Exhaustive & easy-to-use statistics on all matches by top 4 including worst losses [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Exhaustive & easy-to-use statistics on all matches by top 4 including worst losses

Roamed
11-25-2011, 04:57 PM
FOR EXHAUSTIVE STATISTICS - GO HERE:

MOVED TO http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=200697

I aggregated all my links, data description, and examples in this single post:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=200697



I've had a look at all the figures for every match played between Roger, Rafa, Nole and Murray to see which were the closest matches, the most one-sided, and the biggest 'escapes' in terms of % of points won. All the matches are below, but to summarise:


The most one-sided match was Federer def. Nadal 6-3 6-0 at the World Tour Finals 2011 with 67% of the points won
The closest matches were Djokovic def. Murray Madrid 06 (1-6, 7-5, 6-3) and Nadal def. Federer Australian Open 2009 (7-5, 3-6, 7-6(3), 3-6, 6-2) with 50% of the points won each
The biggest 'escape' was Nadal def. Federer Dubai 2006 (2-6, 6-4, 6-4) with 47% of the points won


There's a lot you could do with these figures, like calculate average points won in wins and things like that, I might try and work that out later. Anyway I hope people find it interesting! :)


Djokovic def. Murray - Average points won 57.7%
Murray def. Nadal - Average points won 57.0%
Murray def. Djokovic - Average points won 56.6%
Federer def. Nadal - Average points won 56.2%
Federer def. Murray - Average points won 56.1%
Djokovic def. Nadal - Average points won 56.0%
Nadal def. Djokovic - Average points won 55.4%
Federer def. Djokovic - Average points won 55.1%
Nadal def. Murray - Average points won 55.1%
Murray def. Federer - Average points won 54.3%
Djokovic def. Federer - Average points won 54.0%
Nadal def. Federer - Average points won 53.6%


From this we can see the result most likely to be a beatdown is Djokovic def. Murray; the result most likely to be close is Djokovic def. Federer, followed closely by Nadal def. Federer. Fed's three 'loss' matchups are the closest.

67%
Federer - Nadal World Tour Finals 2011 6-3, 6-0: 67%-33%

66%
Djokovic – Murray Indian Wells 2007 6-1, 6-0: 66%-34%

64%
Nadal – Federer French Open 2008 6-3, 6-1, 6-0: 64%-36%

63%
Djokovic – Nadal Paris 2009 6-2, 6-3: 63%-37%
Nadal - Djokovic Monte Carlo 2012 6-3, 6-1: 63%-37%
Nadal – Murray Wimbledon 2008 6-3, 6-2, 6-4: 63%-37%

62%
Nadal – Murray Indian Wells 2009 6-1, 6-2: 62%-38%

61%
Djokovic – Murray Indian Wells 2007 6-2, 6-3: 61%-39%
Federer – Nadal Masters Cup 2007 6-4, 6-1: 61%-39%
Murray – Djokovic Cincinnati 2011 6-4, 3-0 RET: 61%-39%
Nadal – Federer Miami 2011 6-3, 6-2: 61%-39%

60%
Djokovic – Murray Monte Carlo 2008 6-0, 6-4: 60%-40%
Federer – Murray World Tour Finals 2010 6-4, 6-2: 60%-40%
Murray – Nadal Tokyo 2011 3-6, 6-2, 6-0: 60%-40%
Nadal – Djokovic Rome 2007 6-2, 6-3: 60%-40%

59%
Djokovic – Federer Dubai 2011 6-3, 6-3: 59%-41%
Federer – Djokovic Australian Open 2007 6-2, 7-5, 6-3: 59%-41%
Federer – Djokovic Cincinnati 2009 6-1, 7-5: 59%-41%
Federer – Djokovic World Tour Finals 2011 6-1, 6-4: 59%-41%
Federer – Murray US Open 2008 6-2 7-5, 6-2: 59%-41%
Nadal – Djokovic French Open 2007 7-5, 6-4, 6-2: 59%-41%
Nadal – Murray Hamburg 2008 6-3, 6-3: 59%-41%

58%
Djokovic - Federer French Open 2012 6-4, 7-5, 6-3: 58%-42%
Djokovic – Murray Australian Open 2011 6-4, 6-2, 6-3: 58%-42%
Djokovic – Nadal Cincinnati 2008 6-1, 7-5: 58%-42%
Djokovic – Nadal Indian Wells 2008 6-3, 6-2: 58%-42%
Djokovic – Nadal Montreal 2007 7-5, 6-3: 58%-42%
Murray – Djokovic Miami 2009 6-2, 7-5: 58%-42%
Murray – Federer Shanghai 2010 6-3, 6-2: 58%-42%
Murray – Nadal Rotterdam 2009 6-3, 4-6, 6-0: 58%-42%
Nadal – Djokovic French Open 2006 6-4, 6-4 RET: 58%-42%

57%
Djokovic – Federer Miami 2009 3-6, 6-2, 6-3: 57%-43%
Djokovic – Nadal Cincinnati 2009 6-1, 6-4: 57%-43%
Federer – Nadal World Tour Finals 2010 6-3, 3-6, 6-1: 57%-43%
Nadal – Djokovic Indian Wells 2007 6-2, 7-5 57%-43%

56%
Federer – Djokovic Monte Carlo 2008 6-3, 3-2 RET: 56%-44%
Federer – Murray World Tour Finals 2009 3-6, 6-3, 6-1: 56%-44%
Federer – Nadal Hamburg 2007 2-6, 6-2, 6-0: 56%-44%
Murray – Djokovic Dubai 2012 6-2, 7-5: 56%-44%
Murray – Federer Indian Wells 2009 6-3, 4-6, 6-1: 56%-44%
Murray – Nadal Toronto 2010 6-3, 6-4: 56%-44%
Murray – Nadal Australian Open 2010 6-3, 7-6(2), 3-0 RET: 56%-44%
Nadal – Djokovic World Tour Finals 2010 7-5, 6-2: 56%-44%
Nadal – Djokovic Rome 2009 7-6(2), 6-2: 56%-44%
Nadal – Djokovic Masters Cup 2007 6-4, 6-4: 56%-44%
Nadal – Federer Monte Carlo 2007 6-4, 6-4: 56%-44%
Nadal – Federer Miami 2004 6-3, 6-3: 56%-44%
Nadal – Federer Monte Carlo 2008 7-5, 7-5: 56%-44%
Nadal – Murray Monte Carlo 2009 6-2, 7-6(4): 56%-44%

55%
Djokovic – Nadal Madrid 2011 7-5, 6-4: 55%-45%
Djokovic – Nadal World Tour Finals 2009 7-6(5), 6-3: 55%-45%
Djokovic – Nadal US Open 2011 6-2, 6-4, 6-7(3), 6-1: 55%-45%
Djokovic – Nadal Miami 2007 6-3, 6-4: 55%-45%
Federer – Djokovic Dubai 2007 6-3, 6-7(6), 6-3: 55%-45%
Federer – Djokovic US Open 2008 6-3, 5-7, 7-5, 6-2: 55%-45%
Federer – Murray Bangkok 2005 6-3, 7-5: 55%-45%
Federer – Murray Dubai 2012 7-5, 6-4: 55%-45%
Federer – Nadal Wimbledon 2006 6-0, 7-6(5), 6-7(2), 6-3: 55%-45%
Federer - Nadal Indian Wells 2012 6-3 6-4
Murray – Djokovic Toronto 2008 6-3, 7-6(3): 55%-45%
Murray – Federer Doha 2009 6-7(6), 6-2, 6-2: 55%-45%
Murray – Nadal US Open 2008 6-2, 7-6(5), 4-6, 6-4: 55%-45%
Nadal – Djokovic French Open 2008 6-4, 6-2, 7-6(3): 55%-45%
Nadal – Djokovic Monte Carlo 2009 6-3, 2-6, 6-1: 55%-45%
Nadal – Federer Madrid 2011 5-7, 6-1, 6-3: 55%-45%
Nadal – Murray US Open 2011 6-4, 6-2, 3-6, 6-2: 55%-45%
Nadal – Murray Wimbledon 2011 5-7, 6-2, 6-2, 6-4: 55%-45%
Nadal – Murray French Open 2011 6-4, 7-5, 6-4: 55%-45%

54%
Djokovic – Federer Australian Open 2008 7-5, 6-3, 7-6(5): 54%-46%
Djokovic - Federer Rome 2012 6-2, 7-6(4): 54-46%
Djokovic – Murray Rome 2011 6-1, 3-6, 7-6(2): 54%-46%
Djokovic - Murray Australian Open 2012 6-3, 3-6, 6-7(4), 6-1, 7-5
Djokovic – Nadal Rome 2011 6-4, 6-4: 54%-46%
Djokovic – Nadal Indian Wells 2011 4-6, 6-3, 6-2: 54%-46%
Djokovic – Nadal Miami 2011 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(4): 54%-46&
Djokovic – Nadal Wimbledon 2011 6-4, 6-1, 1-6, 6-3: 54%-46%
Federer – Djokovic US Open 2007 7-6(4), 7-6(2), 6-4: 54%-46%
Federer – Djokovic US Open 2009 7-6(3), 7-5, 7-5: 54%-46%
Federer – Djokovic Shanghai 2010 7-5, 6-4: 54%-46%
Federer – Murray Cincinnati 2009 6-2, 7-6(8): 54%-46%
Federer – Murray Australian Open 2010 6-3, 6-4, 7-6(11): 54%-46%
Federer – Nadal Masters Cup 2006 6-4, 7-5: 54%-46%
Murray – Federer Dubai 2008 6-7(6), 6-3, 6-4: 54%-46%
Murray – Federer Toronto 2010 7-5, 7-5: 54%-46%
Nadal – Djokovic US Open 2010 604, 5-7, 6-4, 6-2: 54%-46%
Nadal – Federer French Open 2007 6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4: 54%-46%
Nadal – Murray Monte Carlo 2011 6-4, 2-6, 6-1: 54%-46%
Nadal – Murray Toronto 2008 7-6(2), 6-3: 54%-46%

53%
Djokovic – Federer Rome 2009 4-6, 6-3, 6-3: 53%-47%
Djokovic – Federer Basel 2009 6-4, 4-6, 6-2: 53%-47%
Djokovic – Federer US Open 2010 5-7, 6-1, 5-7, 6-2, 7-5: 53%-47%
Djokovic – Federer US Open 2011 6-7(7), 4-6, 6-3, 6-2, 7-5: 53%-47%
Federer – Djokovic Monte Carlo 2006 6-3, 2-6, 6-3: 53%-47%
Federer – Djokovic Toronto 2010 6-1, 3-6, 7-5: 53%-47%
Federer – Djokovic Basel 2010 6-4, 3-6, 6-1: 53%-47%
Federer – Djokovic French Open 2011 7-6(5), 6-3, 3-6, 7-6(5): 53%-47%
Federer – Nadal Madrid 2009 6-4, 6-4: 53%-47%
Murray – Djokovic Cincinnati 2008 7-6(4), 7-6(5): 53%-47%
Murray – Federer Cincinnati 2006 7-5, 6-4: 53%-47%
Murray – Federer Madrid 2008 3-6, 6-3, 7-5: 53%-47%
Nadal – Djokovic Wimbledon 2007 3-6, 6-1, 4-1 RET 53%-47%
Nadal – Federer French Open 2005 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3: 53%-47%
Nadal – Federer Monte Carlo 2006 6-2, 6-7(2), 6-3, 7-6(5): 53%-47%
Nadal – Federer French Open 2011 7-5, 7-6(3), 5-7, 6-1: 53%-47%
Nadal – Federer French Open 2006 1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6(4): 53%-47%
Nadal – Murray Australian Open 2007 6-7(3), 6-4, 4-6, 6-3, 6-1: 53%-47%

52%
Djokovic – Federer Indian Wells 2011 6-3, 3-6, 6-2: 52%-48%
Djokovic – Federer Australian Open 2011 7-6(3), 7-5, 6-4: 52%-48%
Djokovic - Nadal Australian Open 2012 5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-7(5), 7-5
Federer – Nadal Miami 2005 2-6, 6-7(4), 7-6(5), 6-3, 6-1: 52%-48%
Federer – Nadal Wimbledon 2007 7-6(7), 4-6, 7-6(4), 2-6, 6-2: 52%-48%
Murray – Federer Masters Cup 2008 4-6, 7-6(3), 7-5: 52%-48%
Nadal – Djokovic Queens 2008 7-6(6), 7-5: 52%-48%
Nadal – Djokovic Hamburg 2008 7-5, 2-6, 6-2: 52%-48%
Nadal - Djokovic French Open 2012 6-4, 6-3, 2-6, 7-5: 52%-48%
Nadal – Federer Hamburg 2008 7-5, 6-7(3), 6-3 52%-48%
Nadal - Federer Australian Open 2012 6-7(5), 6-2, 7-6(5), 6-4
Nadal – Murray Wimbledon 2010 6-4, 7-6(6), 6-4: 52%-48%

51%
Nadal – Federer Madrid 2010 6-4, 7-6(5): 51%-49%
Nadal – Federer Wimbledon 2008 6-4, 6-4, 6-7(5), 6-7(8), 9-7: 51%-49%
Nadal – Murray Madrid 2007 7-6(5), 6-4: 51%-49%

50%
Djokovic – Murray Madrid 2006 1-6, 7-5, 6-3: 50%-50%
Nadal – Federer Australian Open 2009 7-5, 3-6, 7-6(3), 3-6, 6-2: 50%-50%

49%
Djokovic – Federer Montreal 2007 7-6(2), 2-6, 7-6(2): 49%-51%
Nadal – Federer Rome 2006 6-7(0), 7-6(5), 6-4, 2-6, 7-6(5): 49%-51%

48%
Nadal – Djokovic Madrid 2009 3-6, 7-6(5), 7-6(9): 48%-52%
Nadal – Murray World Tour Finals 2010 7-6(5), 3-6, 7-6(6): 48%-52%

47%
Nadal – Federer Dubai 2006 2-6, 6-4, 6-4: 47%-53%



Stats unavailable:
Federer – Djokovic Davis Cup 2006 6-3, 6-2, 6-3
Nadal – Djokovic Davis Cup 2009 6-4, 6-4, 6-1
Nadal – Djokovic Olympics 2008 6-4, 1-6, 6-4

Naudio Spanlatine
11-25-2011, 05:03 PM
AMAZING MATCHES:worship:

sexybeast
11-25-2011, 05:04 PM
Shows you Federer is mentally weaker than Nadal/Djokovic and his stats against Nadal in French Open is just mindblowingly similar around 53-47 except in 2008.

I doubt Federer could defeat Nadal or Djokovic winning less than 50%. At the very least Federer needs 52-48 to defeat anyone, that match in Wimbledon 2007 is the strongest mental match he ever played.

coonster14
11-25-2011, 05:30 PM
I like this thread. Great work :worship:

Johnny Groove
11-25-2011, 05:46 PM
Great work and stats :yeah:

Damn, look at all of Nadal's escapes, 50% or less.

Dubai 06 vs. Fed, WTF 2010 RR vs. Murray, Madrid 09 SF vs. Nole, Fedal Rome 06, and the AO 09 final. Even the Wimbledon epic in 08 was 51-49.

Roamed
11-25-2011, 05:52 PM
I like this thread. Great work :worship:

Thanks! :)

I've added stats about the relative closeness of various results, although it's slightly skewed as it gives each match equal weighting whether it was a close 6-3 6-3 or a close 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, but I couldn't be bothered to count up each point :p Hopefully it's still useful.


Djokovic def. Murray - Average points won 58.2%
Murray def. Nadal - Average points won 57.0%
Murray def. Djokovic - Average points won 56.8%
Federer def. Nadal - Average points won 56.3%
Federer def. Murray - Average points won 56.3%
Djokovic def. Nadal - Average points won 56.2%
Federer def. Djokovic - Average points won 55.1%
Nadal def. Djokovic - Average points won 55.1%
Nadal def. Murray - Average points won 55.1%
Murray def. Federer - Average points won 54.3%
Nadal def. Federer - Average points won 53.7%
Djokovic def. Federer - Average points won 53.5%


From this we can see the result most likely to be a beatdown is Djokovic def. Murray; the result most likely to be close is Djokovic def. Federer, followed closely by Nadal def. Federer. Fed's three 'loss' matchups are the closest.

Naudio Spanlatine
11-25-2011, 06:13 PM
this is the best thread ever:D

true great talents:banana:

Sham Kay
11-25-2011, 06:48 PM
Genuinely great stats for statmunchers to chew on. Practically endless amounts of discussion points. Hopefully you'll be updating as these 4 continue their rivalries, I imagine there will be alot more matches between them over the next few years.

Arakasi
11-25-2011, 07:07 PM
Thanks! :)

I've added stats about the relative closeness of various results, although it's slightly skewed as it gives each match equal weighting whether it was a close 6-3 6-3 or a close 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, but I couldn't be bothered to count up each point :p Hopefully it's still useful.


Djokovic def. Murray - Average points won 58.2%
Murray def. Nadal - Average points won 57.0%
Murray def. Djokovic - Average points won 56.8%
Federer def. Nadal - Average points won 56.3%
Federer def. Murray - Average points won 56.3%
Djokovic def. Nadal - Average points won 56.2%
Federer def. Djokovic - Average points won 55.1%
Nadal def. Djokovic - Average points won 55.1%
Nadal def. Murray - Average points won 55.1%
Murray def. Federer - Average points won 54.3%
Nadal def. Federer - Average points won 53.7%
Djokovic def. Federer - Average points won 53.5%


Federer the hardest to dominate? Or the weakest mentally?

Roamed
11-25-2011, 07:14 PM
Federer the hardest to dominate? Or the weakest mentally?

I'd say a bit of both. Regarding mental issues, as an example, if you look at all of Roger and Rafa's matches, I counted it up, Roger has had *more* break points than Rafa - he's just converted a significant fraction less. Regardless of whether or not it's his weaker mentality that's making him lose these matches, however, you can't deny he is statistically less likely to get thrashed, which is good.

Edit: Yeah I just confirmed this.

Federer vs Nadal:

Federer has had 228 Break Points, has converted 83; a percentage of 36.4%
Nadal has had 226 Break Points, has converted 105; a percentage of 46.4%

thrust
11-25-2011, 07:15 PM
I would think that winning 4 games in 3 sets was worse than losing 3 games in 2 sets, despite the points % was. Games won is more important than points won, IMO.

RogerFedererNo1
11-25-2011, 08:26 PM
I'd say a bit of both. Regarding mental issues, as an example, if you look at all of Roger and Rafa's matches, I counted it up, Roger has had *more* break points than Rafa - he's just converted a significant fraction less. Regardless of whether or not it's his weaker mentality that's making him lose these matches, however, you can't deny he is statistically less likely to get thrashed, which is good.

Edit: Yeah I just confirmed this.

Federer vs Nadal:

Federer has had 228 Break Points, has converted 83; a percentage of 36.4%
Nadal has had 226 Break Points, has converted 105; a percentage of 46.4%


I think that Nadal´s mentally stronger than Federer in their matches but Nadal has a big adavantage on break points due to being a Lefty. His serves to Fed´s backhand makes it a lot easier for him. In my opinion it´s very interesting that Federer had 100% BP conversation in his last two wins (Madrid 09 (2/2), London 2010 (3/3)) and Tuesday he converted the first three break points, too.

stewietennis
11-25-2011, 08:34 PM
Does being a lefty factor into it? 0-15, 0-30 and 0-40: Fed would have gotten to that Break Point opportunity even when on the receiving end of a lefty serve. If Rafa works his way back up to deuce, his serve wouldn't have been the deciding factor right?

RogerFedererNo1
11-25-2011, 08:37 PM
Most break points are played on advantage side, so Nadal can serve to Fed´s backhand .. but anyway, that does not explain 1/17 :(

hipolymer
11-25-2011, 09:15 PM
It's crazy how almost all of the matches are near 50%. Just shows you that only a few points decide the victor.

ApproachShot
11-25-2011, 09:47 PM
Thank you very much for your hard work.

"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Roamed again"

alter ego
11-25-2011, 09:54 PM
Shows you Federer is mentally weaker than Nadal/Djokovic and his stats against Nadal in French Open is just mindblowingly similar around 53-47 except in 2008.

I doubt Federer could defeat Nadal or Djokovic winning less than 50%. At the very least Federer needs 52-48 to defeat anyone, that match in Wimbledon 2007 is the strongest mental match he ever played.

Your interpretation is ridiculous. Federer wins more points in some matches he loses because his serve allows him to win love games. The same goes for other big servers.

rickcastle
11-26-2011, 02:01 AM
Federer the hardest to dominate? Or the weakest mentally?

Both. Federer is extremely hard to dominate, iirc, he was only bageled 4x in his career and 3 of those coming before he started winning slams. Nadal was only able to bagel him one time but he was able to bagel Nadal 3 times.

Murray is still the mentally weakest out of the four. But when it comes to Nadal, Federer's brain farts are legendary.

tennis_analyst
04-15-2012, 06:43 PM
MOVED TO http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=200697

I aggregated all my links, data description, and examples in this single post:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=200697

TennisOnWood
04-15-2012, 06:47 PM
Damn good job!!

Roamed
04-15-2012, 06:56 PM
Amazing work :worship:

xdrewitdajx
04-15-2012, 07:14 PM
excellent work

ossie
04-15-2012, 07:30 PM
it is very appreciated

duong
04-15-2012, 10:00 PM
that's great !!!! :banana::rocker::clap2:

The mistakes in 2003 seem to be on return, and that's exactly like the note I had made that the average stats of points won on return in the ATP Ricoh matchfacts were clearly wrong in 2003 : they were very high for many many players comparing to the other years ;)

Further updates will be greatly appreciated ;) (even though I feel like doing that work for myself : now I can start from your file ;) )

PS : French tennis fans (I'm French ;)) seem to be very fond of tennis stats :lol:
or maybe you are the same guy who made the website http://live-tennis.eu/ ?

NYCtennisfan
04-16-2012, 02:44 AM
Tremendous effort. This must have taken quite an effort to put together. There's a lot of quality stats we can glean from this repository of statistics. The ATP site lists, for example, a player's total points won % for his entire career and for individual seasons. Someone can easily calculate total % of points won for blocks of time, e.g., from 2004 through 2008 for Federer (his time at #1) and compare that particular block to other blocks of time. The same can be done for return points won, break points saved, etc. Great work.

Alex999
04-16-2012, 04:26 AM
absolutely amazing work. Thank you. I do agree, this should be a sticky.

duong
04-16-2012, 07:24 AM
Someone can easily calculate total % of points won for blocks of time, e.g., from 2004 through 2008 for Federer (his time at #1) and compare that particular block to other blocks of time.

I've made stats for the highest number of points reached by player since 2000, and calculating the ranking points with the old ranking system (2000-2008) from 2009 (only for top-15 players or so).

I'll put it in the statistics section of the forum one day, I found it interesting.

However I think the source which has still not been looked at enough is the ATP Ricoh matchfacts : they have it since 1991, which is great !

However, people have to know that these stats are wrong for 2003 for points won on return.

duong
04-16-2012, 07:33 AM
As much as I love these stats, I'm not sure it's good to make it sticky because there's not much to say about it, it's just there for use : there is a "statistics" section in the forum which has other great data ;)

And I still think the topic which would desperately need a sticky thread is the Olympics : I guess the mods will do it one day, but doing it earlier would have helped :shrug:

tennis_analyst
04-16-2012, 09:06 AM
I've made stats for the highest number of points reached by player since 2000, and calculating the ranking points with the old ranking system (2000-2008) from 2009 (only for top-15 players or so).

I'll put it in the statistics section of the forum one day, I found it interesting.

However I think the source which has still not been looked at enough is the ATP Ricoh matchfacts : they have it since 1991, which is great !

However, people have to know that these stats are wrong for 2003 for points won on return.

Great!

I wanted to mention that I have these ATP matchfacts stats (http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Top-Matchfacts.aspx) and will share them in a while.

Also, I wanted to acknowledge what you said about ATP 2003 return data. Somebody screwed up the job on their side, here are some stats averaged for top 50 players each year:

http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/hardtimeseries.jpg
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/claytimeseries.jpg

2003 points returned show an abnormality

Fortunately, in my file, these errors are easy to catch (the error lines are in grey). I just did some checks that have to add up for a legit match stats and if they don't, then it's an error

duong
04-16-2012, 09:20 AM
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/hardtimeseries.jpg
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/claytimeseries.jpg

2003 points returned show an abnormality

Fortunately, in my file, these errors are easy to catch (the error lines are in grey). I just did some checks that have to add up for a legit match stats and if they don't, then it's an error

yes I saw the checking you had made about Federer (who is the only one concerned) in 2003 : great work :yeah:

Thanks for the graph, which is interesting to look at some trends (I guess you could make an article about that ;) , for instance the increase in % of service games won on clay in 2008-2009 is astonishing :eek: ) and also confirms what I had guessed by looking at the 20 top-returners in 2003 who were all much better than other years.

However, the stat for "return games won" looks correct from your graph : it seems it's only a problem for the points won on return (if I remember well, there's the same problem about points won returning the second serve)

I've thought for long that someone should warn the ATP about that if corrections are possible, but I've not made this effort.

Maybe with this graph and the observations you made about Federer, and maybe the observation I made about the top-returners that year, it would be good to email the ATP to warn them.

OR maybe someone has already done that :shrug:

tennis_analyst
04-16-2012, 10:07 AM
Just out of curiosity, I decided to look at the biggest losses of the top 4 players (their biggest wins are not too interesting because they administered a lot of blowouts in early rounds of tournaments)

The data is available here: http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=11931276&highlight=#post11931276

Federer:
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/biggestlossesofFederer.jpg

Nadal:
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/biggestlossesofNadal.jpg

Djokovic:
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/biggestlossesofDjokovic.jpg

Murray:
http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u472/gagaden/biggestlossesofMurray.jpg

Chase Visa
04-16-2012, 10:50 AM
Gun work.

I understand that was back in the day, but lol @ some of Federer's worst losses.

DjokerFan3
04-16-2012, 12:33 PM
Top stuff :worship:

Definitely will check out all these stats. :)

tennis_analyst
04-16-2012, 01:11 PM
UPDATE: Today (16apr2012) I added Sampras and Agassi

BroTree123
04-16-2012, 02:21 PM
That's quite insane. Good work :yeah:.

TennisOnWood
04-16-2012, 02:47 PM
Unforutnately, ATP numbers from 90's are often very wrong but still great job

Certinfy
04-16-2012, 03:03 PM
This is unreal! :eek:

Absolutely stunning work. :worship:

Mark Lenders
04-16-2012, 03:19 PM
Awesome work. I can't even begin to imagine the time and dedication it took. It'd be great if you kept adding players, but this is awesome already.

duong
04-16-2012, 03:51 PM
Awesome work. I can't even begin to imagine the time and dedication it took.

It seems that tennis_analyst found a way to do it quite automatically ("the job was done by a computer"), which surely decreases the time spent and also allows less errors.

Quite as the guy who made livetennis.eu also uses computer-programs to update his rankings and race, which is great :yeah:

tennis_analyst
04-16-2012, 04:07 PM
It seems that tennis_analyst found a way to do it quite automatically ("the job was done by a computer"), which surely decreases the time spent and also allows less errors.

Quite as the guy who made livetennis.eu also uses computer-programs to update his rankings and race, which is great :yeah:

Thank you all for your comments and kind words.

Indeed, it took me a couple of days to write the program but now I can scan for data automatically. So the errors in the data are likely to be those by the ATP itself. Fortunately, they are easy to catch (also automatically) because in erroneous stats certain things don't add up (e.g., total serve points won are not equal to points won on first and points won on second serve) or don't make sense (e.g., percentage of points won > 100%). Also fortunately, these errors are concentrated in one year (2003) and don't affect many matches.

P.S. To answer the question, I am not running livetennis.eu but often use it and think it's great

duong
04-16-2012, 04:54 PM
Thank you all for your comments and kind words.

Indeed, it took me a couple of days to write the program but now I can scan for data automatically. So the errors in the data are likely to be those by the ATP itself. Fortunately, they are easy to catch (also automatically) because in erroneous stats certain things don't add up (e.g., total serve points won are not equal to points won on first and points won on second serve) or don't make sense (e.g., percentage of points won > 100%). Also fortunately, these errors are concentrated in one year (2003) and don't affect many matches.

P.S. To answer the question, I am not running livetennis.eu but often use it and think it's great

Thank you French people are great statisticians :yeah:

It also means that now you could do that for a huge number of players :lol:

I'm not that good at automatically getting data from a website and usually catch my data going to each page and writing the numbers, and surely your method is 1000% more effective :yeah:

tennis_analyst
04-17-2012, 06:01 AM
UPDATE: Today (17apr2012) I added Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, and Kuerten (the stars of early 00)

Don't forget about my other post with all the ATP Ricoh match facts:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=200169

dodo
04-17-2012, 07:22 AM
Gun work.

I understand that was back in the day, but lol @ some of Federer's worst losses.
Yeah, some high level clowning right there.
Interestingly, there are very few full on clown results in the years after he broke through, whereas for the other top4 it seems to be much more spread out.

tennis_analyst
04-17-2012, 12:17 PM
Yeah, some high level clowning right there.
Interestingly, there are very few full on clown results in the years after he broke through, whereas for the other top4 it seems to be much more spread out.

True, I still think that Federer's match against Fish in 2008 was the worst I've seen him play (after he became number 1). His losses to Nadal (Miami, RG) and Djokovic (Dubai) were also bad but they were against quality opponents.

duong
04-17-2012, 01:57 PM
True, I still think that Federer's match against Fish in 2008 was the worst I've seen him play (after he became number 1). His losses to Nadal (Miami, RG) and Djokovic (Dubai) were also bad but they were against quality opponents.

yes, statistically speaking, but Fish played very well that day (and he took Djokovic to 3 sets in the final : that's the best I've seen Fish play), I think Fed played worse against Nadal in Miami than against Fish in Indian Wells.

And even worse that semifinal against Djokovic in Miami 2009 in the wind when he broke his racket :facepalm:

RandomChiller
04-17-2012, 02:48 PM
UPDATE: Today (17apr2012) I added Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, and Kuerten (the stars of early 00)

Don't forget about my other post with all the ATP Ricoh match facts:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=200169

Ferrero was also a star at the early 00 :)

amirbachar
04-18-2012, 01:29 PM
Hi, can you please give us the code that generates the stats?
If not, can you please put the all the matches in one tab delimited file, for all players and not just the one in your file?

Thanks,
Amir

Roamed
04-22-2012, 01:45 PM
Updated with all Top 4 matches this year. Today's win was Rafa's most lopsided victory over Djokovic ever, and joint second most lopsided win over one of the Top 4 opponent ever. 63%-37%.

Ash86
04-22-2012, 02:06 PM
Updated with all Top 4 matches this year. Today's win was Rafa's most lopsided victory over Djokovic ever, and joint second most lopsided win over a Top 4 opponent ever. 63%-37%.

Thanks for the stat. Do we know if it was the shortest match between the two? (Apart from where one person retired...)

Would be funny if the longest match they ever played was followed by the shortest match between them...

Roamed
04-22-2012, 02:21 PM
Thanks for the stat. Do we know if it was the shortest match between the two? (Apart from where one person retired...)

Would be funny if the longest match they ever played was followed by the shortest match between them...

It wasn't quite the shortest - it was 78 minutes long, and Nole's 6-2 6-3 win over Rafa in Paris 2009 was 77 minutes :) Almost though!

duong
04-22-2012, 09:13 PM
Roger has had *more* break points than Rafa - he's just converted a significant fraction less.

Federer vs Nadal:

Federer has had 228 Break Points, has converted 83; a percentage of 36.4%
Nadal has had 226 Break Points, has converted 105; a percentage of 46.4%


it's a well-known fact that lefthanders have a breakpoint conversion because breakpoints are more often played on the ad-side (however it doesn't say everything : Djokovic has a much better breakpoint-to-points won ratio than Nadal)

Fed even said that it's the main advantage of being a lefthander in his opinion.

It's especially a problem for Federer who doesn't have a good backhand return and is especially troubled by Nadal's serve.

Nole fan
04-24-2012, 10:14 AM
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1140119-roger-federer-rafael-nadal-novak-djokovic-whos-best-in-pressure-situations"]Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic: Who's Best in Pressure Situations? (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1140119-roger-federer-rafael-nadal-novak-djokovic-whos-best-in-pressure-situations/page/3)

By Anders H

Federer Is at His Best When It Comes to Finals

Roger Federer leads the competition between him, Rafa, Novak and Murray when it comes to winning finals. He's won 70.9 percent of all the finals he's been in and is ninth on the all-time list. Rafa is at 68.7 percent and 14th on the all-time list.

Djokovic is quickly catching up to Rafa at 68.2 percent and is No. 15 on the list. And Murray is at 17th with a very decent 66.7 percent, winning two of every three finals.

The surprise in this category is really who is second on the overall list. Would you have guessed Nikolay Davydenko at 77.8 percent? I wouldn't. Thomas Muster leads with an amazing 81.5 percent; winning 44 out of 54 finals.

All these numbers can obviously still change a bit. At a certain time in his career, Federer was winning each and every final he participated in. If he plays on for five more years, it'll be hard to keep winning seven of every ten finals. Nadal has enjoyed that dominance too and Djokovic is in the midst of his, where he wins every final he gets to.

Currently, Federer leads this pressure situation by a relatively firm three percent margin.

Federer: The King of Tie-Breaks

The current top four dominate the all-time tie-break list and Federer leads it, winning 66.1 percent of his tiebreaks. Novak Djokovic is third at 63.6 percent, just 0.1 percent below Pete Sampras. And Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray?

They are six and seven with 61.7 and 60.6 percent, respectively.

The tie-breaker often favors the big servers and Federer is the best server among the top four. John Isner and Andy Roddick are fourth and fifth on this list, which shows just how important the serve can be in a tie-break.

Djokovic' position as a clear second among the top four and dead even with Pete Sampras, aka Mr. Serve, is pretty impressive.

But Federer still leads this pressure situation pretty convincingly.

Best at Saving Break Points? Roger Federer Again

Again, this is a category that aids the server and again Federer leads it among the top four. This time however, he's 'only' sixth on the all-time list, saving 67 of the break points he faces. Ivo Karlovic, Andy Roddick, Pete Sampras and John Isner top the list.

Rafa is ranked 11th at 66 percent, Novak is ranked 14th at 65 percent and Murray is ranked 64th at 62 percent.

The race is pretty tight between the top four, but Roger just manages to edge out the other players. Can he continue to do so in the upcoming pressure situations? Read on.

Master of Converting Break Points: Rafael Nadal (and Novak Djokovic)

Nadal knows better than most when it is time to turn the heat on. This is illustrated in this category, where he leads the top four in terms of converting break points. He's fourth on the all-time list with 45 percent and first when it comes to clay.

But breathing down his neck is a familiar foe. The flexible Djokovic has a way of getting the serves back in play almost as fast as they come at him. This has led him to a position just after Rafa on the all-time list with 45 percent as well.

And Roger and Murray? Not near the top. Federer converts 42 percent and is down at 75th on the all- time list. Murray is above with 43 percent and a position at 25th.

Djokovic Runs Away with the Glory in the End

Djokovic is master of the deciding set, winning 70.1 percent when the match goes to a deciding third or fifth set. That doesn't come anywhere near No. 1 though.

Björn Borg was famous for his physique and his clutchness and with good reason. He's an amazing 75.9 percent in the decider.

Rafa is a very good fourth, winning 69.1 percent. And Murray a good eighth at 68.1 percent.

Federer is down at 31th, winning a 'mere' 63.6 of the deciding sets. A possible explanation for this low number is that he rarely had to play deciding sets in his prime and now that he's older, he's just not good enough in the close matches.

A related explanation is that Federer only needs to play deciding sets when he's not at his best—and conversely loses. Whatever the reason, the other big three outshine Federer by a margin in terms of clutchness in this category.

Master of the Fifth? Who Else but Rafa

In tennis, the biggest task for years has been to defeat Rafa on clay in a best-of-five match. Nadal has lost but one best-of-five match on clay in his entire career. And that didn't even go to five sets, as Robin Söderling took him out in four in the French Open 2009.

Rafa's overall record in the fifth is pretty darn good, despite the fact that Novak has made it slightly worse with his Australian Open victory. Rafa is fourth on the all-time list at 78.9 percent, just behind Borg at 80.0.

But he's pretty far ahead of Novak at 75.0, who's ranked seventh, and is light years ahead of Federer, who's 114th, winning 52.9 percent of his fifth sets. Murray is smack in the middle at 30th, winning 66.7 percent.

Here, Rafa's and Novak's records are really great and show grit, determination and stamina. Is there an explanation for Roger's poor status, behind journeymen?

There are at least two possible explanations that may be intertwined a bit:

a.) Roger only has to play five sets when he's not at his absolute best. He didn't play many during his invicible years from 2004-2007—and lost two of his four matches in 2005 in the fifth to a Safin and a Nalbandian on fire. He was pretty darn good against Safin, but he lost the last three against Nalby after coming to the tournament on crutches.

b.) He's not mentally strong or physically fit for the fifth set. He chokes.

Whatever the reason, Rafa and Djokovic are true pressure kings in the fifth set, as evidenced by Djokovic's last two US Open victories over Federer.

Winner? Federer, Nadal and Djokovic

s evidenced from the slide show, the players are very close to one another in ability. Murray doesn't lead any category, so he's the odd one out—as he also happens to be in the Big Four.

With Federer leading three categories, Nadal two (but one almost dead even with Djokovic) and Djokovic one (or one and a half when counting the one Rafa leads), one could argue that Federer is indeed the master in pressure situations.

But that would be overstating his case. The show highlights different qualities. Federer beats the rest when it comes to finals, tiebreaks and saving breakpoints. But the better returners—Novak, Rafa and Murray—are better at converting break points.

And the better grinders—again, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray—are (much) better in the deciding set and the fifth set. Federer's absence from the top of these categories results in him not being a clear winner in pressure points.

These stats are reflective of this specific time in their careers, where Novak is in the smack of his prime; where Rafa still should be in his; where we are still waiting to see if Murray gets a real prime; and where Federer continues to amaze with his longevity.

They can and will change a bit over the course of the next years. Moreover, when it comes to finals, Federer has, as mentioned, had a period where he won every final he played. Rafa has had that too, in particular on clay, where he created his great final record and won 32 of his 46 tournaments. These things show up on the stats.

The conclusion? These players are the best of the best and as the stats prove, they all, already, rank pretty well in tennis all-time history.

duong
04-24-2012, 11:00 AM
The tie-breaker often favors the big servers.

That may be a little bit true because a good serve helps on pressure points, but there's a phenomenon going the other way and which KArlovic proves well : it's tough to win 4 points in a game to break a big server, however in a tie-break you may need only one mini-break to win the tie-break. That's why Karlovic is around 50% tie-breaks won. If people talk about Isner, well to me it's clear that Isner mentally is on top of the game with the world best, it's not only the serve, I've admired his mental for long.

Actually Voo de Mar has Sampras a little bit lower (62.8%) since the ATP stats apparently missed some tie-breaks in the beginning of his carreer, see Voo's great thread in the Stats section of the forum.

What's surprising about Federer in tie-breaks is that his stats have been that constant on top every year since 1991, and he doesn't get worse getting older. Also he's especially good in tight tie-breaks 7-5 or >=6-6.

Djokovic had got close to him at one moment but has declined in recent years for that point.

In my opinion, success in tie-breaks is especially related with the confidence which a player has, which may explain why players are used to going on streaks for tie-breaks won or lost (Davydenko for instance had both). And that is obviously one quality of Federer's mental.

Best at Saving Break Points? Roger Federer Again

Again, this is a category that aids the server and again Federer leads it among the top four.

here yes it's clearly a stat which helps the server.

Actually, I've made stats comparing points won on breakpoints and breakpoints won, to make the difference : I had posted it somewhere, don't have time now,
but the result is very clear and also quite constant since the start of their carreer (both on serve and return, and last year was not good for that for Djokovic)

Djokovic > Nadal > Federer > Murray

... despite the fact that Nadal should be supposed to be the leader because of being a lefthander, which clearly helps on breakpoints because of many of them being on ad-side.

However, I think this stat also may be related to the way the players go from high concentration to too much relaxing and way back :

- it seems to me that Djokovic alternates a lot between periods of high concentration and relaxing moments inside one game, if he's ahead he tries to relax to save energy but if he needs he regroups his concentration very quickly effectively

- Federer on the other side rather goes by periods of one or few games, he can have one bad game and lose his serve or be on a momentum and have a few strong games, it's like his mind just flies away for a game period, these Fed's lapses are clearly one of Fed's main drawbacks, which also explain why Fed is always better positioned for the number of points won than for the number of games won, it's the opposite for Djokovic ... and I insist : this difference between success in games won and in points won is a very different stat from the stat about breakpoints, it's more like I just said, about the length of their concentration/lapses periods, which explains why Fed is used to winning or losing games 40-0 while Djokovic is more used with 40-30s to be schematic.

Nadal has more constant concentration than Djokovic then has less of a tendency to have to regroup to win 40-30, although he has the huge advantage comparing to Federer to avoid having long lapses losing his serve. And that can also lead in him appearing less effective for the stat about breakpoints won comparing to the % of points won on serve/return.

Nadal's stats on breakpoints on return have clearly been helped by his claycourt performance, which is why this disappears when one looks at the difference between breakpoints converted and points won on return.

Personally I think the stats about winning fifth sets are more about the physique/stamina than about the mental, which is why Nadal, Ferrer or Wawrinka perform esp. well here and which is one part of the reason why Federer performs not so well, esp. in recent years.

Fed's stats in finals have clearly been helped by the period when he didn't have to face Nadal, Murray or Djokovic in finals.

crude oil
05-14-2012, 12:37 AM
nadal, djokovic and murray are much steadier and stable players. They are less likely to make mistakes and dont take as many risks as federer. So when the matches are close and long, the more stable player will likely win out. Federer's game style is designed to outplay / blow the other guy out through hitting winners and taking risks. Nadal, novak and murray rally their way to victory. This is why roger's victories are more likely when roger is feeling good and hitting his spots on the court and his losses are because he is getting grinded down by the consistency of the other players.

crude oil
05-14-2012, 12:41 AM
That may be a little bit true because a good serve helps on pressure points, but there's a phenomenon going the other way and which KArlovic proves well : it's tough to win 4 points in a game to break a big server, however in a tie-break you may need only one mini-break to win the tie-break. That's why Karlovic is around 50% tie-breaks won. If people talk about Isner, well to me it's clear that Isner mentally is on top of the game with the world best, it's not only the serve, I've admired his mental for long.

Actually Voo de Mar has Sampras a little bit lower (62.8%) since the ATP stats apparently missed some tie-breaks in the beginning of his carreer, see Voo's great thread in the Stats section of the forum.

What's surprising about Federer in tie-breaks is that his stats have been that constant on top every year since 1991, and he doesn't get worse getting older. Also he's especially good in tight tie-breaks 7-5 or >=6-6.

Djokovic had got close to him at one moment but has declined in recent years for that point.

In my opinion, success in tie-breaks is especially related with the confidence which a player has, which may explain why players are used to going on streaks for tie-breaks won or lost (Davydenko for instance had both). And that is obviously one quality of Federer's mental.



here yes it's clearly a stat which helps the server.

Actually, I've made stats comparing points won on breakpoints and breakpoints won, to make the difference : I had posted it somewhere, don't have time now,
but the result is very clear and also quite constant since the start of their carreer (both on serve and return, and last year was not good for that for Djokovic)

Djokovic > Nadal > Federer > Murray

... despite the fact that Nadal should be supposed to be the leader because of being a lefthander, which clearly helps on breakpoints because of many of them being on ad-side.

However, I think this stat also may be related to the way the players go from high concentration to too much relaxing and way back :

- it seems to me that Djokovic alternates a lot between periods of high concentration and relaxing moments inside one game, if he's ahead he tries to relax to save energy but if he needs he regroups his concentration very quickly effectively

- Federer on the other side rather goes by periods of one or few games, he can have one bad game and lose his serve or be on a momentum and have a few strong games, it's like his mind just flies away for a game period, these Fed's lapses are clearly one of Fed's main drawbacks, which also explain why Fed is always better positioned for the number of points won than for the number of games won, it's the opposite for Djokovic ... and I insist : this difference between success in games won and in points won is a very different stat from the stat about breakpoints, it's more like I just said, about the length of their concentration/lapses periods, which explains why Fed is used to winning or losing games 40-0 while Djokovic is more used with 40-30s to be schematic.

Nadal has more constant concentration than Djokovic then has less of a tendency to have to regroup to win 40-30, although he has the huge advantage comparing to Federer to avoid having long lapses losing his serve. And that can also lead in him appearing less effective for the stat about breakpoints won comparing to the % of points won on serve/return.

Nadal's stats on breakpoints on return have clearly been helped by his claycourt performance, which is why this disappears when one looks at the difference between breakpoints converted and points won on return.

Personally I think the stats about winning fifth sets are more about the physique/stamina than about the mental, which is why Nadal, Ferrer or Wawrinka perform esp. well here and which is one part of the reason why Federer performs not so well, esp. in recent years.

Fed's stats in finals have clearly been helped by the period when he didn't have to face Nadal, Murray or Djokovic in finals.

you have some interesting insight especially about novak and roger.

i think in novak's case, its clearly a mental relaxation of some sort where he actively becomes passive and goes on "auto-pilot".

for roger, i don't necessarily think its always mental - roger has always been a rhythm player and sometimes he just loses his rhythm and that takes longer to get back, which is why he can miss in bunches but at the same time hit winners in bunches. Roger has a higher risk game and as the match goes longer, the %s dont really favor him against some of the more consistent players.