When a player is up 5-1 or 5-0, serving for the set...why not aim to BREAK for the set?

[Sum Buddy Ells]

I've always wondered about this. Obviously we don't have the same mindset of pros under pressure, competing in high-stakes matches day in day out. But wouldn't it be a sensible idea, when you've got a 5-0/5-1 lead in a set, to "tank" your service game with the focus on breaking your opponent's next service game? Especially since that allows you to serve ahead in the final set?

Granted that may shift the momentum slightly, with the opponent thinking they could make a comeback and regaining confidence. But that's a kind of lead that doesn't slip away most of the time. And bear in the mind the insurance of a double/triple break – you can still regroup by 5-2/5-3 to serve out the set and move on.


Some examples (off the top of my head) where things might've gone differently if Player A had broken Player B and A would be starting out the next set:

• AO '17 Final 3rd set: Federer 5-1 Nadal
Part of me feels this match might've ended in 4 sets had Roger broken Rafa to take the third (but of course it wouldn't have ended up as thrilling or epic!)

• USO '17 R16 2nd set: Svitolina 5-1 Keys
Svitolina did have a 4-2 lead in the third, but Maddie found another gear to break back and the NY crowd started cheering her on harder, so of course Svitolina's serves would come under immense pressure at 4-5.

• AO '18 R64 4th set: McDonald 5-0 Dimitrov
Remember how tight that final set was? Grigor won it 8-6 while serving ahead though he was close to being broken a couple times. I think serving first was more helpful than that 4th set bagel was harmful psychologically.


Thoughts?

 

[Plamen1234]

Because if you lead 5-1 lets say and you got broken you can lose momentum and after some time the result can be 5-5.Something like this happened to Goffin in the match with Dimi at MC.He was leading 4-1 with 2 breaks in the second set and then lost it 7-6.It depends also on the player - whether they are mentally strong enough

 

[GrassCourtFan]

No, of course not. If you can tank your service game and then break, isn't it better to win your service game and then break? Then you're serving at up a break at 1-0 instead of serving at 0-0.

Your logic relies on being quite sure that you can break the next game if you want to. But if you're that sure you can break, then who serves first in the next set doesn't matter because you can just bulldoze through all the games. On the other hand, if the 5-0 or 5-1 score is misleading and the game is tighter than it looks, then you can't afford to give up a game because that might be what swings the momentum and starts the other person's comeback.

 

[Mack-2]

I’ve actually had this thought before. At that level you just can’t let your opponent get any momentum going when you have the upper hand. You want to close out the set as soon as you can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rafa's OCD]

only a Roger Federer fan could assume his god could hand a break to Rafael Nadal and automatically break in the very next game

 

[FrontHeadlock]

Imo the reason people don't do that is pretty simple:

1. If you're playing against a much weaker player, it probably doesn't matter if you end on a break, because you feel pretty confident about winning anyway

2. If you're playing against a similar or stronger player, you are concerned about him getting momentum and you're also not sure you can keep up that run of breaks, so you want to bank that set as soon as possible. And if you CAN keep up the run of breaks, you'll just break early in the next set anyway

 

[Deleted member 756514]

But that's a kind of lead that doesn't slip away most of the time.

Doesn't slip away because players don't tank at 5-0 or 5-1.

 

[Sudacafan]

I've always wondered about this. Obviously we don't have the same mindset of pros under pressure, competing in high-stakes matches day in day out. But wouldn't it be a sensible idea, when you've got a 5-0/5-1 lead in a set, to "tank" your service game with the focus on breaking your opponent's next service game? Especially since that allows you to serve ahead in the final set?

Granted that may shift the momentum slightly, with the opponent thinking they could make a comeback and regaining confidence. But that's a kind of lead that doesn't slip away most of the time. And bear in the mind the insurance of a double/triple break – you can still regroup by 5-2/5-3 to serve out the set and move on.


Some examples (off the top of my head) where things might've gone differently if Player A had broken Player B and A would be starting out the next set:

• AO '17 Final 3rd set: Federer 5-1 Nadal
Part of me feels this match might've ended in 4 sets had Roger broken Rafa to take the third (but of course it wouldn't have ended up as thrilling or epic!)

• USO '17 R16 2nd set: Svitolina 5-1 Keys
Svitolina did have a 4-2 lead in the third, but Maddie found another gear to break back and the NY crowd started cheering her on harder, so of course Svitolina's serves would come under immense pressure at 4-5.

• AO '18 R64 4th set: McDonald 5-0 Dimitrov
Remember how tight that final set was? Grigor won it 8-6 while serving ahead though he was close to being broken a couple times. I think serving first was more helpful than that 4th set bagel was harmful psychologically.


Thoughts?

Because Fedr loves to squander break points.

 

[reaper]

There's no statistical advantage in serving first, so it's a false premise...

 

[accidental]

If players could just break at will they would be unbeatable

 

[thomasferrett]

OP, I feel your future lies not in tennis coaching.

Tanking one game can easily become a slippery slope letting your opponent right back into the match. Server always has the advantage, it is dangerous arrogance to think you can break at will if you drop service of your own.

You should always be focusing on building a lead - not just maintaining it. E.g., if you're up one break already, you should be even hungrier to break again and again (whilst holding your own service games) to really leave your opponent in the dust.

 

[tacou]

I think it is a better strategy to try to win all the games.