gof’s drop shots are biggest attacking spice. They’re not good ones and usually lead to both players being at net
With 47% freebies, Med could count on holding regularly regardless of court action almost. Throw in pushing rally dynamics and Med being considerably steadier, and he’s in safe as houses territory
With Gof’s small 18% freebies, 19% second serves being double faults), Med returning close to neutralizingly, Gof not inclined to do much to keep things from getting neutral - and the same, pushing dynamics and how that plays out, Gof’s done well to not be broken more often
Two players combine for 25 winners and 23 FEs, to compare with 38 UEs. Consistency and pushing dynamics are there, but match isn’t devoid of aggression either. Seems like less because rallies tend to be long, even when finishing is aggressive - and rallies tend to be pushy for good while before someone takes up attacking role. And also because winners tend to be clustered together - short interruptions before base of steady baseline exchanges returns
Gof, as he must, is the more aggressive and has 5 more winners and forces 5 more errors (while trailing UEs (as in, he has more of them) by 12
Nowhere vaguely near enough to compensate for 29% handicap in freebies. He’s done well, or been a bit lucky to not lose more convincingly
Match Progression
First few games are a microcosm of the whole match
Med holds to love with 4 unreturned serves to open. His second hold is also to love, with 3 unreturned serves (including a second serve ace)
In between, Goff gets a couple freebies himself, double faults and there are a couple of very long rallies as he holds. And he’s broken second time around in a FH error riddled game from both players which keeps things 30-30 before Goff double faults again. Med seals the break with a winning BH dtl after a long rally
Goff finally wins a return point, after losing the first 11 before Med holds again. So it’s a surprise when Goff’s able to break back for 3-4 in a well played game, where he spanks a couple of BH dtl winners (1 return) and on break point, a quick-dash approach draws an error
Tough hold to consolidate, lasting 12 points with a lot of long rallies ending in UEs, particularly FHs. Near end, Gof turns to drop shotting and it sees him hold
Aggressive burst from Gof to hold next time with 4 winners (2 FH cc, 2 FHV). Maybe it frustrates Med, who responds with a particularly brutal third ball winner at net to putaway ball - the shot is a cross between a FH cc and an OH on bounce - the unplayability of the shot being that he hits it hard enough to bounce well over Gof, so more the nature of an OH. He
Tiebreak is strange, with just 2 points being won by server, both of them Med. There are Goff’s drop shots and some good returns and both players take net (both forced and otherwise). Med’s at net 5/10 points. He’d only been there 4 times the whole set prior - once having retreated, another time forced back and a third time forced back and then dragged to net again
Gof’s at net 3 times, including a serve-volley that Med’s backward returning position invites. Invites cruelly it turns out, as he smacks a perfect FH cc return winner. Particularly good returns from Med are feature of the breaker, which ends with another Gof double fault
Is Goff downcast by the set? He plays a weak, poor game to be broken to 15 to start the second, missing routine groundies in short rallies. And he remains flat returning. Med holds to love 4 times in a row, despite in-count of 6/16. In regular games (i.e. sans tiebreak), his run of service points won is 24 going back to first set
Meanwhile, Med gets a foot into every return game - 2 going to deuce, 2 to 30 - without seeing break point
All that leads to Med stepping up to serve for the match. Gof comes alive, taking net to win first two points, and then dispatching a poor drop shot after being aced to reach 15-40
Med responds with 4 huge serves - the first, an error forcing, big second serve, and the rest aces to close out the match
Summing up, efficient showing from Medvedev. His serve is by far the dominant shot of the match - and includes big second serves to go along with expected fat firsts - and Goffin has no answer to it. Meanwhile, he’s able to return his opponents average serve with comfort and get a neutral rally going regularly
With such a wide gap in serve-return complex - about half of Medvedev’s serves don’t come back, to about a fifth of Goffin’s - the winner has luxury of not taking risks, keeping the ball in play safely and waiting for errors, as his way. Its not rock ‘n’ roll, but his consistency is more impressive than Goffin's is unimpressive, and more than enough to get the job of winning done
