Halle · R32 · Grass · 9 Jun 2014
Michal Przysiezny v Peter Gojowczyk
60–70 in points · Peter Gojowczyk won
Why it went the way it did
Peter Gojowczyk won 7.1 more points than Michal Przysiezny relative to what the serve alone predicted. Michal Przysiezny's biggest leaks: forehand execution −4.4, slice execution −2.0, return 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 | Michal Przysiezny | Peter Gojowczyk | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | +0.2 | +0.3 | +2.0 | +2.5 | +0.1 | −0.2 | +1.9 | +1.9 |
| Serve 2nd | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −0.7 | −0.8 | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.8 | −1.0 |
| Return | −0.4 | −0.6 | −1.7 | −2.8 | −0.4 | +0.4 | −1.4 | −1.5 |
| Forehand | +0.1 | +2.1 | −4.4 | −2.1 | +0.1 | +0.4 | −1.7 | −1.2 |
| Backhand | +0.1 | +0.1 | −0.9 | −0.8 | −0.3 | −0.1 | +0.1 | −0.3 |
| Slice | ±0.0 | −1.6 | −2.0 | −3.6 | −0.1 | −0.6 | +0.2 | −0.5 |
| Net | +0.3 | −0.4 | −0.4 | −0.6 | +0.2 | ±0.0 | +0.5 | +0.7 |
| Touch | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | +0.1 | +0.3 | +0.5 | +0.9 |
| All shots | +0.2 | −0.2 | −8.1 | −8.1 | −0.3 | ±0.0 | −0.7 | −1.0 |
Set by set
| Set | Michal Przysiezny | Peter Gojowczyk | Net, Michal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −2.1 | +0.9 | −3.1 | |
| 2 | −6.0 | −1.9 | −4.1 |
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.
Michal Przysiezny serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 51% 70% | 8% 33% | 41% 69% |
| 2 | 53% 65% | 6% 50% | 41% 62% |
Set to set +0.35 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets +0.39 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Peter Gojowczyk serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 48% 69% | 3% 0% | 48% 88% |
| 2 | 42% 64% | 4% 0% | 54% 93% |
Set to set −1.26 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets +0.34 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.
Michal Przysiezny
3.4 points left on the table across 130 shots 2.58 per 100 shots
- Return of a 1st serve, wide, ad court hit BH slice down the line ×3; BH slice crosscourt rates higher · 0.58 pts
- Return of a 1st serve, T, deuce court hit BH slice down the line ×3; BH slice through the middle rates higher · 0.30 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH slice down the line ×3; BH slice crosscourt rates higher · 0.16 pts
- Serve +1: mid-depth return to your backhand side hit BH slice through the middle ×2; BH slice crosscourt rates higher · 0.16 pts
Peter Gojowczyk
3.4 points left on the table across 136 shots 2.53 per 100 shots
- Return of a 1st serve, wide, deuce court hit FH down the line ×6; FH through the middle rates higher · 0.43 pts
- Return of a 1st serve, wide, ad court hit BH down the line ×2; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.23 pts
- Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle hit BH through the middle + approach ×1; BH down the line + approach rates higher · 0.21 pts
- Return of a 1st serve, T, ad court hit FH down the line ×5; FH through the middle rates higher · 0.20 pts