Albert Portas beat Juan Carlos Ferrero 4-6, 6-2, 0-6, 7-6(5), 7-5 in the Hamburg final, 2001 on clay
Portas was a qualifier who beat among others seeds Magnus Norman, Sebastien Grosjean and Lleyton Hewitt en route to the final. This would be his only tour title. Ferrero had recently won Rome
Portas won 159 points, Ferrero 163
Serve Stats
Portas...
- 1st serve percentage (85/159) 53%
- 1st serve points won (54/85) 64%
- 2nd serve points won (37/74) 50%
- Aces 4
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (24/159) 15%
Ferrero...
- 1st serve percentage (86/163) 53%
- 1st serve points won (56/86) 65%
- 2nd serve points won (39/77) 51%
- Aces 7
- Double Faults 8
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (30/163) 18%
Serve Patterns
Portas served...
- to FH 26%
- to BH 67%
- to Body 7%
Ferrero served...
- to FH 20%
- to BH 80%
Return Stats
Portas made...
- 125 (30 FH, 95 BH), including 7 runaround FHs & 2 drop-returns
- 3 Winners (3 BH), including 1 drop-return
- 23 Errors, comprising...
- 12 Unforced (1 FH, 11 BH)
- 11 Forced (3 FH, 8 BH)
- Return Rate (125/155) 81%
Ferrero made...
- 130 (44 FH, 86 BH), including 9 runaround FHs
- 3 Winners (2 FH, 1 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 20 Errors, comprising...
- 13 Unforced (6 FH, 7 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 7 Forced (3 FH, 4 BH)
- Return Rate (130/154) 84%
Break Points
Portas 8/20 (11 games)
Ferrero 8/26 (11 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Portas 50 (19 FH, 19 BH, 1 FHV, 6 BHV, 2 OH)
Ferrero 38 (23 FH, 7 BH, 2 FHV, 2 BHV, 4 OH)
Portas' FHs - 4 cc, 2 cc/inside-in, 3 dtl (2 passes), 6 inside-out (1 pass), 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 inside-out/longline pass, 2 drop shots
- BHs - 4 cc, 8 dtl (2 returns, 2 passes), 1 dtl/inside-out pass, 1 inside-out, 4 drop shots (1 return), 1 running-down-drop-shot at net chord dribbler at net
- 3 BHVs were net-to-net and 2 OHs were on the bounce
Ferrero's FHs - 10 cc (2 returns - 1 runaround, 3 at net), 1 cc/down-the-middle, 1 cc/inside-in pass, 4 inside-out (1 at net), 4 inside-in, 3 drop shots
- BHs - 1 cc, 5 dtl, 1 inside-out return pass
Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Portas 90
- 58 Unforced (19 FH, 35 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 2 OH)... with 1 FH at net & 1 BH at net
- 32 Forced (20 FH, 11 BH, 1 OH)... with 1 FH at net (pass attempt), 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net & the OH was a flagrantly forced, on the bounce from the baseline shot against an at net smash
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 48.4
Ferrero 77
- 52 Unforced (21 FH, 30 BH, 1 BHV)... with 1 FH at net, 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net & 1 BH at net
- 25 Forced (9 FH, 16 BH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net & 2 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 49.0
(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
Portas was...
- 25/35 (71%) at net, including...
- 1/4 (25%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves
---
- 1/1 forced back
Ferrero was 27/47 (57%) at net, with...
- 0/3 forced back
Match Report
Topsy turvy affair, with each player having better of things to varying degrees at different times. By the end, its anyone’s match. Portas, who has been the more composed in the final stages, takes it. The tennis is hard hitting and good overall, with substantial variance
Its amazing that a match that’s so up and down and round and round can be all but statistically identical at the end
First serve in - both 53%
First serve won - Portas 64%, Ferrero 65%
Second serve won - Portas 50%, Ferrero 51%
Both breaking 8 times, both having break points in 11 games
Both winning same number of points as they serve - Portas 159, Fer 163
There’s no key difference that determines the result. Action is hard hitting baseline stuff, dual winged biased to BH play. By both players, so they compete for hitting advantage, with honours close to even. Portas probably edging the BH hitting, particularly near the end, but in early part of match, its Fer whose more impressive (not necessarily due to power). Both players willing to go dtl with point finisher, both succeeding to about same degree. They’re evenly matched off the FH too
Both players serve heartily and return the same
Both players seem to lose heart at different stages. After getting bagelled in third set, Portas looks ready to throw in the towel. Fer doesn’t look much better at the start of the fifth, having spit up a spate of double faults to lose the fourth
In fourth set tiebreak, a would be Fer FH cc winner is called out. Ball was on the line. All things remaining the same, the tiebreak Portas wins 7-5 reverts to 6-6 and up in the air. Fer just gets on with the game after the call. Both players make less fuss about close calls than just about any match I’ve seen, only very rarely asking about a mark
What are the differences between the two players?
Fer moves better - he’s exceptional, Portas not bad generally, with rare lapses
Fer has better shot tolerance
Fer returns better, both in movement and shot tolerance, with Portas stumbling some against hefty serves. He sends down serves of same kind, but Fer’s invariably in perfect position and upto handling pace of the ball
And drop shots
Portas is a drop shot specialist who had apparently flummoxed all his opponents with it en route to the final. Fer is somewhat on the look out for it early on, but not many to be seen. In due time, Portas indulges with the drop shots
He finishes 18-14 (including 1-1 with the return) when he goes for drop shots. And he doesn’t play them well, but Fer handles them even worse. Discredit to Fer there - who messes up a good number of comfy situations when handling drop shots
Strange as it seems for such a long match, that’s about it. Contest is long but action is meat & potatoes, with only standard of it fluctuating, which it does for both players and by substantial amounts. Final outcome is coin-flip, with Portas playing with greater composure in final stages
Serve & Return
Serves are both hefty, returns are both hearty - with Ferrero showing better movement and shot tolerance on the return
First serve percentage is almost perfect predictor of who wins sets
Set 1 - Fer wins, leads in count 62% to 54%
Set 2 - Portas wins, leads in count 59% to 35%
Set 3 - Fer wins, leads in count 56% to 35%
…
Set 5 - Portas wins, leads in count 63% to 58%
Leaving Set 4, the coin flip 7-5 tiebreak in which a Fer winner is erroneously called out, sans which, ‘breaker would stand at 6-6 and ongoing. Stats for that set -
- first serve in - Portas 21/43, Fer 22/44
- first serve won - Portas 17/21, Fer 17/22
- second serve won - Portas 9/22, Fer 9/22
Basically, whoever gets more first serves in, wins QED
Fer leading first serve ace rate 8% to 5% and unreturned rate 18% to 15%, but also double faulting off second serves 10% to 7%
Portas hits his first ace in game 12, set 4. And his last 3 aces come in his last 3 service games of the match. In other words, he has no aces at all almost all match. Opposite pattern for Fer, whose aces mostly come early
Exact opposite for double faults. Early on, looks like Portas has a double faulting problem, but once he cleans up, doesn’t make any. Fer goes on a double faulting bender at end of fourth set
Return errors -
- UEs - Portas 12, Fer 13
- FEs - Portas 11, Fer 7
Discrepancy is about Fer’s superior movement and shot tolerance. Hefty + slightly wide serves have Portas rushed and out of position. Not so Fer, who moves into perfect position and isn’t noticably bothered by pace. The kinds of serves that are FEs for Portas aren’t for Fer because he’s in perfect position
Portas was a qualifier who beat among others seeds Magnus Norman, Sebastien Grosjean and Lleyton Hewitt en route to the final. This would be his only tour title. Ferrero had recently won Rome
Portas won 159 points, Ferrero 163
Serve Stats
Portas...
- 1st serve percentage (85/159) 53%
- 1st serve points won (54/85) 64%
- 2nd serve points won (37/74) 50%
- Aces 4
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (24/159) 15%
Ferrero...
- 1st serve percentage (86/163) 53%
- 1st serve points won (56/86) 65%
- 2nd serve points won (39/77) 51%
- Aces 7
- Double Faults 8
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (30/163) 18%
Serve Patterns
Portas served...
- to FH 26%
- to BH 67%
- to Body 7%
Ferrero served...
- to FH 20%
- to BH 80%
Return Stats
Portas made...
- 125 (30 FH, 95 BH), including 7 runaround FHs & 2 drop-returns
- 3 Winners (3 BH), including 1 drop-return
- 23 Errors, comprising...
- 12 Unforced (1 FH, 11 BH)
- 11 Forced (3 FH, 8 BH)
- Return Rate (125/155) 81%
Ferrero made...
- 130 (44 FH, 86 BH), including 9 runaround FHs
- 3 Winners (2 FH, 1 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 20 Errors, comprising...
- 13 Unforced (6 FH, 7 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 7 Forced (3 FH, 4 BH)
- Return Rate (130/154) 84%
Break Points
Portas 8/20 (11 games)
Ferrero 8/26 (11 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Portas 50 (19 FH, 19 BH, 1 FHV, 6 BHV, 2 OH)
Ferrero 38 (23 FH, 7 BH, 2 FHV, 2 BHV, 4 OH)
Portas' FHs - 4 cc, 2 cc/inside-in, 3 dtl (2 passes), 6 inside-out (1 pass), 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 inside-out/longline pass, 2 drop shots
- BHs - 4 cc, 8 dtl (2 returns, 2 passes), 1 dtl/inside-out pass, 1 inside-out, 4 drop shots (1 return), 1 running-down-drop-shot at net chord dribbler at net
- 3 BHVs were net-to-net and 2 OHs were on the bounce
Ferrero's FHs - 10 cc (2 returns - 1 runaround, 3 at net), 1 cc/down-the-middle, 1 cc/inside-in pass, 4 inside-out (1 at net), 4 inside-in, 3 drop shots
- BHs - 1 cc, 5 dtl, 1 inside-out return pass
Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Portas 90
- 58 Unforced (19 FH, 35 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 2 OH)... with 1 FH at net & 1 BH at net
- 32 Forced (20 FH, 11 BH, 1 OH)... with 1 FH at net (pass attempt), 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net & the OH was a flagrantly forced, on the bounce from the baseline shot against an at net smash
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 48.4
Ferrero 77
- 52 Unforced (21 FH, 30 BH, 1 BHV)... with 1 FH at net, 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net & 1 BH at net
- 25 Forced (9 FH, 16 BH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net & 2 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 49.0
(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
Portas was...
- 25/35 (71%) at net, including...
- 1/4 (25%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves
---
- 1/1 forced back
Ferrero was 27/47 (57%) at net, with...
- 0/3 forced back
Match Report
Topsy turvy affair, with each player having better of things to varying degrees at different times. By the end, its anyone’s match. Portas, who has been the more composed in the final stages, takes it. The tennis is hard hitting and good overall, with substantial variance
Its amazing that a match that’s so up and down and round and round can be all but statistically identical at the end
First serve in - both 53%
First serve won - Portas 64%, Ferrero 65%
Second serve won - Portas 50%, Ferrero 51%
Both breaking 8 times, both having break points in 11 games
Both winning same number of points as they serve - Portas 159, Fer 163
There’s no key difference that determines the result. Action is hard hitting baseline stuff, dual winged biased to BH play. By both players, so they compete for hitting advantage, with honours close to even. Portas probably edging the BH hitting, particularly near the end, but in early part of match, its Fer whose more impressive (not necessarily due to power). Both players willing to go dtl with point finisher, both succeeding to about same degree. They’re evenly matched off the FH too
Both players serve heartily and return the same
Both players seem to lose heart at different stages. After getting bagelled in third set, Portas looks ready to throw in the towel. Fer doesn’t look much better at the start of the fifth, having spit up a spate of double faults to lose the fourth
In fourth set tiebreak, a would be Fer FH cc winner is called out. Ball was on the line. All things remaining the same, the tiebreak Portas wins 7-5 reverts to 6-6 and up in the air. Fer just gets on with the game after the call. Both players make less fuss about close calls than just about any match I’ve seen, only very rarely asking about a mark
What are the differences between the two players?
Fer moves better - he’s exceptional, Portas not bad generally, with rare lapses
Fer has better shot tolerance
Fer returns better, both in movement and shot tolerance, with Portas stumbling some against hefty serves. He sends down serves of same kind, but Fer’s invariably in perfect position and upto handling pace of the ball
And drop shots
Portas is a drop shot specialist who had apparently flummoxed all his opponents with it en route to the final. Fer is somewhat on the look out for it early on, but not many to be seen. In due time, Portas indulges with the drop shots
He finishes 18-14 (including 1-1 with the return) when he goes for drop shots. And he doesn’t play them well, but Fer handles them even worse. Discredit to Fer there - who messes up a good number of comfy situations when handling drop shots
Strange as it seems for such a long match, that’s about it. Contest is long but action is meat & potatoes, with only standard of it fluctuating, which it does for both players and by substantial amounts. Final outcome is coin-flip, with Portas playing with greater composure in final stages
Serve & Return
Serves are both hefty, returns are both hearty - with Ferrero showing better movement and shot tolerance on the return
First serve percentage is almost perfect predictor of who wins sets
Set 1 - Fer wins, leads in count 62% to 54%
Set 2 - Portas wins, leads in count 59% to 35%
Set 3 - Fer wins, leads in count 56% to 35%
…
Set 5 - Portas wins, leads in count 63% to 58%
Leaving Set 4, the coin flip 7-5 tiebreak in which a Fer winner is erroneously called out, sans which, ‘breaker would stand at 6-6 and ongoing. Stats for that set -
- first serve in - Portas 21/43, Fer 22/44
- first serve won - Portas 17/21, Fer 17/22
- second serve won - Portas 9/22, Fer 9/22
Basically, whoever gets more first serves in, wins QED
Fer leading first serve ace rate 8% to 5% and unreturned rate 18% to 15%, but also double faulting off second serves 10% to 7%
Portas hits his first ace in game 12, set 4. And his last 3 aces come in his last 3 service games of the match. In other words, he has no aces at all almost all match. Opposite pattern for Fer, whose aces mostly come early
Exact opposite for double faults. Early on, looks like Portas has a double faulting problem, but once he cleans up, doesn’t make any. Fer goes on a double faulting bender at end of fourth set
Return errors -
- UEs - Portas 12, Fer 13
- FEs - Portas 11, Fer 7
Discrepancy is about Fer’s superior movement and shot tolerance. Hefty + slightly wide serves have Portas rushed and out of position. Not so Fer, who moves into perfect position and isn’t noticably bothered by pace. The kinds of serves that are FEs for Portas aren’t for Fer because he’s in perfect position