Hamburg CH · R16 · Hard · 24 Oct 2019
Botic Van De Zandschulp v Gianluca Mager
57–37 in points · Botic Van De Zandschulp won
Why it went the way it did
Botic Van De Zandschulp won 8.0 more points than Gianluca Mager relative to what the serve alone predicted. Gianluca Mager's biggest leaks: backhand execution −3.1, touch execution −1.4, net execution −1.1.
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 | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Gianluca Mager | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | +0.1 | −0.1 | −0.6 | −0.6 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −1.0 | −1.0 |
| Serve 2nd | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −0.2 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.9 | −1.0 |
| Return | −0.1 | +0.1 | −0.6 | −0.6 | −0.1 | +0.1 | +0.9 | +0.9 |
| Forehand | +0.7 | +1.6 | −0.1 | +2.3 | +0.4 | +2.3 | +0.5 | +3.2 |
| Backhand | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | +1.9 | +1.8 | +0.2 | +0.1 | −3.1 | −2.8 |
| Slice | −0.1 | −1.5 | +1.1 | −0.5 | +0.1 | −0.9 | ±0.0 | −0.8 |
| Net | +0.3 | +0.2 | +1.3 | +1.8 | −0.2 | +0.8 | −1.1 | −0.5 |
| Touch | +0.1 | −0.1 | +0.4 | +0.4 | +0.1 | ±0.0 | −1.4 | −1.2 |
| Other | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −0.2 | ±0.0 | −0.3 |
| All shots | +1.0 | +0.2 | +3.2 | +4.4 | +0.3 | +2.1 | −6.1 | −3.6 |
Set by set
| Set | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Gianluca Mager | Net, Botic | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +1.2 | +0.9 | +0.4 | |
| 2 | +3.1 | −4.5 | +7.6 |
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.
Botic Van De Zandschulp serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 33% 67% | 8% 100% | 58% 62% |
| 2 | 22% 100% | – | 78% 86% |
Set to set −0.46 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets +0.26 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Gianluca Mager serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 38% 63% | 14% 67% | 48% 70% |
| 2 | 42% 50% | 5% 0% | 53% 50% |
Within sets +0.70 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.
Botic Van De Zandschulp
3.8 points left on the table across 188 shots 2.04 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×5; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.19 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×3; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.15 pts
- Return +1: drive to your backhand side hit BH slice down the line ×2; BH slice crosscourt rates higher · 0.15 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×3; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.13 pts
Gianluca Mager
3.8 points left on the table across 196 shots 1.93 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side, you at net hit FH volley through the middle ×1; FH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.28 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: slice to your backhand side, opponent at net hit BH volley through the middle ×1; BH volley down the line rates higher · 0.20 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×4; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.20 pts
- Return +1: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×4; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.16 pts