Australian Open

[johnyandell]

I don't doubt those are the posted stats. Just not sure I believe them. As I posted before a USTA insider tells me that on the groundstrokes any data above 100mph is "unreliable" what ever that means...

[stotty]

Speeds of Serves & Groundstrokes at Australian Open 2023

I continue to track speed & spin of ATP players' since the pair of articles for TPN I collaborated with John on, based initially on a new level of detail released during the French Open.
Ball speed article: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...op_ball_speed/

Some of John's earlier work on Sampras et al
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...nis_page1.html

Here are two examples of shots by Holger Rune when playing Andrey Rublev during this fortnight's Australian Open, a serve & a forehand at identical speeds of 121 MPHs. I have laboriously extracted this information, which requires searching and clicking on individual shots, and gotten 120 MPH+ groundstroke data for Tsitsipas, Rune, Medvedev, Djokovic, Korda, and Rublev.

First, we have an ace by the 19 yo Dane. Loads of stats a flat serve, at 121 MPH, was 3.9 feet above the ground (presumably when it crossed the net? not specified), and bounced 4.6 feet high. Good, ATP level serve, nothing spectacualr

filedata/fetch?id=99556&d=1674848192&type=thumb

Next, we have another winner by Rune, a forehand at an identical 121 MPH, landing almost on the sideline, with 2,485 RPM, and 5.2 feet above the ground (again, not specified where).

This is one huge forehand. Up until a few years ago, a 120+ MPH forehand would be newsworthy. There would be videos on YouTube, including with fastest ever shots by the likes of Fernando Gonzalez and James Blake. Now, at least per the stats I've found at Roland Garros and replicated at other events from San Diego to Indian Wells, most of the top 10 players and many other regularly reach 120 MPHs.

The fastest groundstrokes combined off both sides at Roland Garros, came from Sasha Zverev, who reached 130 MPH with both forehands and backhands -- per the HE/RG stats.

There are reasonable doubts. First, it sounds huge. Second, we're trained to expect serves to be faster than groundstrokes. Part of that may be that we are traditionally given "average" speeds for groundstrokes and individual speeds for serves. The variation in groundstroke speed is much greater than that for serves (Other than, say, an underhand serve by Kyrgios, one seldom sees a 40 mph serve). Finally, John got feedback off the record from a USTS official that that although they believe in HawkEye's accuracy in calling lines, they think the top speeds are off. No specifics were given.

Now, I don't have a dog in this fight. I'd just like to know. My skepticism of the skepticism is this; If we believe, as almost everyone seems to accept, that HawkEye is extremely accurate at measuring service speeds, why would it be inaccurate measuring an identical speed on a shot hit seconds later on the side instead of above the head?

Secondly, although we have ZERO independent verification and test results on HawkEye that I'm aware of (a glaring omission IMHO), a more sophisticated, more complicated HawkEye system is used by Major League Baseball to provide stats on every game in every stadium. MLB publishes detail down to fractions of a MPH, "launch angles" of home runs, and reaction time of players. MLB is a much larger business with far more resources invested in this & I presume doesn't want to risk its reputation heavily promoting inaccurate numbers.

Finally, I can understand how HawkEye could measure speed and spin impeccably but get the spot wrong, since its version of a "ball mark" is actually a computer simulation. But I can't understand how HawkEye could simulate the landing of the ball (remember, unlike FoxTen HE has no cameras at ball level), if the stats it would be calculated on are wrong. Garbage In = Garbage Out.

Perhaps that is my lack of imagination.

More to come in the future, presumably.

Amazing post....

Seems outrageous that forehands are reaching such high speeds. A while back I read Wawrinka was the biggest hitter on tour off both wings, averaging the low 80s mph on his forehand and backhand. Del Potro was once singled out at Wimbledon for hitting a 104 mph forehand, which was thought to be the fastest ever hit at SW19.

[stroke]

Jim, great stuff. No doubt to my eye these young guys like Rune, Tsitsipas, Korda are producing some groundstrokes, speed and spin totality, on a new level. I am sure you have seen this occasional TennisTV stat where they, during a set, will give their "quantitative " measure of each players forehand "heaviness". That spin/speed thing must be the measure of such a result.

[jimlosaltos]

Just FYI -- here is a different presentation of shot speed, spin data from AO23, this for Sebi Korda.

Korda's "Winner" (this view does not specify the type of non-serve) reached 193 kph & 2,266 RPMs, landing on the sideline. This view shows the trajectory so it looks like a down the line forehand.

The serve in the next image is a serve at roughly comparable 199 kph or 123 mph.

filedata/fetch?id=99560&d=1674849621&type=thumb

Korda's serve, an ace up the T.

filedata/fetch?id=99559&d=1674849621&type=thumb

#

[jimlosaltos]

Speeds of Serves & Groundstrokes at Australian Open 2023

I continue to track speed & spin of ATP players' since the pair of articles for TPN I collaborated with John on, based initially on a new level of detail released during the French Open.
Ball speed article: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...op_ball_speed/

Some of John's earlier work on Sampras et al
https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...nis_page1.html

Here are two examples of shots by Holger Rune when playing Andrey Rublev during this fortnight's Australian Open, a serve & a forehand at identical speeds of 121 MPHs. I have laboriously extracted this information, which requires searching and clicking on individual shots, and gotten 120 MPH+ groundstroke data for Tsitsipas, Rune, Medvedev, Djokovic, Korda, and Rublev.

First, we have an ace by the 19 yo Dane. Loads of stats a flat serve, at 121 MPH, was 3.9 feet above the ground (presumably when it crossed the net? not specified), and bounced 4.6 feet high. Good, ATP level serve, nothing spectacualr

filedata/fetch?id=99556&d=1674848192&type=thumb

Next, we have another winner by Rune, a forehand at an identical 121 MPH, landing almost on the sideline, with 2,485 RPM, and 5.2 feet above the ground (again, not specified where).

This is one huge forehand. Up until a few years ago, a 120+ MPH forehand would be newsworthy. There would be videos on YouTube, including with fastest ever shots by the likes of Fernando Gonzalez and James Blake. Now, at least per the stats I've found at Roland Garros and replicated at other events from San Diego to Indian Wells, most of the top 10 players and many other regularly reach 120 MPHs.

The fastest groundstrokes combined off both sides at Roland Garros, came from Sasha Zverev, who reached 130 MPH with both forehands and backhands -- per the HE/RG stats.

There are reasonable doubts. First, it sounds huge. Second, we're trained to expect serves to be faster than groundstrokes. Part of that may be that we are traditionally given "average" speeds for groundstrokes and individual speeds for serves. The variation in groundstroke speed is much greater than that for serves (Other than, say, an underhand serve by Kyrgios, one seldom sees a 40 mph serve). Finally, John got feedback off the record from a USTS official that that although they believe in HawkEye's accuracy in calling lines, they think the top speeds are off. No specifics were given.

Now, I don't have a dog in this fight. I'd just like to know. My skepticism of the skepticism is this; If we believe, as almost everyone seems to accept, that HawkEye is extremely accurate at measuring service speeds, why would it be inaccurate measuring an identical speed on a shot hit seconds later on the side instead of above the head?

Secondly, although we have ZERO independent verification and test results on HawkEye that I'm aware of (a glaring omission IMHO), a more sophisticated, more complicated HawkEye system is used by Major League Baseball to provide stats on every game in every stadium. MLB publishes detail down to fractions of a MPH, "launch angles" of home runs, and reaction time of players. MLB is a much larger business with far more resources invested in this & I presume doesn't want to risk its reputation heavily promoting inaccurate numbers.

Finally, I can understand how HawkEye could measure speed and spin impeccably but get the spot wrong, since its version of a "ball mark" is actually a computer simulation. But I can't understand how HawkEye could simulate the landing of the ball (remember, unlike FoxTen HE has no cameras at ball level), if the stats it would be calculated on are wrong. Garbage In = Garbage Out.

Perhaps that is my lack of imagination.

More to come in the future, presumably.

[jimlosaltos]

Early odds I have seen, Novak a comprehensive favorite over Stef, with an implied probability of winning at 84 5%. Certainly a lot of money to be had for one who thinks Stef has a decent chance of winning. Certainly anyone wagering on Novak is paying a bit of a premium, as they should be given Novak's accomplishments here. DB said he thinks it is even more impressive than Nadal's accomplishments at RG. Certainly don't agree with that, I have what Nadal has done at RG the greatest accomplishment in all of sports. Of all Novak has accomplished, his AO results are right up there. Winning all the Master's 1000 twice each, as no other player has even done it once, is mind boggling. Stefs backhand has held up well thus far. I hope it does. It will have to as he definitely gives up a lot to Novak on that side. His forehand looks better than even Novak's, which is saying something. And there is still that best ever Novak return of serve to deal with

Heads to head is 2-10 to Novak.

So, yes, Stef can and has beaten him. But the percentage is close to the implied probability you listed: 80 % vs 84.5%

Also, last win was, if I remember correctly, 2019.

[stroke]

Early odds I have seen, Novak a comprehensive favorite over Stef, with an implied probability of winning at 84 5%. Certainly a lot of money to be had for one who thinks Stef has a decent chance of winning. Certainly anyone wagering on Novak is paying a bit of a premium, as they should be given Novak's accomplishments here. DB said he thinks it is even more impressive than Nadal's accomplishments at RG. Certainly don't agree with that, I have what Nadal has done at RG the greatest accomplishment in all of sports. Of all Novak has accomplished, his AO results are right up there. Winning all the Master's 1000 twice each, as no other player has even done it once, is mind boggling. Stefs backhand has held up well thus far. I hope it does. It will have to as he definitely gives up a lot to Novak on that side. His forehand looks better than even Novak's, which is saying something. And there is still that best ever Novak return of serve to deal with

[stroke]

I did not.

[don_budge]

2023 Australian Open...Novax appears to be the winner according to Scott Adams (not referring to tennis)

Scott Adams makes a rather bizarre video regarding the COVID Vaccines. Novak Djokovic took a stand and refused to take the jab. But it cost him a shot at winning his 10th Australian Open Championship. A rather steep price considering. The forum ganged up on him last year. He had the audacity to think for himself. I read it. I didn't participate...being on sabbatical as I was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C41GCgyG4mI&t=182s

[stroke]

I have always liked Novak. I like Tsitsipas too, but I am thinking Novak will probably be the favorite in the Final.

[don_budge]

Case in Point...Novak Djokovic vs. Tommy Paul

Novak Djokovic is the epitome of modern tennis. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This a refrain from my dear old tennis coach Sherm Collins. Where is the weak link in the Novak Djokovic game? I'll tell you where it is...the closer he gets to the net the less effective he is. But that being said...how do you bring him in to exploit that? A very dangerous proposition.

No...the thing that seperates Novak from all of his peers is the combination of defence and offence. First of all...all great championships are won with great defence as the foundation. You see this in all sports. Right across the board. Tennis is certainly not an exception. Tennis players must be able to play uncanny defence to extradite themselves all the time and turn it around to take it on offence. This is called transitioning. Transitioning from defence to offence and vice versa. It is constantly happening throughout a match.

Again...that being said Novak is a master at "maintaining pressure on his opponent" for those very attributes. You think you have him in trouble and there he is pulling off one of his "Harry Houdini" acts extriditing himself from all kinds of fantastic circumstances. I noticed at this Austalian Open he is using very good use of teh very high lob. A number of times Rublev had him on the ropes only to find himself retreating to the baseline to retrieve a Djokovic lob landing very close to the baseline. More great defense. And then he is right back on top of you.

Any play behind the baseline is going to favor Djokovic. He simply does not have a weakness in either his forehand, backhand and most importantly...his serve. While his serve is not compared to "greatest of all time" by our serve connoisseur, he manages his serve better than any player currently playing. Only Roger Federer was able to take this up a notch among his contemporaries. If somehow Rublev was able to put Novak on the defensive...it is always amazing at how quickly and how decisively he can turn it around. After Rublev beat Rune the interviewer brought up the prospect of playing Novak in the next round even before Novak had beaten Di Manure. Rublev practically threw in the towel right then and there. Rublev knows the score. He knows that he might possibly hurt Novak with a forehand or a serve but he knows how difficult it is to seal the deal on the slippery Djokovic and how quickly he can turn the tables on you.

You can look at all the numbers and all the stats you want. Useless information in the end. The thing is to "read the play". Once you understand what that means and how good Novak plays the percentages and plays to the score...well that is all you really need to know. It doesn't matter if Di Manure is the quickest rat in the shed...the question is what does he have to hurt Djokovic with. The same question applies to his opponent today. Well...we'll see. Everyone has a 50/50 chance when they walk out on the court. But once the pill is in play and you start to read the play it becomes more and more obvious who is "maintaining consistent pressure on the opponent". As Bill Tilden wrote so many, many years ago. When tennis was really tennis. This is modern tennis and you will find Novak Djokovic's picture under that word in the lexicon.

He is a man on a mission. He is exacting revenge on all those responsible for the clown show last year. He has been ramping it up round by round. Tommy Paul will be a perfect barometer at the level of the Serb today. Then who knows what tomorrow will bring Novak's way. He has a pretty good idea. He has a lot of experience in these types of situations. He has won this tournament how many times? I would say that this is even more impressive than Fafa's run at Roland Garros. Clay being somewhat historically an acquired taste while the hard court is remandatory.

A well played first set by the American hopeful...Tommy Paul. But in the end all for naught. Breaking the Djokovic serve to level the set, Novak calmly proceeds to break back and serve it out. Transition from defence to offence. Or from service game to return game. Initially on the opponents serve, Novak is on defence. But look how quickly he neutralizes the point and he is on top of his opponent. Transitioning. Maintaining pressure on his opponent. Flatter forehand? More spin? Who cares? The answer is by any means possible and Novak has them all at his disposal. After a hiccup on his service game he comes back like a surgeon and just flat lines the set game. Paul never knew what hit him. At one moment he was challenging he commander in chief and then just as quickly he was sitting in between sets licking his wounds.

Now speaking of live serving arms, I think Paul has a really good one. He has got some really good action and a really nice motion out of the platform stance. Nothing fancy. No gimmicks. Just a nice fluid motion that can produce big bombs as well as superbly crafted spins. He can nip the corners too. Interesting character and likeable fellow. But does he have the stomach for what Novak is about to propose. All bets are off. Novak doubling down. I have never seen Novak play with such purpose. His main opposition...his main competition were removed from his path. I would say Nadal, Rune and whoever were his main obstacles. But it has been clear sailing for a couple of rounds now. He has Tommy Paul on his heels early on in the second and once he starts with the pedal to the metal he rarely lets up. If ever. He just keeps applying the pressure.

Back to his look of purpose. Once upon a time Roger Federer had a match point on Djokovic on his own serve. Novak returned with an amazing comet of a forehand to come back eventually and win that. But when he hit the forehand he had a look on his face like Robert DiNero in the "Deerhunter" when he was playing Russian roulette with his Vietnamese captors. Once he was in position to take them out he had this maniacal look on his face. I'm seeing this in Novak's heart now. "The Heart of Darkness". A compelling novel by Joseph Conrad that was turned into the movie "Apocalypse Now".

Novak reading the play. He knows what Tommy can produce in any given situation and he merely covers the bases. Then he is on you like stink on poop. Like a wet blanket. A cheap suit. Then it is over and he is in between rounds left with himself to deal with. He is an amazing character. Never a favorite of mine. But I certainly give him his due. He has it coming to him. He has earned it. Certainly has. Joke 'em if they can't take a fuck. Djokovic.

[don_budge]

Is Djokovic just showing the deficiencies of modern tennis?

Novak Djokovic is the epitome of modern tennis. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This a refrain from my dear old tennis coach Sherm Collins. Where is the weak link in the Novak Djokovic game? I'll tell you where it is...the closer he gets to the net the less effective he is. But that being said...how do you bring him in to exploit that? A very dangerous proposition.

No...the thing that seperates Novak from all of his peers is the combination of defence and offence. First of all...all great championships are won with great defence as the foundation. You see this in all sports. Right across the board. Tennis is certainly not an exception. Tennis players must be able to play uncanny defence to extradite themselves all the time and turn it around to take it on offence. This is called transitioning. Transitioning from defence to offence and vice versa. It is constantly happening throughout a match.

Again...that being said Novak is a master at "maintaining pressure on his opponent" for those very attributes. You think you have him in trouble and there he is pulling off one of his "Harry Houdini" acts extriditing himself from all kinds of fantastic circumstances. I noticed at this Austalian Open he is using very good use of teh very high lob. A number of times Rublev had him on the ropes only to find himself retreating to the baseline to retrieve a Djokovic lob landing very close to the baseline. More great defense. And then he is right back on top of you.

Any play behind the baseline is going to favor Djokovic. He simply does not have a weakness in either his forehand, backhand and most importantly...his serve. While his serve is not compared to "greatest of all time" by our serve connoisseur, he manages his serve better than any player currently playing. Only Roger Federer was able to take this up a notch among his contemporaries. If somehow Rublev was able to put Novak on the defensive...it is always amazing at how quickly and how decisively he can turn it around. After Rublev beat Rune the interviewer brought up the prospect of playing Novak in the next round even before Novak had beaten Di Manure. Rublev practically threw in the towel right then and there. Rublev knows the score. He knows that he might possibly hurt Novak with a forehand or a serve but he knows how difficult it is to seal the deal on the slippery Djokovic and how quickly he can turn the tables on you.

You can look at all the numbers and all the stats you want. Useless information in the end. The thing is to "read the play". Once you understand what that means and how good Novak plays the percentages and plays to the score...well that is all you really need to know. It doesn't matter if Di Manure is the quickest rat in the shed...the question is what does he have to hurt Djokovic with. The same question applies to his opponent today. Well...we'll see. Everyone has a 50/50 chance when they walk out on the court. But once the pill is in play and you start to read the play it becomes more and more obvious who is "maintaining consistent pressure on the opponent". As Bill Tilden wrote so many, many years ago. When tennis was really tennis. This is modern tennis and you will find Novak Djokovic's picture under that word in the lexicon.

He is a man on a mission. He is exacting revenge on all those responsible for the clown show last year. He has been ramping it up round by round. Tommy Paul will be a perfect barometer at the level of the Serb today. Then who knows what tomorrow will bring Novak's way. He has a pretty good idea. He has a lot of experience in these types of situations. He has won this tournament how many times? I would say that this is even more impressive than Fafa's run at Roland Garros. Clay being somewhat historically an acquired taste while the hard court is remandatory.

[jimlosaltos]

What Slow Dunlop Balls?
2/2

More from @Vestige_du-jour, comparing serve speed averages from last year's Australian Open to this show negligible change so ZERO impact of the supposedly "slow" Dunlop 2023 balls select players are whining about.

Now, this does get more complicated, requiring compilation of the year-to-year variances for each player then aggregating them.

Horizontal axis is change in first serve speed, horizontal change in second.

Data till QF
Compared the Sv speed shift 2023 - 2022 for the SAME player

<Δ1st> = -0.2 ? 5.8 km/h
<Δ2nd> = +0.8 ? 6.4 km/h

Update: Vestige 'might' disagree with my interpretation because Rafa said the balls "slow after 2 hits". But IMHO if that was true, not only would serves be slower but there would be higher variances in speed. Balls as used for 7 games of ~105 hits or ground strikes & I can't imagine a scenario in which the "re-inflate" after a rally.

filedata/fetch?id=99544&d=1674770932&type=thumb

[jimlosaltos]

AO Serve Speeds

Right on cue my virtual bud, stat guru @Vestige_du-jour created this detailed comparison of first- and second-serve speed for the men at the Australian Open. It's not as complex as it looks. The horizontal axis is first serve speed and the vertical axis second serve speed. So, Bublik, the yellow dot way up in your right-hand corner is an outlier with the fastest ave for both, by a good margin. Nearest top player is Matteo Berrettini.

You'll also note a cluster of Shelton-Rune-Shapovalov-Isner-Karatsev with fast second serves all around 170 km/h, near the top line. Although the difference between Rune's flat seconds, and Shelton's hooks is great, velocity is similar.

Among the biggest fall offs for top players, continues to be Zverev & Rublev down to your lower right (high first, low second quadrant).

Again ATP data, graphic created to @Vestige_du-jour who you can find on twitter, although he usually posts in Kanji, but some English, occasional French, Must be nice to be poly-math and a polyglot <g>

1/2

filedata/fetch?id=99541&d=1674770733&type=thumb

[stroke]

What Happened to Big Servers in Men's Game?

This gave me pause. Brad Gilbert said Ben Shelton might have the biggest serve on the tour now, serving frequently at 140 mph.

Another announcer I usually don't pay attention said "Lots of people serve at that velocity" then went on about the lefty-ness.

But then I started thinking about how the Big Trees in tennis have fallen. Virtually everybody around the 7 foot mark has departed or is barely playing. O'Pelka is still around, but last I saw him he never reached 140 mph.

But even aside from the Big Trees, top speeds seem to be declining. (Not overall average speeds, and more players than ever each 130 mph, but the real top)

I recall when Ryan Harrison served 150 mph, and saw Fernando Verdasco miss (or not, there was no Hawkeye) getting 150 mph serve in.

The Dear Departed Big Servers: Sam Groth, Isner (almost), Raonic (oft injured), Dr. Ivo (did he ever officially retire?), Greg Rusedski, Andy Roddick. Dying breed?

Random noise in the universe or trend? Am I missing somebody?

My take on this is right now playing, other than Kyrgios, no player has a serve(cumulative 1st and 2nd), of the all time greats. I would put the 3 giants as the top 3 serves of all time. Then you have other great past servers such as Goran, Tanner, Roddick, Sampras, Raonic, Rudedski. Sheldon does seem to have a lot of potential in this area. Hurkacz is in the ballpark in the outfield somewhere. Another great server no one talks about is Wayne Arthurs, another lefty.