Match Stats/Report - Wilander vs McEnroe, Rome semi-final, 1987

[Waspsting]

Mats Wilander beat John McEnroe 6-1, 6-3 in the Rome semi-final, 1987 on clay

Wilander would go onto win the title, beating Martin Jaite in the final. McEnroe was playing as a wild card

Wilander won 60 points, McEnroe 39

McEnroe serve-volleyed off all but 3 first serves and about a third off the time off second serves

(Note: I’m missing first point of the match - a Wilander service point that he lost)

Serve Stats
Wilander...
- 1st serve percentage (36/47) 77%
- 1st serve points won (26/36) 72%
- 2nd serve points won (6/11) 55%
- ?? serve points won (0/1)
- Aces 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (6/47) 13%

McEnroe...
- 1st serve percentage (29/51) 57%
- 1st serve points won (15/29) 52%
- 2nd serve points won (8/22) 36%
- Aces 1
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (10/51) 20%

Serve Patterns
Wilander served...
- to FH 47%
- to BH 49%
- to Body 4%

McEnroe served...
- to FH 39%
- to BH 49%
- to Body 12%

Return Stats
Wilander made...
- 39 (20 FH, 19 BH), including 3 runaround FHs
- 4 Winners (2 FH, 2 BH), including 1 runaround FH
- 9 Errors, comprising...
- 2 Unforced (1 FH, 1 BH)
- 7 Forced (4 FH, 3 BH)
- Return Rate (39/49) 80%

McEnroe made...
- 41 (21 FH, 20 BH), including 4 runaround FHs & 8 return-approaches
- 4 Errors, comprising...
- 2 Unforced (2 FH)
- 2 Forced (1 FH, 1 BH)
- Return Rate (41/47) 87%

Break Points
Wilander 5/9 (5 games)
McEnroe 1/3 (1 game)

Winners (including returns, excluding serves)
Wilander 14 (7 FH, 6 BH, 1 BHV)
McEnroe 11 (1 BH, 6 FHV, 2 BHV, 2 OH)

Wilander had 14 passes - 4 returns (2 FH, 2 BH) & 10 regular 10 (5 FH, 4 BH, 1 BHV)
- FH returns - 1 runaround dtl, 1 inside-out
- BH returns - 2 dtl
- regular FHs - 1 cc, 1 dtl/inside-out at net, 1 inside-out, 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 lob
- regular BHs - 2 cc, 1 dtl, 1 lob
- BHV - a non-net cc

McEnroe had 4 from serve-volley points -
- 2 first volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHV)
- 1 second volley (1 FHV)
- 1 re-approach volley (1 FHV)

- 3 from return-approach points (1 FHV, 2 OH).... 1 OH was on the bounce, just behind service line

- BH - 1 cc

Errors (excluding serves and returns)
Wilander 17
- 6 Unforced (3 FH, 2 BH, 1 FHV)... with 1 BH pass attempt
- 11 Forced (2 FH, 8 BH, 1 BHOH)... with 1 FH running-down-drop-shot (non-net) & 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.7

McEnroe 38
- 31 Unforced (7 FH, 13 BH, 8 FHV, 1 BHV, 2 OH)
- 7 Forced (2 BH, 1 FHV, 3 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)
- Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.1

(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
Wilander was 4/8 (50%) at net

McEnroe was...
- 28/59 (47%) at net, including...
- 14/32 (44%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 12/25 (48%) off 1st serve and...
- 2/7 (29%) off 2nd serve
---
- 4/8 (50%) return-approaching
- 1/1 forced back

Match Report
Wilander is solid off the ground and good on the pass and easily beats a net seeking McEnroe who isn’t good at net or off the ground

31 UEs for Mac (20 off the ground, 11 on the volley - including 2 OHs). Putting that in perspective -
- both players combined have 16 unreturned serves
- both players combined have 25 winners
- both players combined have 18 FEs
- Mats has miserly 6 UEs (3 groundies, 1 volleys)

Action does change across match
In first set, Mats serves normally, which is not damaging. In second, he just spins in his first serve
Why change a formula that’s seen you win set 6-1?

He serves at 67% first set (winning 75% first serve points and having 2 aces), which goes up to 87% in second set (wins 70% first serve points, no aces)
Doesn’t matter much, but why change winning formula?

Mac varies his ground game. For couple games, he falls back 3 paces behind baseline and rallies in Wilander/Lendl clay style of looping balls harmlessly in. Good play in such style is just not making errors. He’s not bad at it (the errors take time in coming), but predictably, not as good as the master Mats - and the UEs do come from Mac in good time

There’s the usual early, pushed groundies
And he swings with the BH to a greater extent than I’ve seen from him. Its more powerful than his typical push, but still hardly powerful enough to trouble Mats

And he seeks net. In all, Mac’s at net 59/93 points or 63% of all feasible points (that is, sans aces and double faults), but he’s not too good on the volley either. 10 winners, 11 UEs on the ‘volley’ and just 47% of net points won

While the ground contest is summarized by baseline UEs of Mats 4, Mac 20
In short, at net or on baseline, Mac getting short end of stick

Most interesting thing in match broadcast is a piece of commentary. In first round, Mac had apparently been down a set and a break to a teenaged qualifier from Argentina in a night match, when the lights went out and stayed out for an hour. Mac eventually recovering to win the match

Commentators Fred Stolle and Tony Trabert suggest that the lights were intentionally turned off to help Mac out, and cite a former Italian player (Mulligan, was it?) for ‘letting the cat out of the bag’ on that piece of news. In given circumstances, virtually everyone would have thought/suspected it, but Stolle and Trabert aren’t sensationalist or conspiracy minded sort, who’d actually say something like that on air unless they had very good reason to believe it

Action & Stats
Good in counts for both players (Mats 77%, Mac 57%). Mats’ yield divided by sets as mentioned earlier. Mac serving same strength across match, but with low 44% in first set, 64% in second

Mac on look out to return-approach, but often thinks better of it after moving forward a couple of steps. In all, he executes 8 times, winning 4
Consistent returning by Mac to tune of 87% return rate. With for him, below par aggression (that is, return-approaching). Not bad

Mac serve-volleying 89% of the time of first serves. Wins 48% so doing, 2/3 not
Off second serve, serve-volleys 35% of the time. Wins 29% so doing, 46% not

Just 20% unreturned rate. Mats returning solidly, firmly and typically getting returning slightly under net or even lowish against the serve-volleying. At that return rate, very good
Mats seemingly reading Mac’s serve. Into position quickly and rarely forced to lunge. Not bad placement of serve from Mac, and credit to Mats’ reading and movement for the returning comfort

Court action is baseline rallies, with Mac looking to come in or Mac taking net off the return or serve

Pure baseline rallies are summed up by UE counts Mats 4, Mac 20 -
- Mats BH 1
- Mats FH 2
- Mac FH 7
- Mac BH 13

As mentioned earlier, Mac trying out different things. His playing Wilander’esque, 3 feet behind baseline and looping balls in for a couple of games is surprising. I’ve never seen him play like this. Its just for couple of games and he does keep the rally going for good while, before blinking up the UE
Later, high proportion of swinging, drive BHs. A shot he generally (that is, beyond this match) plays rarely, amidst early pushed BHs. BH cc winner from Mac is the only aggressively ended baseline point
He is pretty sloppy off the ground. And footwork is slack, he’s often not over the ball

Mats happy to play FH cc’s and breakdown the BH. No winners, no errors forced, not much pressure exerted via power. Varies his shots by loop and firmness, but never goes into attacking with it

Mac, naturally, looking for net. Necessary, given baseline mismatch

Rallying to net - Mats 4/8, Mac 10/19
… with about half of Mats’ being forced approaches, most of the rest, very easy choices to approach

 

[Waspsting]

On ‘volley’, Mac has 10 winners, 11 UEs, 5 FEs
Mats on pass has 14 winners (every winner, including his sole volley, is a pass), 10 FEs. 4 of the winners are returns

More UEs than winners on the volley is disastrous for Mac. Its not as bad as it looks because typically, Mats’ passing skirts line of being forceful and unforceful (that is, how the volley error will be marked if Mac misses)

Some combo of above average power, slightly wide, slightly under the net passing from Mats, yielding tricky, but more makeable than otherwise volleys. Mac also gets very close to net, and is rushed a little for that reason

‘Not as bad as it looks’ is far away from being ‘good’ or even ‘not bad’ - and to be clear, Mac isn’t good at making the volleys
He is good on the half volley. Faces 5-7, misses just one

Mac almost exclusively targets Mats BH from net. Wisely, so

Sans returns, Mats’ on pass -
- FH 5 winners, 2 errors
- BH 5 winners 9 errors (1 UE)

A great yield for FH, fair one from BH. With Mac targetting BH, still possible for Mac to come away with great success
Mac volleying not well (consistency) is what keeps him from it and keeps him to just 47% net points won. ‘Not well’, but not as bad as numbers look due to Mats’ just-enough passing style

Match Progression
Thrashing of a first set. Mats open up 5-0 lead before Mac gets on board
8/18 first serves in sinks Mac, in conjunction with being outlasted almost always from the baseline

Mats breaks for 2-0, working Mac over to win 2 points (lob draws defensive OH and Mats follows up with low pass to force BH1/2V error and dispatches BH cc pass winner after drawing a first half-volley) and Mac missing couple of net shots (FHV and OH) do the trick

Its quite breezy and OHs are tricky. Mac lets them bounce couple of times instead of taking them out of the air

Next break takes 8 points. Mac falling behind baseline to play Borg like ground game. He saves 2 break points, but another comes up for Mac missing easy as can be putaway FHV and he blinks up FH UE on it

Mac takes to attacking net more in return games after that. Rewarded with a deuce game and a not easy serve out, but Mats is upto seeing him off

In second set, Mac abandons fall-back baseline tennis, and plays his usual, early taken pushes + swiping a lot of BH cc’s. And seeks net more aggressively in return games. And raises in count to 21/33
And plays very badly from baseline, blinking up routine UEs in short rallies. And still not much better at net, with Mats maintaining high passing level

After Mac holds deuce game to start, there’s a very good game, of Mats making just-good-enough passes. Mac’s at net 4/6 points, but makes a couple not-easy volleys. And Mats completes hold with a just strong enough first serve that doesn’t come back

Interesting shots and blunders next game. Mac with a gorgeous stop FHV winner but then gets into 2 minds about whether to play or leave a volley and ends up just casually tapping it for a silly error. Point after, Mats misses a sitter BH pass from near service line. Lovely BH lob winner from Mats after forcing a half-volley first up later in the game, followed by Mats forced into BHOH error. Mac holds the game

2 trade breaks in moving from 2-2 to 3-3
Couple of net UEs from Mac (OH and under net FHV), couple pass winners from Mats (BH dtl return and non-net BHV) scores first break to 15
Mac’s at net 6/8 points to break back - completing the game by drawing FH UE with a deep shot

Mats reels of next 3 games to end the match
First break starts with a double, ends with a perfect, sliding FH cc pass winner. Next break is more about Mats’ passing (winners from FH lob, BH dtl return and forcing a makeably difficult volley error that’s lowish and cramping), though it ends with a Mac BH blink

In between, Mac with a terrible return game of just handing over quick ground UEs. He’d played a very similar game earlier in the set too

Summing up, easy win for Wilander. Solid of the ground, firm and regular in his passing and returning - some perfect ones for winners and otherwise, yielding tricky volleys that opponent usually can’t handle

Bad showing from McEnroe. Misses a lot of makeable volleys and on whole, sloppy off the ground. He does interestingly mix up his groundies - he’s not bad when briefly falling behind baseline and looping balls in play passively and later, swipes large lot of BHs - but can’t trouble opponent with it and much of the time, gives up cheap UEs, especially off the BH

Stats for the final between Wilander and Martin Jaite - Match Stats/Report - Wilander vs Jaite, Rome final, 1987 | Talk Tennis

 

[jrepac]

So, I've never seen this one and I'm now curious. Sounds like his serving and volleying were subpar, so no way was he going to win rallying from the back. Maybe in '84, but not in '87 vs. Mats. I thought Mac made the QF at the FO a few weeks later? I was hoping he'd bounce back in '87 but was pretty meh.....Connors had a better year than he did.

 

[WCT]

I didn't remember that Mcenroe even played the Italian. His red clay preparation, for the French, was somewhat like Connors. Maybe 1 event, if that. He would play Forest Hills every year on the green clay.

I didn't remember Trabert and Stolle doing matches on CBS. So, I looked and see that they did this match for Australian TV. Hadn't realized, or forgot,that Trabert did matches for them.

Wilander beat him in a couple of French Opens. Nothing like this, though. He usually came in a bit more than this against Mcenroe. But, as you said, why change what is working.

 

[jrepac]

So, I've never seen this one and I'm now curious. Sounds like his serving and volleying were subpar, so no way was he going to win rallying from the back. Maybe in '84, but not in '87 vs. Mats. I thought Mac made the QF at the FO a few weeks later? I was hoping he'd bounce back in '87 but was pretty meh.....Connors had a better year than he did.

correction; mac lost in the first round of the FO in '87.

 

[Waspsting]

...no way was he going to win rallying from the back. Maybe in '84, but not in '87 vs. Mats

Its a pity we can't force the players to play in a way to test out things like this
I'm also curious how Mac as a pure baseliner would have done

With him, the threat of taking net shapes baseline action, so even when he's rallying from back, net play is never fully out of the equation (the way we can take it out for players like Wilander, Lendl or Borg)
He had power and excercised good judgement in his backcourt shot-making in '84. Enough to top a Wilander or Lendl from the baseline?
Maybe on hard courts or indoors, but doubt even at his apex, it would be enough to top a decent Mats Wilander on clay
No version of Mac matches Wilander's ground consistency

The only baseline match I've seen Mac play is against Vitas Gerulaitis on the green clay of Forest Hills, '83