Hamburg · F · Clay · 3 May 1987
Miloslav Mecir v Ivan Lendl
71–101 in points · Ivan Lendl won
Why it went the way it did
Ivan Lendl won 18.9 more points than Miloslav Mecir relative to what the serve alone predicted. Miloslav Mecir's biggest leaks: backhand execution −4.6, net execution −3.7, slice execution −1.7.
Each shot moves its hitter's chance of winning the point. Those moves are split into direction choice, shot selection and execution, and summed here. Read both columns together: one player's gain is the other's loss.
| Shot | Miloslav Mecir | Ivan Lendl | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | −0.2 | −0.8 | −0.1 | −1.2 | +0.2 | −0.4 | −1.2 | −1.4 |
| Serve 2nd | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.6 | −0.9 | ±0.0 | −0.2 | +1.3 | +1.1 |
| Return | +0.6 | ±0.0 | −0.5 | +0.1 | +0.9 | ±0.0 | +6.0 | +6.9 |
| Forehand | +0.5 | +1.8 | +2.4 | +4.7 | +0.8 | +3.2 | +2.0 | +6.0 |
| Backhand | +2.1 | +3.5 | −4.6 | +1.0 | +0.9 | +1.0 | +1.0 | +2.9 |
| Slice | −0.1 | −1.5 | −1.7 | −3.4 | +1.6 | −7.1 | +3.3 | −2.2 |
| Net | +0.8 | +0.2 | −3.7 | −2.7 | +0.1 | ±0.0 | −0.3 | −0.2 |
| Touch | ±0.0 | −0.3 | −1.5 | −1.8 | +0.2 | −0.7 | +2.5 | +2.0 |
| Other | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.3 |
| All shots | +3.7 | +2.6 | −10.3 | −4.1 | +4.9 | −4.4 | +14.3 | +14.8 |
Set by set
| Set | Miloslav Mecir | Ivan Lendl | Net, Miloslav | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −3.2 | +5.7 | −8.8 | |
| 2 | −2.6 | +2.0 | −4.6 | |
| 3 | +1.7 | +7.1 | −5.4 |
Adaptation
First-serve direction mix set by set, with the share of points each direction won. The scores measure whether the server moved toward the directions that had been winning earlier in this match, set to set and every two to three service games, in points per 100 first serves. Read them as a habit, not a gain: across the tour, a direction's edge in early sets barely predicts the later ones. Whether the returner responded can't be told apart from noise within one match.
Miloslav Mecir serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 53% 40% | 11% 50% | 37% 50% |
| 2 | 38% 46% | 24% 50% | 38% 62% |
| 3 | 61% 50% | 15% 60% | 24% 25% |
Set to set −0.19 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets +0.12 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Ivan Lendl serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 33% 80% | – | 67% 80% |
| 2 | 50% 54% | – | 50% 85% |
| 3 | 67% 56% | – | 33% 75% |
Set to set −2.44 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets −0.64 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Counterfactual: the best direction every time
If each shot had gone in the direction that is usually worth most for that stroke and position, this is how many more points each player would expect to win. It's an upper bound: the best direction isn't always on, and the chart can't see the ball's pace or position.
Miloslav Mecir
8.1 points left on the table across 550 shots 1.47 per 100 shots
- Return of a 1st serve, T, ad court hit FH through the middle ×3; FH inside-in rates higher · 0.49 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×7; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.38 pts
- Long rally, 9+: volley to your middle, opponent at net, you at net hit FH volley through the middle ×1; FH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.32 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×6; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.30 pts
Ivan Lendl
10.8 points left on the table across 566 shots 1.90 per 100 shots
- Return of a 1st serve, T, ad court hit FH down the line ×4; FH inside-in rates higher · 0.73 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×12; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.61 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×9; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.49 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side hit BH slice through the middle ×7; BH slice crosscourt rates higher · 0.49 pts