Would the Big-3 survive without.. analytics?

[gjm127]

What if their access to expensive and meaningful data analytics is what's keeping the Big-3 from losing their handle on the top of men's tennis?

We all know they use this approach that some/most couldn't afford for more than 2 years now but this is rarely discussed by enthusiasts, analysts. I believe it largely contributes to their recent success and longevity.

The role of analytics in tennis is on a long, slow rise | Tennis.com

While tennis doesn't just involve numbers, it is increasingly being measured in them.

www.tennis.com

Disguss

 

[tonylg]

Really interesting question and I suspect players would not be letting on how much impact analytics has, for obvious reason.

 

[Jonesy]

Djokovic game is proof such data is being well used.

 

[gjm127]

To me, it feels like it's especially useful in early rounds when they're facing players they haven't played against at all. No surprises there, they have a strategic odd-based gameplan that's calculated and data-driven.

 

[tonylg]

To me, it feels like it's especially useful in early rounds when they're facing players they haven't played against at all. No surprises there, they have a strategic odd-based gameplan that's calculated and data-driven.

I think it would be even more useful in later rounds, when little separates opponents. Sure, you know their patterns .. but do you know how their play changes after 2 hours, what their break point patterns are, how their patterns change in tiebreakers, etc. That can easily be the difference between holding up a trophy and going down in 5.

 

[MadariKatu]

Don't see the relationship of this to the big3. Every player has the data at reach, so all could use it. Most certainly, they do already. Schwarzman recently said that he sees Nadal play and sees some flaws that are exploitable, but then you see him train and it scares you.
I think it relies more on their ability to impose their strategy on the opponent more than being the ones with the right strategy thought out because of data

 

[ollinger]

1) the article the OP cites indicate widespread use of analytics among top 20 players on both tours, so there's little reason to think the Big 3 would especially benefit.
2) the article really offers no evidence of the value of analytics; quantifying something that should be evident from careful observation and scouting is not necessarily an advantage.

 

[MeatTornado]

I love tennis, but it's an unbelievably simple sport. There's only so much edge that analytics can give. At the end of the day its just about who can execute their shots more accurately.

Does anyone in their right mind think Djokovic would lose his #1 ranking if you took away his analytics. He wins matches because of simple geometry, not anticipation. He puts the ball deep and he puts it there consistently. There's no gameplanning around that.

The court is so small that things in tennis are pretty much 50/50. The ball's either going to your right or your left. Even if you have the data that a player goes wide on ad court serves on break points, the article also rightfully points out that the player who does it also knows that himself. Then you get stuck in this game of you-know-that-I-know-that-you-know-that-I-know, and suddenly it becomes a 50/50 game again, because you don't know who is overthinking it.

 

[TimHenmanATG]

This is the kind of thing which underpins every facet of life: once one gains an advantage - however small - that aforementioned advantage continuously compounds to create an infinitely increasing overall advantage.

It's the fundamental basis of the differences between the "haves" and "have nots".