Match Stats/Report - Sampras vs Bruguera, French Open second round, 1996

[Waspsting]

Pete Sampras beat Sergi Bruguera 6-3, 6-4, 6-7(2), 2-6, 6-3 in the French Open second round, 1996 on clay

Sampras, the top seed, would go onto lose in the semi-final to eventual winner Yevgeny Kafelnikov. It would be his sole semi at the event. 2 time former champion Bruguera would finish runner-up the next year

Sampras won 155 points, Bruguera 154

Sampras serve-volleyed off almost all first serves and about a quarter off second serves

Serve Stats
Sampras...
- 1st serve percentage (105/179) 59%
- 1st serve points won (84/105) 80%
- 2nd serve points won (34/74) 46%
- Aces 14, Service Winners 2
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (63/179) 35%

Bruguera...
- 1st serve percentage (82/130) 63%
- 1st serve points won (62/82) 76%
- 2nd serve points won (31/48) 65%
- Aces 14 (3 second serves)
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (41/130) 32%

Serve Patterns
Sampras served...
- to FH 33%
- to BH 66%
- to Body 1%

Bruguera served...
- to FH 31%
- to BH 68%
- to Body 1%

Return Stats
Sampras made...
- 89 (22 FH, 67 BH), including 2 runaround FHs & 18 return-approaches
- 4 Winners (4 FH)
- 27 Errors, comprising...
- 24 Unforced (11 FH, 13 BH), including 1 runaround FH & 2 return-approaches
- 3 Forced (2 FH, 1 BH)
- Return Rate (89/130) 68%

Bruguera made...
- 111 (37 FH, 74 BH)
- 10 Winners (3 FH, 7 BH)
- 47 Errors, comprising...
- 6 Unforced (2 FH, 4 BH)
- 41 Forced (13 FH, 28 BH)
- Return Rate (111/174) 64%

Break Points
Sampras 3/8 (3 games)
Bruguera 2/20 (9 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Sampras 50 (20 FH, 3 BH, 7 FHV, 12 BHV, 8 OH)
Bruguera 43 (22 FH, 18 BH, 2 FHV, 1 BHV)

Sampras had from serve-volley points -
- 17 first 'volleys' (2 FHV, 8 BHV, 3 OH, 4 FH at net)
- 5 second volleys (1 FHV, 2 BHV, 2 OH)... 1 BHV was possibly not clean

- 5 from return-approach points (3 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)... 1 FHV was a re-approach volley
- 1 other OH was on the bounce

- FHs - 6 cc (1 return), 3 inside-out, 7 inside-in (3 returns)
- BHs - 1 cc pass, 1 dtl pass, 1 running-down-drop-shot dtl at net

Bruguera had 24 passes - 8 returns (1 FH, 7 BH) & 16 regular (8 FH, 8 BH)
- FH return - 1 dtl
- BH returns - 2 down-the-middle/cc (both left by opponent), 2 dtl, 3 inside-in
- regular FHs - 4 cc, 2 dtl, 1 lob, 1 running-down-drop-shot cc at net
- regular BHs - 3 cc, 3 dtl, 1 dtl/inside-out, 1 inside-out/dtl

- regular (non-pass) FHs - 2 cc (1 return), 1 cc/down-the-middle, 1 cc/inside-in, 1 dtl, 1 inside-out, 3 inside-in, 1 inside-in/longline return, 1 inside-in/cc, 1 drop shot, 1 running-down-drop-shot cc at net
- regular BHs - 3 dtl

- 1 FHV was a swinging cc played net-to-net (technically, a pass)

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Sampras 65
- 49 Unforced (28 FH, 13 BH, 2 FHV, 5 BHV, 1 OH)... with 1 FH at net & 1 BH at net
- 16 Forced (4 FH, 4 BH, 3 FHV, 2 FH1/2V, 1 BHV, 2 BH1/2V)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 48.0

Bruguera 42
- 11 Unforced (2 FH, 8 BH, 1 FHV)
- 31 Forced (15 FH, 16 BH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 44.5

(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
Sampras was...
- 99/143 (69%) at net, including...
- 73/96 (76%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 62/78 (79%) off 1st serve and...
- 11/18 (61%) off 2nd serve
---
- 10/18 (56%) return-approaching

Bruguera was 9/15 (60%) at net, with...
- 0/1 forced back

Match Report
Peculiar match where Bruguera is better player, but Sampras makes and takes bare minimum chances, while somehow managing to stay half a step ahead of a regularly threatening opponent to gain the result. Court is quick for clay

Cutting to the chase, Sampras’ serve-volleying is lot better than Bruguera’s return-passing
Sampras’ return-approaches hit just well enough to get him what he needs to break
Meanwhile, Bruguera is far better baseliner and Sampras returns pretty badly

In a formula: (Sampras serve-volleying > Bruguera return-passing) < (Bruguera’s baseline superiority + Sampras’ sloppy returning)

So Bruguera the better player overall. So why/how does Sampras win?
He makes and takes bare minimum chances to potentially win + somehow Bruguera stays a nose behind, despite generally being better player.

To be better player and lose, some combo of 3 things must be at play
- winner ‘clutching’
- loser ‘choking’
- plain ol’ luck

Its mostly clutching from Sampras - with the serve, on the volley, even off the ground (not giving up UEs from the ground constitutes ‘clutching’ for him, in context of how match runs). Extent of let-down from Brug is not being able to find one of his better returns (or even one that lands in) on break points - just the sheer number of break points makes it unlikely he wouldn’t find 1 or 2 good ones. On break points, Pete on volley is tasked with ‘not messing up’, as opposed to having make difficult volleys

Points won - Samrpas 155, Brug 154
Points served - Sampras 179, Brug 130… or Sampras serving 58% of them

Break points - Sampras 3/8 (3 games), Brug 2/20 (9 games)
That's lopsided

By set -
- first - Pete 1/1, Brug 0/1
- second - Pete 1/2, Brug 0/6 (2 games)
- third - Brug 0/6 (3 games)
- fourth - Burg 2/4 (2 games)
- fifth - Pete 1/5, Brug 0/3 (1 game)

So in 3 sets Samparas wins - Pete 3/8 (3 games), Brug 0/10 (4 games)
Not lopsided looking now. Could be a clutch thing

In these 3 sets -
Points won - Sampras 94, Brug 77
Points served - Sampras 100, Brug 71… or Sampras winning 58% points, serving 55% of them

Match long -
Love holds - Pete 7, Brug 6
15 holds - Pete 5, Brug 10
Deuce games - Pete 8, Brug 2

One possible explanation for large points served discrepancy (or Brug holding serve so much more easily on average) is choice waning effort in return games by Pete
Especially since he breaks early (for 2-0) in 2 sets and once in middle of set (for 3-2). Grab break, focus on holding serve and take it easier on return ---> Brug holding easily, but making headway on return? - is that whats going on?

Nope. Sampras plays with return games with normal focus after going up break
In first two sets, he gets break via return-approaches (in other words, he doesn’t get better of baseline rallies). He continues return-approaching and looking to, continues trying to compete with Brug from baseline

It isn’t until fourth set that he plays a few careless return games and that seems to organic product of tiring than strategic. And by fifth, Brug’s about as run down as Pete is

3 ingredients go into such a fascinating full dish -
1) Sampras serve-volleying better than Brug return-passing (more broadly, Sampras’ net play)
2) Brug much better baseliner
3) Sampras returning poorly

 

[Waspsting]

Sampras serve-volleying better than Bruguera return-passing
...coupled with Brug being much better baseliner

16% of Pete’s first serves are aces or service winners. Rest of time, he serve-volleys 88% of time
Wins 79% serve-volleying, just 55% (6/11) staying back

7% of Pete’s second serves are double faults. Rest of time, he serve-volleys 26% of the time
Wins 61% serve-volleying, just 45% staying back

Combining serves, he wins 76% serve-volleying, 47% staying back
That’s with a great first serve, a good second

Above primarily gets to Pete being much better serve-volleying than staying back, and secondarily his serve-volleying being better than Brug’s return-passing

76% serve-volley points won, including 61% behind second serves on clay (albeit, fairly quick clay) is huge figure - so clearly, his serve-volleying is better than Brug’s return-passing

Its not a high end contest. Brug’s return pass in particular isn’t too good

Serve-volleying, Pete’s unreturned serves are 39/96 or 41%. Higher than good returner would like on clay. Would need to be returning with particularly good force to make it worthwhile

Brug doesn’t return with ‘particularly good force. He’s got 9 return-pass winners (which is hovering between ‘not bad’ and ‘could do with a bump’)
His average return though isn’t challenging. Not much low, not much wide. Pete left with comfy, routine volleys first up. Most returns are comfily above net rather than slightly beneath it. Next most common return is well above net, an easy volley to be putaway

Serve-volleying, Pete has 17 first ‘volley’ winners, just 5 seconds (and nothing beyond that)

For starters, Pete generally tends to have second volley heavy yield of winners
Next, on clay, everyone tends to have second volley biased yield of winners
Third Pete’s 17 first ‘volley’ winners include 4 FH at nets and 3 OHs

First 2 points are particularly pertinent in bringing home Brug’s return-passes lacking force; a guy who’s modus operandi is second volley winners hitting 17 first volley winners, 5 seconds on clay = returner returning softly
Third point hints at it, but not as clear cut; Sampras as ever serves powerfully - and even on clay, a few very weak returns are normal enough. Even then, 4 FH at net winners is on high side - and they’re not the only ones Pete gets first up

Below par return rate
Low force of returns - a slightly under net first volley from average paced return is a good return from Brug in the match
Even given excellent serve, this is a pretty bad return-passing showing from Brug

Pete wins 56% of his 18 return-approaches and 55% of his 29 approaches from rallies.
To compare with 76% serve-volleying (79% of 78 first serves, 61% of 18 second serves)
So it is the serve shot that’s doing the extra damage. Little difference in Pete’s volleying across different types of approaches

In all (not just serve-volley), Pete on the ‘volley’ has 31 winners, 9 UEs, 8 FEs
Brug on the pass in play has 16 (8 FH, 8 BH) winners, 27 FEs (11 FH, 16 BH)

Pete’s UEs are easy or routine. He’s not faced with much that’s tricky
He makes most difficult volleys

In light of high winners, and hard stamped volleys, those error numbers are in medium quality range - given facing not tough volleys in general

Not bad passing yield from Brug, given being faced with hard stamped volleys. FH with great ratio of winners to errors, but FH gives up its share of not good passes that are stamped away to end point also. Its not bad, but not as good as 8 winners, 11 FEs would suggest

8 winners, 16 FEs from BH isn’t bad either, especially since volleys are stamped harder to his BH - but Pete’s volleys clearly getting better of it

Gist - Sampras serve-volley much better than Brug’s return-passing
Strong serving from Sampras, of course. Even so, Brug’s returning of it is below par - both for making returns and for the force of returns made
Pete left with mostly easy and comfy volleys. He stamps them hard and puts them away well enough. Dynamic of first 3 shots (serve, return and first volley) results in Brug having rushed passes that he can’t do too much with

Its essential for Pete to dominate serve-volleying because…

Bruguera much better baseliner
On top of Pete winning 47% of his stay back service points (including return errors), Brug wins 76% first serve points, 65% seconds (including unreturned serves and Pete’s return-approaches)

Baseline rally UEs by shot -
- Brug FH 2
- Brug BH 8
- Pete BH 12
- Pete FH 27

2 FH UEs in a match with so much baseline action is one of the most impressive stats I’ve come across, though as as is the way with UEs, its liable to be a quiet, under-radar thing

Baseline action is grindy, who-blinks first, dual winged stuff
Pete holds up and is one try eventually to liven point up (if not outright attack), Brug just keeping ball in play with heavy spin
Rallies are typically medium-long. Pete’s not sloppy to lose the consistency contest by such a big margin, Brug’s exceptionally wall like

Baseline rally UE types -
- neutral - Pete 17, Brug 7
- attacking - Pete 18, Brug 2
- winner attempts - Pete 4, Brug 1

… to go with errors forced of Pete 4, Brug 5
And winners Pete 12 FH, Brug 13 (10 FH, 3 BH)
(winners exclude 4 return winners from Pete, 2 from Brug - all FHs)

So points won aggressively virtually same
Pete paying 7 times the price in errors as Brug does for it and simply out-steadied about 2.5 times

That is a baseline crushing. And almost all credit to Brug for being a wall
Pete trying to rally tough (to repeat, not playing carelessly) and Brug simply not missing anything - so Pete ends up doing so

Probably good move by Pete to look to up the ante to attacking. Hence, high attacking UEs and it’s the FH that gives those up
So Pete, rallying normally with an eye to escalate, where escalation is almost necessity given Brug’s wall like showing. Not too good at escalating, but just continuing to rally is sure losing game

Dynamic rarely escalates to Brug defending - Pete attacking. Brug keeps Pete more or less bottled up, unable to solidly get on front foot to begin with. This isn’t a Brug running all over the place defending match, it’s a Brug suffocating an antsy Sampras type thing

Pete mixing up his BHs. His usual loopy top spin shot is there, but he also plays substantial lot of push/drive slices. Pretty good control on those, though they usually don’t stay too low. And Brug taking them in stride

10 winners from the Brug FH, so its not just a wall. 10 winners, 2 UEs over 5 sets (he has a return winner also) - top drawer stuff. Most of his winners are third ball shots, with Pete regularly returning feebly, but they’re not putaways and Brug showing something beyond inclination to just grind opponent down with his shot choices

It isn’t until 4th set when Pete seems to be tiring that he gets sloppy with the UEs and he’s edgily attacking (as opposed to rallying neutrally and building to attacking). But he isn’t too much different in the decider, but scores more with power FHs. By which time, Brug’s joined him in being noticably run down

Rallying to net - Pete 16/29, Brug 9/15

Some relief for Pete from being smothered and thwarted from the baseline. Minus the booming serve as an approach shot, not too successful in forecourt - but better than being smothered and thwarted from the back. Brug with near 0 interest coming forward

Gist - Bruguera dominating baseline rallies. His FH showing is absolutely top class, though quietly so. 2 UEs in 5 sets is mind-boggling (for those whose mind’s are capable of taking in more than flash and crash highlights) and it does its share of damage too. BH is merely normal very good - spin loaded and secure

Its not that Sampras is bad from baseline, but just Brug is much better. He plays with variety of top spin spin and push/drive slices on the BH and in time, looks to control with FH.
Mostly unsuccessful at the latter, against a wall that gives him next to nothing - for free or otherwise

Before all that comes…

Sampras returning poorly
Unreturned serves - Pete 35%, Brug 32%
Aces - both 14
First serve ace rate - Pete 13.3%, Brug 13.4%
Second serve ace rate - Brug 6% (Pete 0)

Those are facts, with 0 room for interpretation. Throw in Brug with 0 doubles, Pete 5 or 7% second serves

Add context of Pete serve-volleying so much, Brug never (serve-volleying naturally tends to increase unretuned serves) and most obvious interpretation would be Brug having stronger serve and certainly stronger second serve

That is about as far from reality as can be
Sampras with his usual very strong serve, Bruguera’s serve is average at best.
And yet, he trails freebies by such 3%, serves first aces at same rate, has 3 second serve aces, no doubles

That is criminally bad returning from Pete the returner’s point of view
Put someone like Thomas Muster or Albert Costa at the returners end, Sampras would still have something like 14 aces, 35% freebies
Brug would have 3-6 aces, 10-20% freebies, and 0 second serve aces

 

[Waspsting]

At most, one step above harmless serve from Brug
Of his 11 first serve aces, 6-7 are due to Pete being inside the baseline to return or tanking returns when well down in games
All 3 second serve aces are due to Pete mis-anticipating serve to BH and Brug darting what would be routine enough FH return had Pete stayed put

Return UEs - Pete 24, Brug 6
Return FEs - Pete 3, Brug 41

UE and FE distinction is interpretative, not factual (unlike unreturned serves, ace rate, etc.), so less strong evidence. But that would tell the tale of how the quality of serves stack up better

Toughest returners Pete has is above average paced, slightly wide to BH in deuce court. Even his 3 FEs are returns he might well be disappointed to miss
Brug’s FEs are products of serve-volleying, but even without that, he’s rushed and forced to reflexively return. 2 Sampras stay back first serves draw errors (1 UE, 1 FE)

Shave 10-15% freebies from Brug, and even as much better baseliner, he’s liable to get into trouble holding. In the actual event, 16/20 holds are to love to 15
All those unnecessary missed returns from Pete big part of Brug holding so easily all match

Its not all bad from Pete
He’s got 4 return winners and wins 10/18 return-approaching (+ 2 errors trying to approach)
And he’s taking good lot of first serves from inside the court (some of which leads to his getting aced by still average serves). Most of those early taken returns aren’t overly aggressive swings, just normal block or push returns taken early. Still there are a few

The aggressive returning contributes to (relatively) low return rate, but its minor part of it.
Consistent, aggressive returning might be worth 68% return rate. If that were the case, Brug wouldn’t be winning 57/83 or 69% of baseline points. Most return UEs are simple products of poor consistency

Pete staying inside court to normally return first serves and rarely chip-charging the first serve are also indicators of Brug’s serve being merely average quality. It would be suicidally low percentage to try doing the same to Pete’s serve, but against Brug’s it’s certainly do-able

“Not all bad” means just that, its not a euphamism for some successful, strategic balancing of force and consistency. The consistency is bad, the upped force is limited and its success still more limited

5 that fall into the limit end up being critical
In gathering his 1 break in each of first 2 sets (both 5 point games), Pete wins 5/5 return-approaching
All in deuce court, all serves to BH, all pulled inside-in returns (1 is a bit lucky, a net chord flicker which drops short and stays low forcing Brug to scamper in and make a get)

So sans those 2 games, Pete’s 5/13 return-approaching for the match (and 2 errors trying)

Gist - pretty bad returning from Sampras
He returns at 64%, where 80% is one the cards
Most of it due to poor consistency, minority part due to failed aggressive returning and select tanking
And the aggressive returning usually doesn’t pay off

Match Progression
Sampras open up 2-0 lead to start
Begins with third ball FH UE
Is forced into BH1/2V error soon after for 15-30
Gorgeously plucks a very difficult wide BH1/2V into play to and flagrantly force passing error for 40-30- and goes onto hold

Begins first return game with FH inside-out winner
BH inside-in return-approaches to putaway a lunging FHV winner for 15-30
Secures the break with the same return, this one catching the net chord, and throwing Brug off

Game after, 2 FH UEs (1 at net) and a double set Pete back 30-40. He saves break point with clinical serve-volley, an easy BHV winner. Goes on to hold with Brug missing routine second return

Rest of set, both players lose 2 service points for 3 holds
Pete continues looking for return-approach, but loses 2/3 such points. Otherwise, he’s sloppy with return errors. His serve volleying stays on top of Brug

In second set, Pete continues serve-volleying and he’s given a hard time to hold
But again, grabs a break to 15 - this time with 3 successful BH inside-in return approaches

Takes Pete 18 points to hold for 2-2, saving 4 breeak points along the way. It’s a high end game. There’s just 1 UE in play in it (also 3 Pete doubles - including 2 in a row and a Brug return UE against stay back first serve). Few good passes by Brug, clincial volleys from Pete

He’s bold to save break points. FH inside-out sets up smash at net winner on the first, third ball BH dtl approach deals with the second. Other 2 are dealt with via commanding serve-volleys
Shot of the game is Brug with an unusual FH drop shot winner - a sliding ‘get’ against a powerful FH, that looks intentional
Pete grabs break right after for 3-2

Pete’s down 15-40 at 4-3, with simple BHV miss and a FH dtl UE
Reaches deuce with standard serve-volley point and with Brug blinking up a BH UE against an average FH - and goes on to hold

Pete serves out to 15 next go around. He leaves a return down the middle that lands in for winner doing so

Third set sees Brug return-passing at his best for the match
He still misses a lot of returns, but gets the ones he makes under the net. So far, he’d left easy volleys above it regularly

No breaks going into ‘breaker. Pete serves 48 points for his 6 holds, Brug 32
Break points for set read Pete 0, Brug 0/6 (3 games)
That includes Pete getting out of 0-40 in his first service game and 15-40 in his last

Tiebreak is a bit wild from Pete. Starts it missing attacking FH (a return point).
Ends it missing 3 consecutive aggressive FHs (1 serve, 2 returns - both winner attempts)
In between, leavs another return that lands in for winner
Brug delivers perfect BH dtl pass winner from a good lookg pass and an even better, hooked FH cc one on the move also

Sampras shows signs of tiring in the fourth and it’s a sloppy showing from him in. He’s overaggressive from the ground and error prone

Brilliant running FH cc is pick of 3 passing winners in opening game, where Brug gets his first break. Pete helps with couple FH cc UEs, including on last point
And another break to to end the set, where Pete looks distinctly sluggish of movement and blows a 40-0 lead

In the decider, Brug joins Pete in showing his tiredness and is slow to move at times
Pete stays back of more first serves than at any stage of match and replaces with rallying to net early

Takes Pete 14 points to break for 2-0
He’d reached 0-40 with 3 winners (FHV, BH cc pass and FHV in return-approach point where both players are at net and forced back, before Pete re-approaches to gain the winner)
He finishes with 2 more winners (FH cc and a neat BHV starting with big first return to the baseline)
In between, all kinds of things happen, including another Pete FH winner. Its full-effort game from Pete when seemingly down to fumes

Has to save 3 break points to hold 12 point game for 4-1 afterwards. Gets first serves in on all 3 break points - twice drawing serve-volleying return errors, once dispatching a mid court third ball FH inside-out winner. More strong serves see him go onto hold. In between, poor ground UEs to keep Brug in the hunt

No big competitive thrills from there to the end. Brug holds from 30-30 with Pete missing routine returns for 2-4
And Pete’s down 0-30 on the serve out (missed third ball BH cc winner attempt and a good FH dtl pass winner from Brug) before winning last 4 games to bring down the curtain

Summing up, quite a ride, if not a very high quality one, certainly memorable
Neither player return particularly well. Bruguera presents comfortable to easy volleys against serve-volleying opponent and also misses a few more return-passes than he can afford and Sampras is outright sloppy in missing routine returns against an average serve he makes look much better than it is

Bruguera is a wall in ground rallies. The security of his FH (that unbelievably has just 2 UEs all match) in particular is stellar and he retains awkward heavy spin through it, outlasting Sampras and making it difficult for him to even get a foot in the attacking door, let alone successfully attack

On the volley, Sampras is faced with comfortable stuff. Good volleying against it is just not messing up, which he manages. Bruguera isn’t bad on the pass when he has fair look, but returns softly enough that he usually doesn’t

Combination of Sampras missing routine returns and Bruguera mastering the baseline is weightier than Sampras’ advantage successfully serve-volleying against not-well returning of Bruguera
But Sampras wins - clutching up to make and take bare minimum chances he needs to break and not lapsing when his service chips are down

Stats for Sampras’ semi-final with Yevgeny Kafelnikov - (17) Match Stats/Report - Kafelnikov vs Sampras, French Open semi-final, 1996 | Talk Tennis
Stats for the final between Kafelnikov and Michael Stich - (17) Duel Match Stats/Reports - Kafelnikov vs Enqivst, Australian Open final, 1999 & Kafelnikov vs Stich, French Open final, 1996 | Talk Tennis

@I get cramps - thoughts?

 

[MilosRaonicFan]

Interesting timing for the report.
Sampras breaks in all 3 games he has break points.
Bruguera breaks in 2 of the 9 games he had break points.


Almost exact same thing happened today.
Ruud breaks in all 3 games he has break points.
Tommy Paul breaks in 2 of the 8 games he had break points.

I can't think that this happens too often. Even in this years Aussie, Djokovic had break points in 5 different games against Sinner.

 

[Mustard]

This was just after Tim Gullikson had died. Sampras was thinking about him a lot during the whole 1996 French Open run to the semi final, which included three 5-set wins, against Bruguera, Martin and Courier.

 

[fezer]

Interesting timing for the report.
Sampras breaks in all 3 games he has break points.
Bruguera breaks in 2 of the 9 games he had break points.


Almost exact same thing happened today.
Ruud breaks in all 3 games he has break points.
Tommy Paul breaks in 2 of the 8 games he had break points.

I can't think that this happens too often. Even in this years Aussie, Djokovic had break points in 5 different games against Sinner.

Paul Haarhuis converted 5/5 BPS vs Becker in 91 USO!

 

[Waspsting]

Interesting timing for the report.
Sampras breaks in all 3 games he has break points.
Bruguera breaks in 2 of the 9 games he had break points.


Almost exact same thing happened today.
Ruud breaks in all 3 games he has break points.
Tommy Paul breaks in 2 of the 8 games he had break points.

I can't think that this happens too often. Even in this years Aussie, Djokovic had break points in 5 different games against Sinner.

This match was brough to my attention for having large gap in points served between 2 players
49 points. Largest I know of

@Garro - compare atp stats with mine (which are accurate)

per atp -
Points served - Sampras 193 and Brug 137
aces and double faults - Sampras 9 and 6, Brug 11 and 0

adjusting for double counts - Sampras would serve 193 - 15 =178, Brug would serve 137 - 11 = 126
Actual figures - Pete 179, Brug 130

one of the problems might be that Brug has 3 second serve aces. They've listed him with 11 (its actually 14, with 3 second serves)
So possibly, they just don't count second serve aces

But there figures are badly off on this one. They've got Sampras with 9 aces, 6 doubles
He had 14 aces, 5 doubles
How do you miss 5 aces? And as we talked about earlier, there should never be discrepancy in double faults

So yeah, some of the ATP site stats just seem to be plain and simple wrong - independent of double counting or not
And how they handle second serve aces is another possible bug in their system

Paul Haarhuis converted 5/5 BPS vs Becker in 91 USO!

Agassi was 7/7 vs McEnroe in 92 Wimby

 

[Mustard]

The 1987 Wimbledon final had a big gap, I think, in terms of points served with Lendl and Cash. It was like a 26 point difference after just the first set.

With Sampras and Bruguera at the 1996 French Open, it's the eventual winner Sampras who served so many points.

 

[Waspsting]

The 1987 Wimbledon final had a big gap, I think, in terms of points served with Lendl and Cash. It was like a 26 point difference after just the first set.

With Sampras and Bruguera at the 1996 French Open, it's the eventual winner Sampras who served so many points.

In this case, I was thinking specifially of matches where winner serves more points than loser
Springing out of -

Facing all those break points Wawrinka ended up serving 41 more points than Djokovic (164-123).

I have not checked all our matches, Moose, but over the years I've made note of other such examples of this. I think you first noticed it in Smith's win over Nastase at Wimbledon (the winner serving many more points than the loser).

I know of three matches that top Wawrinka-Djokovic:
Sampras d. Bruguera at 1996 RG, serving 178 points to 126 (+52) (the ATP has 193-137 but I am adjusting these numbers on the assumption that aces and df's were counted twice)
Corretja d. Moya in 1998 YEC final, serving 189 points to 144 (+45)
Johansson d. Roddick in 2004 USO QF, serving 162 points to 118 (+44)

Something like the Djokovic-Sinner match at Aus this year where
- winner has few chances, but takes them all
- loser has constant chances, but is usually thwarted
- otherwise, loser holding like clockwork and winner being extended regularly

Presumably, that'd be rarer than one sided match where winner holds easily, loser is always extended, like the '87 Wimby final

50 point difference in that one (Cash 81, Lendl 131)

Couple of others that come mind - both Becker-Edberg matches where winner literally served half the points the loser did -

'90 Stockholm (Becker 54, Edberg 110) - 56 points
'87 Cincy (Edberg 39, Becker 78) - 39 points

These kind of thing can get swayed by number of games served
In this Sampras-Brug match, Sampras serves 2 extra games
In both 2:1 ratio matches mentioned, the guy who serves more points serves 1 extra game
The only match I know of where a player served 3 extra games is Becker-Rostagno '89 US Open. Rostagno served 38 more points in that one

 

[fezer]

Such an amazing match. Sampras showed how it's done. Winning a 5th Set vs a CC titan. All-in on every shot on the return. And get all the mental strength togehter on the serve. He did the same two rounds later vs Courier (also twice a champion there).
Remember Courier lamenting that 'this Guy ist still firing bombs' after hours of playing. Yes, Jim, that's according to the rules.

 

[Mustard]

Such an amazing match. Sampras showed how it's done. Winning a 5th Set vs a CC titan. All-in on every shot on the return. And get all the mental strength togehter on the serve. He did the same two rounds later vs Courier (also twice a champion there).
Remember Courier lamenting that 'this Guy ist still firing bombs' after hours of playing. Yes, Jim, that's according to the rules.

Courier was fed up of Sampras by then. That was the second time that Sampras beat Courier at a major from 2 sets down, and now at the French Open!

 

[Mustard]

Here's the full 1996 French Open Sampras vs. Bruguera match: