Australian Open · SF · Hard · 27 Jan 1990

Mats Wilander v Stefan Edberg

44–83 in points · result not charted to completion

Why it went the way it did

Stefan Edberg won 21.0 more points than Mats Wilander relative to what the serve alone predicted. Mats Wilander's biggest leaks: slice shot selection −1.9, return execution −1.7, net execution −1.4.

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	Mats Wilander				Stefan Edberg
Shot	Dir	Sel	Exec	Total	Dir	Sel	Exec	Total
Serve 1st	−0.4	−0.9	+0.3	−1.0	−0.7	+2.3	−1.2	+0.4
Serve 2nd	−0.1	−0.5	+1.5	+0.9	−0.2	+0.7	−0.9	−0.4
Return	−0.3	+0.3	−1.7	−1.7	+0.2	+0.4	+2.3	+2.8
Forehand	−0.6	+1.3	−0.7	±0.0	+0.2	+1.3	+1.0	+2.5
Backhand	−0.6	+0.3	+0.7	+0.4	+0.4	+0.6	+2.1	+3.2
Slice	−0.4	−1.9	+1.9	−0.4	+0.5	−0.9	−0.7	−1.1
Net	−0.1	−0.4	−1.4	−1.8	+2.2	−0.5	+8.2	+9.9
Touch	±0.0	−0.8	−0.1	−1.0	+0.1	−0.5	−0.5	−0.9
All shots	−2.5	−2.5	+0.5	−4.6	+2.7	+3.4	+10.3	+16.4

Set by set

Set	Mats Wilander	Stefan Edberg	Net, Mats
1	−2.7	+4.4	−7.1
2	−0.8	+7.9	−8.7
3	−1.1	+4.1	−5.2

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.

Mats Wilander serving

Set	Wide	Body	T
1	27% 29%	12% 100%	62% 38%
2	12% 50%	35% 67%	53% 11%
3	28% 29%	16% 50%	56% 71%

Set to set −0.47 per 100 first serves in sets 2+

Within sets +0.09 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games

Stefan Edberg serving

Set	Wide	Body	T
1	39% 71%	39% 86%	22% 50%
2	58% 91%	5% 100%	37% 71%
3	40% 88%	45% 67%	15% 100%

Set to set +0.94 per 100 first serves in sets 2+

Within sets −0.02 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.

Mats Wilander

9.4 points left on the table across 236 shots 3.99 per 100 shots

Return +1: volley to your backhand side, opponent at net hit BH through the middle ×3; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.53 pts
Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle hit BH slice through the middle + approach ×1; BH slice crosscourt + approach rates higher · 0.33 pts
Return of a 1st serve, wide, deuce court, server rushing the net hit FH through the middle ×4; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.30 pts
Return +1: volley to your backhand side, opponent at net hit BH lob through the middle ×3; BH lob crosscourt rates higher · 0.29 pts

Stefan Edberg

6.2 points left on the table across 252 shots 2.45 per 100 shots

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×2; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.44 pts
Return of a 1st serve, T, ad court hit FH through the middle + approach ×1; FH crosscourt + approach rates higher · 0.30 pts
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×1; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.26 pts
Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side, you at net hit FH volley through the middle ×1; FH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.26 pts