RallyIQ

Wimbledon · R32 · Grass · 28 Jun 1997

Tim Henman v Paul Haarhuis

228–199 in points · Tim Henman won

Why it went the way it did

Tim Henman won 20.9 more points than Paul Haarhuis relative to what the serve alone predicted. Paul Haarhuis's biggest leaks: serve 2nd execution −5.9, serve 1st execution −5.8, net execution −5.7.

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.

ShotTim HenmanPaul Haarhuis
DirSelExecTotalDirSelExecTotal
Serve 1st +0.8 +1.8 −0.9 +1.6 −0.6 +3.7 −5.8 −2.7
Serve 2nd ±0.0 +0.8 −2.8 −2.1 −0.1 +2.0 −5.9 −4.0
Return +0.6 −0.4 −5.9 −5.7 −0.8 +1.4 −4.0 −3.4
Forehand +0.5 +2.2 +0.3 +3.0 ±0.0 +1.0 +0.5 +1.5
Backhand −0.4 +0.7 −1.2 −0.9 +0.5 +1.1 +1.0 +2.6
Slice +0.1 −0.8 −1.4 −2.1 +0.1 −0.9 −0.5 −1.4
Net +0.5 +1.1 +10.7 +12.3 −2.1 +0.1 −5.7 −7.7
Touch +0.1 −2.3 −0.5 −2.7 ±0.0 −0.7 −1.9 −2.6
All shots +2.2+3.0 −1.9+3.3 −3.0+7.7 −22.3−17.6

Set by set

SetTim HenmanPaul HaarhuisNet, Tim
1−3.5−3.5 ±0.0
2+1.6−5.7 +7.2
3+2.8−4.4 +7.3
4−0.7−0.8 +0.2
5+3.1−3.1 +6.2

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.

Tim Henman serving

SetWideBodyT
1 49% 65% 2% 0% 49% 70%
2 42% 63% 5% 100% 53% 100%
3 33% 63% 8% 100% 58% 79%
4 48% 62% 7% 100% 44% 67%
5 43% 61% 3% 100% 54% 78%

Set to set +0.23 per 100 first serves in sets 2+

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

Paul Haarhuis serving

SetWideBodyT
1 48% 67% 7% 67% 45% 65%
2 47% 64% 23% 43% 30% 44%
3 62% 50% 14% 75% 24% 29%
4 34% 64% 22% 56% 44% 72%
5 49% 64% 13% 58% 38% 65%

Set to set +0.48 per 100 first serves in sets 2+

Within sets +0.26 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.

Tim Henman

17.8 points left on the table across 411 shots 4.33 per 100 shots

  1. Return of a 2nd serve, T, deuce court, server rushing the net hit BH through the middle ×10; BH crosscourt rates higher · 1.20 pts
  2. Serve +1: drive to your middle, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×5; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.99 pts
  3. Return of a 1st serve, wide, deuce court, server rushing the net hit FH down the line ×17; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.66 pts
  4. Return of a 1st serve, T, deuce court, server rushing the net hit BH through the middle ×7; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.66 pts

Paul Haarhuis

20.9 points left on the table across 371 shots 5.62 per 100 shots

  1. Serve +1: drive to your backhand side, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×6; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 1.28 pts
  2. Return of a 1st serve, T, deuce court, server rushing the net hit BH through the middle ×11; BH crosscourt rates higher · 1.03 pts
  3. Serve +1: drive to your middle, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×5; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.99 pts
  4. Return of a 2nd serve, T, deuce court, server rushing the net hit BH through the middle ×8; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.96 pts