Karlovic is stupid! [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Karlovic is stupid!

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:04 PM
I wonder how can Karlovic be so stupid not to play 2 first serves. He put his first serve in with 67% and wins 86% of them.
Maths:
0.67*0.86 = 57.6%
According to the Ricoh Match Stats he only wins 52% of his second serves.
Besides having the better winning percentage, people like me would find it funny to watch if the opponent wins more points on the return when Ivo double faults then when actlually returning serve. It could also frustrate the opponent.

I think he should have a look at his statistics and decide not to second serve any more. He must be really stupid or did I make a mistake with the math?
guillermo

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:07 PM
:retard: :retard: :retard: :retard:

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:08 PM
Yeah,he serves those second on purpose,he is a robot and he can serve first serve when he wants,and he serves second only because he wants to :retard:

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:09 PM
Yeah,he serves those second on purpose,he is a robot and he can serve first serve when he wants,and he serves second only because he wants to :retard:

donīt get the irony. I am serious about that.

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:12 PM
donīt get the irony. I am serious about that.

That was the most stupid arguments I ever heard.
You are excepting him not to serve any second serves.So what he should do?
Let his opponent win a point when he misses a first serve?

jazar
04-13-2007, 07:13 PM
he probably already is hitting it as a first serve, there is soo little difference between them anyway

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:13 PM
I wonder how can Karlovic be so stupid not to play 2 first serves. He put his first serve in with 67% and wins 86% of them.
Maths:
0.67*0.86 = 57.6%
According to the Ricoh Match Stats he only wins 52% of his second serves.
Besides having the better winning percentage, people like me would find it funny to watch if the opponent wins more points on the return when Ivo double faults then when actlually returning serve. It could also frustrate the opponent.

I think he should have a look at his statistics and decide not to second serve any more. He must be really stupid or did I make a mistake with the math?
guillermo


:spit:
And I should decide to live without water from now.

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:14 PM
That was the most stupid arguments I ever heard.
You are excepting him not to serve any second serves.So what he should do?
Let his opponent win a point when he misses a first serve?

why not?
If he wins more points in average I think is clever.
But I donīt play tennis myself, maybe thatīs why I donīt understand.

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:16 PM
why not?
If he wins more points in average I think is clever.
But I don´t play tennis myself, maybe that´s why I don´t understand.

And I think he shouldn't let his opponent a free point when he misses a first serve,IMO :eek: :eek: :spit:
Well,try to play it.You'll see then.

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:16 PM
he probably already is hitting it as a first serve, there is soo little difference between them anyway

Actually I am quite new to tennis and I have seen Karlovic play only once 20 minutes. But there must be a big difference between the 1st and 2nd serve, because he only wins half of his second serves and almost all of his first serves (86% by far the best percentage of every player, as well most aces).

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:18 PM
And I think he shouldn't let his opponent a free point when he misses a first serve,IMO :eek: :eek: :spit:

Maybe my english is not perfect and thatīs why there has been a misunderstanding. I mean of course not give the opponent a free point to serve the second serve like a first serve.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Bobby
04-13-2007, 07:19 PM
I kind of follow your logic. But I assume your stats are based on one match only. Because that 67% first serves in is a very high number and 86% of points won is also very high. I don't think that he's able to keep that level in the long run. Therefore, I don't think that he should serve two first serves.

Interesting point of view though.

RickDaStick
04-13-2007, 07:19 PM
Actually I am quite new to tennis and I have seen Karlovic play only once 20 minutes. But there must be a big difference between the 1st and 2nd serve, because he only wins half of his second serves and almost all of his first serves (86% by far the best percentage of every player, as well most aces).

Not really. With his 1st serve he goes for the corners and wants aces. His
2nd serve isnt much weaker but he usually puts it in the middle of the box and it is easily returnable.

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:19 PM
Actually I am quite new to tennis and I have seen Karlovic play only once 20 minutes. But there must be a big difference between the 1st and 2nd serve, because he only wins half of his second serves and almost all of his first serves (86% by far the best percentage of every player, as well most aces).

of course there is a difference,you cant serve 1st and second serve with the same speed.

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:22 PM
I kind of follow your logic. But I assume your stats are based on one match only. Because that 67% first serves in is a very high number and 86% of points won is also very high. I don't think that he's able to keep that level in the long run. Therefore, I don't think that he should serve two first serves.

Interesting point of view though.

seems like you are the only one who understands what I mean. But just have a look at karlovic year to date stats on www.atptennis.com and you will see that is his percentages for the whole year 2007 or at least the matches he has played so far this year.

RickDaStick
04-13-2007, 07:24 PM
seems like you are the only one who understands what I mean. But just have a look at karlovic year to date stats on www.atptennis.com and you will see that is his percentages for the whole year 2007 or at least the matches he has played so far this year.

I think everyone understands what you are saying but its not really a realistic idea.

gusman890
04-13-2007, 07:35 PM
how does that make him stupid? He has a hard time winning matches already, which diss his biggest weopen after his magical backhand?

Honestly, why do you care what he does and your logic doesnt even make sense, everyone misses serves, it happens, no matter how tall you are.

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:36 PM
I think everyone understands what you are saying but its not really a realistic idea.

I donīt play tennis and I know that noone hits 2 "first serves" although of course some risk more on their second serve and make a lot of double faults and some just throw the ball in.
Anyone why is this not possible or not realistic?

gusman890
04-13-2007, 07:38 PM
bc who wants to risk a double fault which is a free point to your opponent when you can hit a 2nd and still win the point.

guillermo
04-13-2007, 07:45 PM
how does that make him stupid? He has a hard time winning matches already, which diss his biggest weopen after his magical backhand?

Honestly, why do you care what he does and your logic doesnt even make sense, everyone misses serves, it happens, no matter how tall you are.

I know that everyone misses serves but I think in the end it is just about how to win most of the service points.
I know this doesnīt exactly work like this but just imagin he could do that.
Than in average he would win 56.7%+(0.33*56.7)= 56,7+18,7= 75,4% of his serve points. Thatīs a great percentage and far better than his percentage on ricoh match facts 2007 right now.
I say again just imagine he could hit 2 "first serves", and also consider that his opponent might get frustrated which helps of course too. :)

Blue Heart24
04-13-2007, 07:50 PM
I know that everyone misses serves but I think in the end it is just about how to win most of the service points.
I know this doesnīt exactly work like this but just imagin he could do that.
Than in average he would win 56.7%+(0.33*56.7)= 56,7+18,7= 75,4% of his serve points. Thatīs a great percentage and far better than his percentage on ricoh match facts 2007 right now.
I say again just imagine he could hit 2 "first serves", and also consider that his opponent might get frustrated which helps of course too. :)

that sounds more realistic :)

Bobby
04-13-2007, 08:03 PM
I know that everyone misses serves but I think in the end it is just about how to win most of the service points.
I know this doesnīt exactly work like this but just imagin he could do that.
Than in average he would win 56.7%+(0.33*56.7)= 56,7+18,7= 75,4% of his serve points. Thatīs a great percentage and far better than his percentage on ricoh match facts 2007 right now.
I say again just imagine he could hit 2 "first serves", and also consider that his opponent might get frustrated which helps of course too. :)

I see what you mean. Based on this, he really should hit "two first serves". But I'm still not convinced that the stats concerning his serve are entirely correct and/or cover a period long enough.

Burrow
04-13-2007, 08:20 PM
:haha: :confused:

Jim Courier
04-13-2007, 09:03 PM
That was the most stupid arguments I ever heard.
You are excepting him not to serve any second serves.So what he should do?
Let his opponent win a point when he misses a first serve?
You didn't even get his (stupid) point..

Chip_s_m
04-13-2007, 09:32 PM
I see what you mean. Based on this, he really should hit "two first serves". But I'm still not convinced that the stats concerning his serve are entirely correct and/or cover a period long enough.

I had a hard time believing these stats too. However, according to the ATP website he has played 13 ATP-level matches this year, with a 1st serve % of 67, winning 86% of those points. He has only won 52% of points on his second serve.

13 matches is a decent amount (163 service games), but I'm not sure how well this would hold up over a longer period of time.

I'm still not sure if this would work, but its a very thought-provoking argument.

http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/matchfacts.asp?playernumber=K336

Merton
04-13-2007, 09:32 PM
I wonder how can Karlovic be so stupid not to play 2 first serves. He put his first serve in with 67% and wins 86% of them.
Maths:
0.67*0.86 = 57.6%
According to the Ricoh Match Stats he only wins 52% of his second serves.
Besides having the better winning percentage, people like me would find it funny to watch if the opponent wins more points on the return when Ivo double faults then when actlually returning serve. It could also frustrate the opponent.

I think he should have a look at his statistics and decide not to second serve any more. He must be really stupid or did I make a mistake with the math?
guillermo

The math is wrong. You use the time averages (derived from historical data) as a ***** for the probabilities of winning the next point. Those are not known. Furthermore, this logic ignores the strategic component of tennis. Losing a point through a double fault (because of attempting a 2nd first serve instead of a 2nd serve) means that the opponent won that point for free, without expending any energy.

zicofirol
04-13-2007, 09:34 PM
I actually was going to make a post about this, what would be the probability of a 60% 1st serve percentage player, getting a 1st serve in on his second serve?
I suck at statistics so someone do this, I think its a rather simple formula.

vincayou
04-13-2007, 09:54 PM
This is not a stupid thought even if many people have missed the point of your thread. This just comes from one match though, and the difference between 54% adn 57% is not big enough to call him stupid.

On a side note, his match would become even more boring if he applied this strategy.

croat123
04-13-2007, 10:00 PM
you also have not considered that fact that a player is likely to feel more pressure when they hit a second serve and that they probably won't get as many serves in as their first serve statistics suggest

guillermo
04-13-2007, 10:43 PM
On a side note, his match would become even more boring if he applied this strategy.

Come on. It wouldnīt be boring. It would drive the opponent crazy and thatīs fun. I mean you donīt watch Karlovic matches every day do you?

guillermo
04-13-2007, 11:31 PM
OK, just because I find i funny.:)

Given Karlovic could hit a second serve like a first serve, which would result in the same stats for the second serve (in average) like the first serve, these would be his average serve stats provided he holds his level of play of his first 13 matches of the year. Based on this stats: http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/matchfacts.asp?playernumber=K336
(By the way, where can I see the stats from last year?)

Out of 100 points on serve Karlovic would in average:

-double fault on 10.9 points (0.33*0.33) (coria was worse :))
-win 57.6 points on first serve (0.67*0.86)
-win 19.0 points on his "second" serve (57.6*0.33) (right now he wins 17.16)
-win 76.6 (right now he wins 75)
-hit 50% more aces (given the fact he hit all his aces so far this year with the first serve, propably not, than it is a little bit less)

Of course all stats are average, so it could vary as well to the better or to the worse. It shows that Karlovic would be better of if he could play his second serve like a first serve.
Anyway there is a lot to think about, for example could the returner get a better rhythm in the return or not if the speed doesnīt vary so much or does he not get a rhythm at all and gets frustrated?
Also there are of course various tactical issues to think of, but I only wanted to show how the stats would look like if he could do so.
And why should it not be possible to serve the same level under the pressure of commiting a double fault. Many players serve better on the pressure of break- or matchpoints.

Whatīs your thoughts?

guillermo
04-13-2007, 11:32 PM
The reason why I brought this topic up, is that I donīt understand, sometimes in matches people get attacked on their second serve and just win a small part of their points on their second serve, why are they afraid of making double faults?
In the end it just matters how much points in total they win and not how so sometimes a riskier serve is maybe better no?

Lucinda
04-13-2007, 11:42 PM
This sounds fun, but only if he shows up to the match and his first serves are running like 95% that day - but he wouldn't need to try on a second serve then if his firsts are going in so often - woudln't affect much of the match... la la la :eek:

gusman890
04-13-2007, 11:57 PM
People would rather have their oppenent shank a return or net it think its too slow on a 2nd serve, rather then expected a heater the entire time.

Jimnik
04-14-2007, 12:22 AM
Karlovic already has arguably the best 2nd serve in the game. He does go for his 2nd serves quite a lot because, like Sampras, he has so much faith in the shot. But I can definately see the logic in just trying to hit two 1st serves.

I think it mainly depends on who he's playing. Against the likes of Murray, Nalbandian and Federer he should take more risks on his 2nd serve because the quality of returning and passing is just too good. As long as he gets more than 60% serves in play, he'll double fault less than 20% of the time.

It actually surprises me that he doesn't get a higher number of first serves in play. I've seen Roddick, Gonzalez, Stepanek and even Federer go through sets with over 80% first serves in. Their average for the year isn't quite that high but if they can achieve that over the length of a set or a match, you'd think Karlovic could achieve much more.

GlennMirnyi
04-14-2007, 01:20 AM
The reason why I brought this topic up, is that I donīt understand, sometimes in matches people get attacked on their second serve and just win a small part of their points on their second serve, why are they afraid of making double faults?
In the end it just matters how much points in total they win and not how so sometimes a riskier serve is maybe better no?

That's because they can't serve decently. Simple as that.

About your post, well, it's not stupid. I get your point: you mean that he would win more points serving for the ace and making DF or actually aces than just putting the second serve in and playing the point. Yeah, but statistically you can't simply put a mean number, that comes from many matches, as a hard line for all matches.

NYCtennisfan
04-14-2007, 01:33 AM
Assume Ivo plays 100 service points.

If he is serving at say 65% and winning 90% of those points on the first serve, then he is winning this many points hitting first and second serves:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5 points won

.35 X 100 = 35
.50 X 35 = 17.5

So in total, he is winning 58.5 + 17.5 = 76 points out of 100 on serve.

NOW if he hits two first serves, and assuming he hits both at a 65% clip, he would be winning this many points based upon winning 90% of the points on his first serve:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5

.65 x (.35 X 100)= .65 X 35 =22.75 (he hits 65% of the remaining 35 serves that would normally be second serves into play)

.90 X 22.75 = 20.5

So in total, he would be winning 58.5 + 20.5= 79 out of 100 points.

The difference is negible really.

The big problem in this reasoning is that we are ASSUMING he will hit 65% of the "second serves" in as big bombs. It is a lot harder to hit that second serve in at the same pace knowing that the point is over if the serve isn't put into play. I highly doubt he would be able to hit consistently at a 65% clip that second serve.

I bet his percentage would drop down to about 50%. Then, the new math would look like this:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5

.50 x (.35 X 100)= .50 X 35 =17.5 (he hits 50% of the remaining 35 serves that would normally be second serves into play)

.90 X 17.5= 15.75 rounded to 16

So in total, he would be winning 58.5 + 16= 75 out of 100 points.

I guess someone with Ivo's height could keep up a 50% clip on that second serve used as a first serve but I think the % drops even further on pressure points.

kobulingam
04-14-2007, 02:11 AM
Maybe my english is not perfect and thatīs why there has been a misunderstanding. I mean of course not give the opponent a free point to serve the second serve like a first serve.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.

The people who misunderstood you are at fault. You made sense, and it was _obvious_ what you meant taking into account the relative absurdity of what the other meaning amounts to.

You have a very good point here. He probably should *try* hitting his second serve like it's his first (based on those numbers you gave).

gusman890
04-14-2007, 02:11 AM
NYC showed it.

The distance between the 2 is very minimum, hitting 2 firsts serves will not counteract the % of the 1st serve and its effectancy at any time.

Jimnik
04-14-2007, 03:25 AM
Assume Ivo plays 100 service points.

If he is serving at say 65% and winning 90% of those points on the first serve, then he is winning this many points hitting first and second serves:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5 points won

.35 X 100 = 35
.50 X 35 = 17.5

So in total, he is winning 58.5 + 17.5 = 76 points out of 100 on serve.

NOW if he hits two first serves, and assuming he hits both at a 65% clip, he would be winning this many points based upon winning 90% of the points on his first serve:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5

.65 x (.35 X 100)= .65 X 35 =22.75 (he hits 65% of the remaining 35 serves that would normally be second serves into play)

.90 X 22.75 = 20.5

So in total, he would be winning 58.5 + 20.5= 79 out of 100 points.

Indeed. But you're assuming he'd get 100% 2nd serves in play if he went for the safe approach. For Karlovic to win 50% of points on his 2nd serve, he has to do more than spin the ball in play. He's a decent volleyer but, with this generation of players, he'd be a sitting duck if he didn't hit with at least some aggression. At the moment, I think he's averaging around 4 or 5 DFs a match.

Mechlan
04-14-2007, 04:39 AM
Indeed. But you're assuming he'd get 100% 2nd serves in play if he went for the safe approach. For Karlovic to win 50% of points on his 2nd serve, he has to do more than spin the ball in play. He's a decent volleyer but, with this generation of players, he'd be a sitting duck if he didn't hit with at least some aggression. At the moment, I think he's averaging around 4 or 5 DFs a match.

On the other hand, we can't assume that his first serve percentage on "second serves" would drop by as much as NYC's estimate either. It's conceivable that with the added pressure of knowing that a missed "second serve" results in an automatic point loss, he'd actually serve more conservatively and his percentage would rise, though his success ratio would fall. Also, on pressure points, he could simply go for his normal second serve. And that's to say nothing of the rhythm he takes away from his opponent by employing such a strategy.

It's an interesting theory, and will never be taken to the extreme of guillermo's suggestion, but it's something his team could probably take into account in considering going for more on his serve occasionally. Though I tend to agree that it's not really going to have a tremendous impact on his game. He's tough enough to break already; his weaknesses in other areas are far more apparent.

NYCtennisfan
04-14-2007, 06:33 AM
Indeed. But you're assuming he'd get 100% 2nd serves in play if he went for the safe approach. For Karlovic to win 50% of points on his 2nd serve, he has to do more than spin the ball in play. He's a decent volleyer but, with this generation of players, he'd be a sitting duck if he didn't hit with at least some aggression. At the moment, I think he's averaging around 4 or 5 DFs a match.

I thought about this, but the ATP calculates the amount of points won on the 2nd serve including double faults so if Ivo's stats say he wins 50% of his 2nd serve points, this is including the double faults. That's what I have always assumed at least. ;)

spencercarlos
04-14-2007, 06:45 AM
OK, just because I find i funny.:)

Given Karlovic could hit a second serve like a first serve, which would result in the same stats for the second serve (in average) like the first serve, these would be his average serve stats provided he holds his level of play of his first 13 matches of the year. Based on this stats: http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/matchfacts.asp?playernumber=K336
(By the way, where can I see the stats from last year?)

Out of 100 points on serve Karlovic would in average:

-double fault on 10.9 points (0.33*0.33) (coria was worse :))
-win 57.6 points on first serve (0.67*0.86)
-win 19.0 points on his "second" serve (57.6*0.33) (right now he wins 17.16)
-win 76.6 (right now he wins 75)
-hit 33% more aces (given the fact he hit all his aces so far this year with the first serve, propably not, than it is a little bit less)

Of course all stats are average, so it could vary as well to the better or to the worse. It shows that Karlovic would be better of if he could play his second serve like a first serve.
Anyway there is a lot to think about, for example could the returner get a better rhythm in the return or not if the speed doesnīt vary so much or does he not get a rhythm at all and gets frustrated?
Also there are of course various tactical issues to think of, but I only wanted to show how the stats would look like if he could do so.
And why should it not be possible to serve the same level under the pressure of commiting a double fault. Many players serve better on the pressure of break- or matchpoints.

Whatīs your thoughts?
Rare and interesting idea.
But unsustainable in the time.
Just imagine how sore his shoulder would be match after match.

Loremaster
04-14-2007, 07:43 AM
Interestind idea but stupid in one noone would play 2nd serve as 1st all the time , of course he can from time to time fire huge 2nd serve, but his 2nd serve is one of the best so why risk DF all the time , and we don't know how would it transit into stats really because tennis in tennis many things are in head of player.

NYCtennisfan
04-14-2007, 06:02 PM
Looking some more at this, you could also tweak the numbers by surface. Ivo's obviously going to have a higher % of points won on his 1st serve on grass, carpet, indoor courts, fast hardcourts, etc. I'm too lazy to calculate all that right now though. :)

guillermo
04-15-2007, 10:03 AM
I thought about this, but the ATP calculates the amount of points won on the 2nd serve including double faults so if Ivo's stats say he wins 50% of his 2nd serve points, this is including the double faults. That's what I have always assumed at least. ;)

You are right. The winning percentage on second serve includes the double fault. It is 52% he is winning on his second serve so far this year. Not a big difference I know.:)

oz_boz
04-15-2007, 01:29 PM
Good idea at a glance, but

Just imagine how sore his shoulder would be match after match.

sums it up IMO.

MatchFederer
04-15-2007, 05:03 PM
I kind of follow your logic. But I assume your stats are based on one match only. Because that 67% first serves in is a very high number and 86% of points won is also very high. I don't think that he's able to keep that level in the long run. Therefore, I don't think that he should serve two first serves.

Interesting point of view though.

I don't know if the previous posters were being VERY dense or being very sarcastic and just deliberately picking on the way Guillermo worded his sentences. If it is the former then some of the posters on this board are ridiculously slow, as it really is not THAT hard to see what Guillermo is getting at.

Anyway Guillermo I also kind of follow your logic but agree with Bobby.

MatchFederer
04-15-2007, 05:07 PM
OK, just because I find i funny.:)

Given Karlovic could hit a second serve like a first serve, which would result in the same stats for the second serve (in average) like the first serve, these would be his average serve stats provided he holds his level of play of his first 13 matches of the year. Based on this stats: http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/matchfacts.asp?playernumber=K336
(By the way, where can I see the stats from last year?)

Out of 100 points on serve Karlovic would in average:

-double fault on 10.9 points (0.33*0.33) (coria was worse :))
-win 57.6 points on first serve (0.67*0.86)
-win 19.0 points on his "second" serve (57.6*0.33) (right now he wins 17.16)
-win 76.6 (right now he wins 75)
-hit 50% more aces (given the fact he hit all his aces so far this year with the first serve, propably not, than it is a little bit less)

Of course all stats are average, so it could vary as well to the better or to the worse. It shows that Karlovic would be better of if he could play his second serve like a first serve.
Anyway there is a lot to think about, for example could the returner get a better rhythm in the return or not if the speed doesnīt vary so much or does he not get a rhythm at all and gets frustrated?
Also there are of course various tactical issues to think of, but I only wanted to show how the stats would look like if he could do so.
And why should it not be possible to serve the same level under the pressure of commiting a double fault. Many players serve better on the pressure of break- or matchpoints.

Whatīs your thoughts?

Actually, that is crazy and yet it isn't. If Karlovic had the balls/insight to try that it could be interesting.

Merton
04-15-2007, 05:09 PM
Actually, that is crazy and yet it isn't. If Karlovic had the balls/insight to try that it could be interesting.

It is not a question of "balls", it is a question of rationality and if it was such a great idea Goran would have already tried it back in the 90s.

Bobby
04-15-2007, 05:18 PM
I don't know if the previous posters were being VERY dense or being very sarcastic and just deliberately picking on the way Guillermo worded his sentences. If it is the former then some of the posters on this board are ridiculously slow, as it really is not THAT hard to see what Guillermo is getting at.

Anyway Guillermo I also kind of follow your logic but agree with Bobby.

Very true. Guillermo's point wasn't all that difficult to understand, still some feel the need to be sarcastic and make fun of the post. I don't know why to be honest. It would be nice if some would actually read the post and think about it for a while before replying.

Bobby
04-15-2007, 05:27 PM
It is not a question of "balls", it is a question of rationality and if it was such a great idea Goran would have already tried it back in the 90s.

I'm not so sure. I'm not saying Guillermo's idea would actually work, but it maybe an idea worth developing. Those of us who play tennis regularly don't necessarily think about the possibility that second serve could be served as first serve on a regular basis. It's kind of like a given fact that the second serve is usually played more safely.

But if Karlovic (or anyone) is able to get almost 70 percent of fast and well placed first serves in constantly, then it might be wise to play the second serve with more risk. I'm still not convinced about Guillermo's stats and maths,but I'm puzzled because the numbers show that statistically Karlovic would be better off serving more first serves.

bobjoe66
04-15-2007, 07:45 PM
I dont think it would be as successful as some people think because, he whacks that 1st serve with no pressure knowing he has security of a 2nd serve if he misses it. If he tried a 1st serve again there would be more pressure as it could be a double and surely wouldn't be as successful as a normal first serve.

guillermo
04-15-2007, 07:51 PM
I donīt play tennis myself and I follow tennis only for a short time, so I didnīt have a clue whether tennis players in general are able to serve a second serve as a first serve. Also I didnīt know whether it is too demanding physically or a crappy idea strategically to do it or whether there is any other reason that makes it a bad idea.
Also I thought that there must be reason, because the stats clearly show Karlovic is better off by serving 2 "first serves".
Unexpectedly your main concerns are that there must be someting wrong with the stats or the maths rather than telling me that it is not a good idea for whatever reason.

I'm still not convinced about Guillermo's stats and maths.



To the stats:
The statīs are the official atp match stats for 2007, which just means that they add the stats of each match together. Of course you could say that 13 matches so far is too less but apart from that I donīt see why not to trust them. (If someone knows how to find out the stats for last year please tell me).
Again, they can be seen here http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/matchfacts.asp?playernumber=K336

To the math:
Of course the match stats are not very exact and an average of 67% first serves in could be between 66.5% and 67.5% and the average winning percentage on first serve could be between 85.5% and 86.5%. Anyway even if you assume it to be the lower value the stats are still better for 2 "first serves". (0.665*0.855 = 56.9%)
Assuming the higher value for Karlovicīs current 2nd serve winning percentage, which would be be 52.5%, the difference would still be 4.4% and that is worst case scenario. It could well be the other way round as well.
Apart from that my little sister could do the math and I will buy anyone a beer who can proof me that that there is something wrong with it.:)


I noticed also that if you look at the players 2nd serve winning percentages you will see that pretty much all decent players are in the 50īs for winning percentage. Only Nadal and Federer won 60% and 62% of their second serve points.
So 5.6% (average) improvement on the second serve winning percentage is a lot, although it first doesnīt seem like it.

guillermo
04-15-2007, 07:54 PM
I dont think it would be as successful as some people think because, he whacks that 1st serve with no pressure knowing he has security of a 2nd serve if he misses it. If he tried a 1st serve again there would be more pressure as it could be a double and surely wouldn't be as successful as a normal first serve.

Is it not possible for professional players just to forgot about whether it is an important serve to make or not? In the end it is just about the technic isnīt it? But as I said I am new to tennis.

croat123
04-15-2007, 07:56 PM
Is it not possible for professional players just to forgot about whether it is an important serve to make or not? In the end it is just about the technic isnīt it? But as I said I am new to tennis.
some players are better at blocking out the pressure than others, but i doubt there is a single player who can totally forget what the score is when they have to hit a second serve at 4*-5 15-40

Bobby
04-15-2007, 08:03 PM
Is it not possible for professional players just to forgot about whether it is an important serve to make or not? In the end it is just about the technic isnīt it? But as I said I am new to tennis.

I'm afraid it's not possible. Tennis is very much a mental game and you just can't ignore the score. You do feel the pressure in a tight situation. Why do you think so many football players miss penalties at the penalty shoot out? Because of the pressure. Technically it's not that difficult but the pressure makes it very difficult.

kartveteran
04-15-2007, 08:04 PM
Hey Guillermo,
I also think it's an interesting idea.
In fact I already posted a topic about this 1 year ago! :)
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=3424256

Bobby
04-15-2007, 08:09 PM
Nevertheless, I appreciate your ideas. There are many things that are impossible to include (such as mental issues, possible injuries and so on) but in general this is quite interesting. I think that in a way it's an advantage for you that you are new to tennis. You can come up with ideas that most of us would not think of.

guillermo
04-15-2007, 08:22 PM
Hey Guillermo,
I also think it's an interesting idea.
In fact I already posted a topic about this 1 year ago! :)
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=3424256

Didnīt know there is already a thread about this topic.
Anyway there is pretty much the same conclusions which is that is not possible, mainly because mentally it is hard to go for second serves.

MatchFederer
04-15-2007, 08:45 PM
It is not a question of "balls", it is a question of rationality and if it was such a great idea Goran would have already tried it back in the 90s.

Well forgive me for disagreeing but I think you would need some bottle to go for that tactic. But no, you are right essentially.

Question:

You mention chess players on occasion, a fan?

NYCtennisfan
04-15-2007, 09:05 PM
What's interesting is that Ivo is the only player who could possibly pull this off or want to.

He has the height that nobody else has, he has poor groundstrokes (although he did well this week), and his normal game has not worked so he might want try something new (until this week).

Other big servers had a lot of game behind their serve like Goran, Krajicek, Flip back in the day, etc

Merton
04-15-2007, 10:22 PM
Question:

You mention chess players on occasion, a fan?

Yes, big time, actually I am much better at chess than at tennis. :p

Bernard Black
07-23-2009, 01:59 PM
Interesting question posed here, and one of those rare things of a technical tennis discussion here on MTF despite the clumsy thread title. All posts here have merit.

My take, unless he really is "stupid" you would have to assume Karlovic, and other big servers, have thought this tactic through at some point. They would surely have tried it in practice matches, so for this reason, I would assume it doesn't work. I don't buy the potential shoulder problems because second serves put just as much stress on the body, but perhaps the issue is giving your opponent too much of a look at your first serve that it increases their chances of getting a good read on it.

All that being said though, I'm surprised we haven't seen players attempt to use this strategy simply out of frustration when they're being killed in the rallies. Banging first serves down constantly could disrupt the opponents rhythm and win you a few easy service games if you can pull it off...in theory at least.

Ivo#1Fan
07-23-2009, 02:27 PM
Interesting question posed here, and one of those rare things of a technical tennis discussion here on MTF despite the clumsy thread title. All posts here have merit.

My take, unless he really is "stupid" you would have to assume Karlovic, and other big servers, have thought this tactic through at some point. They would surely have tried it in practice matches, so for this reason, I would assume it doesn't work. I don't buy the potential shoulder problems because second serves put just as much stress on the body, but perhaps the issue is giving your opponent too much of a look at your first serve that it increases their chances of getting a good read on it.

All that being said though, I'm surprised we haven't seen players attempt to use this strategy simply out of frustration when they're being killed in the rallies. Banging first serves down constantly could disrupt the opponents rhythm and win you a few easy service games if you can pull it off...in theory at least.

I think we have seen some players use this strategy. Phillipousis certainly did in some matches when he knew his opponent was better than him in all other areas of the game. It worked pretty well for him at times, he could survive big double fault numbers and still pull out matches.

Early in his career in the challenger days Ivo did this sometimes as well. He's certainly moved away from that strategy as evidenced by his low double fault average.

lessthanjake
07-23-2009, 03:00 PM
He has 67% first serves this year, and wins 85% of those points. He wins 54% of his second serve points. If he used his first serve as his second serve, he would double fault 33% of the time he attempted a 2nd serve, but the other 67% of the time, he would win 85% of the points, just like he does on his first serve. Overall, this would allow him to win 57% of points on his second serve, instead of 54%.

From a broader perspective, this should allow him to win half a percent more points overall, which is significant.

straitup
07-23-2009, 03:40 PM
But if he used his first serve for both serves, he would have more chances to double fault. And yes, maybe he would win half a percent more points overall, but if he has a poor service game, then he would probably get broken easier than if he dropped his second serve in and played his groundstrokes which are somewhat poor but can hit winners.

Manon
07-23-2009, 04:10 PM
I wonder how can Karlovic be so stupid not to play 2 first serves. He put his first serve in with 67% and wins 86% of them.
Maths:
0.67*0.86 = 57.6%
According to the Ricoh Match Stats he only wins 52% of his second serves.
Besides having the better winning percentage, people like me would find it funny to watch if the opponent wins more points on the return when Ivo double faults then when actlually returning serve. It could also frustrate the opponent.

I think he should have a look at his statistics and decide not to second serve any more. He must be really stupid or did I make a mistake with the math?
guillermo

Most clownish thread recently.

theDreamer
07-23-2009, 04:24 PM
But if he used his first serve for both serves, he would have more chances to double fault. And yes, maybe he would win half a percent more points overall, but if he has a poor service game, then he would probably get broken easier than if he dropped his second serve in and played his groundstrokes which are somewhat poor but can hit winners.

I agree.
With the 2 1st serves strategy, I would imagine it would be
easier to have a poor service game. (In tennis, the total no. of points won is important, but far more important is the timing of when those points are won).
So might not even translate into more wins.

Plus, playing some baseline rallies after 2nd serves (once in a while if he doesn't s&v) might help to get him into the groove to make better attempts at service breaks later in the match.

ballbasher101
07-23-2009, 04:39 PM
There is a reason why big servers don't serve second serves at a zillion miles per hour, IT DOES NOT WORK. If it worked all big servers would be doing it. I remember Lubo playing Nadal in the semis of the French a few years ago. He hit a huge second serve on a big point which turned out to be a double, he lost the point, lost the set and ultimately lost the match.

Shadow Knows
07-23-2009, 04:46 PM
It is not a question of "balls", it is a question of rationality and if it was such a great idea Goran would have already tried it back in the 90s.

There is a reason why big servers don't serve second serves at a zillion miles per hour, IT DOES NOT WORK. If it worked all big servers would be doing it. I remember Lubo playing Nadal in the semis of the French a few years ago. He hit a huge second serve on a big point which turned out to be a double, he lost the point, lost the set and ultimately lost the match.

This assumes that A) tennis players are rational actors who would never behave sub-optimally out of an aversion to risk and that B) the calculus for "other big servers" is the same as for Karlovic, who has the largest gap in efficacy between his serve and his rally game of any player in the history of the sport.

lessthanjake
07-23-2009, 05:04 PM
But if he used his first serve for both serves, he would have more chances to double fault. And yes, maybe he would win half a percent more points overall, but if he has a poor service game, then he would probably get broken easier than if he dropped his second serve in and played his groundstrokes which are somewhat poor but can hit winners.

This would only be relevant if his ability to hit his first serves in comes and goes in a non-consistent manner over the course of a match. I.e. if he hits 12 first serves in in a row and then proceeds to miss 6 in a row.

That certainly might be the case with him. I dont know if his ability to put in first serves is sporadic or consistent. If it is sporadic, then he is likely better off using a slower 2nd serve because he would win more games, even if he might win slightly less points in the long run that way.

However, if his ability to put first serves in was entirely consistent, as in every serve has a 67% chance of going in, then he WOULD be better off just using his first serve even after a fault.

Also, the math here really does depend on the exact percent of his serves going in. His average is 67%. However, like any tennis player, he will have good days and bad days. He might serve 80% one day, and 50% the next. If he were having an on day with his serve, then he would DEFINITELY be better off using it every time. Conversely, an off day would make this strategy suicide.

So at the very best, Karlovic would probably be best advised to use this strategy if he is feeling it with his serve, and abandon it otherwise.

Commander Data
07-23-2009, 05:38 PM
That was the most stupid arguments I ever heard.
You are excepting him not to serve any second serves.So what he should do?
Let his opponent win a point when he misses a first serve?

you are :retard:. His idea was that Karlovic should serve two 1st serves in a row, hence, he should try to hit the 2nd serve exactly like his 1st serve. whats so hard to understand about this?

ORGASMATRON
07-23-2009, 05:44 PM
I dont care about the argument, Karlovic is stupid either way. And a boring clown :retard:

BodyServe
07-23-2009, 07:03 PM
The math is wrong. You use the time averages (derived from historical data) as a ***** for the probabilities of winning the next point. Those are not known. Furthermore, this logic ignores the strategic component of tennis. Losing a point through a double fault (because of attempting a 2nd first serve instead of a 2nd serve) means that the opponent won that point for free, without expending any energy.

It's not that maths are wrong, it's just that parameters are choosen using had oc methods. Better than anything else for this instance.

JMG
07-23-2009, 07:26 PM
you are :retard:. His idea was that Karlovic should serve two 1st serves in a row, hence, he should try to hit the 2nd serve exactly like his 1st serve. whats so hard to understand about this?

Shows that tennisfancroatia should come back to mtf, but sadly he won't. He was always good for some funny :cuckoo: posts.

sammy01
07-23-2009, 07:29 PM
karlovic annoys me because hes been on tour for god knows how long and his backhand is still pathetic, does he never practice it?

malisha
07-23-2009, 07:39 PM
lol at this thread

as long there are mugs like Verdasco,Tsonga or Blake with their WTA 2. serves on big points Karlo will be fine
he improved his baseline game big time...and his 2. serve is effective at times

malisha
07-23-2009, 07:41 PM
karlovic annoys me because hes been on tour for god knows how long and his backhand is still pathetic, does he never practice it?

his onehander is a thing of beauty
so natural..no need to practise it

sammy01
07-23-2009, 07:59 PM
his onehander is a thing of beauty
so natural..no need to practise it

i must have over looked this, though i do spend a lot of karlovic matches rolling my eyes lol

Certinfy
07-23-2009, 08:03 PM
He might as well.

NYCtennisfan
07-23-2009, 09:09 PM
Assume Ivo plays 100 service points.

If he is serving at say 65% and winning 90% of those points on the first serve, then he is winning this many points hitting first and second serves:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5 points won

.35 X 100 = 35
.50 X 35 = 17.5

So in total, he is winning 58.5 + 17.5 = 76 points out of 100 on serve.

NOW if he hits two first serves, and assuming he hits both at a 65% clip, he would be winning this many points based upon winning 90% of the points on his first serve:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5

.65 x (.35 X 100)= .65 X 35 =22.75 (he hits 65% of the remaining 35 serves that would normally be second serves into play)

.90 X 22.75 = 20.5

So in total, he would be winning 58.5 + 20.5= 79 out of 100 points.

The difference is negible really.

The big problem in this reasoning is that we are ASSUMING he will hit 65% of the "second serves" in as big bombs. It is a lot harder to hit that second serve in at the same pace knowing that the point is over if the serve isn't put into play. I highly doubt he would be able to hit consistently at a 65% clip that second serve.

I bet his percentage would drop down to about 50%. Then, the new math would look like this:

.65 X 100 = 65
.90 X 65 = 58.5

.50 x (.35 X 100)= .50 X 35 =17.5 (he hits 50% of the remaining 35 serves that would normally be second serves into play)

.90 X 17.5= 15.75 rounded to 16

So in total, he would be winning 58.5 + 16= 75 out of 100 points.

I guess someone with Ivo's height could keep up a 50% clip on that second serve used as a first serve but I think the % drops even further on pressure points.

I must have had a lot of time on my hands back then. :)

Obviously the playing surface has to factor in the risk/rewards calculation as well as the opponent you're playing. It would make more sense to go for a '1st serve on 2nd serve' on grass, fast hard or indoor hard than on clay since there's less of a guarantee of getting that free point on clay. Then again, maybe getting that free point would be easier than winning a rally on clay.

He's won a very good % of his 2nd serve points against a good portion of the ATP as his FH is a lot better/consistent now, not to mention that he's a better volleyer as well. Against a Murray, Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal, he might be better served to go for the big 1st serve on 2nd since he's lost more points on second against these guys than against other players, even though he's had really good %'s won on 2nd against Nadal (Queen's), and Federer (Cincy). He knows that he's going to probably lose against these players, but there's always that chance that he plays 3 TB's and his opponents make mistakes like Federer in Cincy and Djokovic in Madrid. He's 2-15 against that group of 4 so a change up of gameplan wouldn't hurt, and it would certainly be interesting to see him try it.

Myrre
07-23-2009, 09:09 PM
I remember Lendl actually trying this at Wimbledon one year. Going flat out on both 1st and 2nd serves. He hit lots of aces and LOTS of double faults. Somebody can probably dig up the stats. Anyway it's far too risky a tactic as everyone have patches where their 1st serve isn't going in as regularly as they'd like. You'll then end up giving away your service games without a fight.

L James
07-23-2009, 11:34 PM
I must have had a lot of time on my hands back then. :)

Obviously the playing surface has to factor in the risk/rewards calculation as well as the opponent you're playing. It would make more sense to go for a '1st serve on 2nd serve' on grass, fast hard or indoor hard than on clay since there's less of a guarantee of getting that free point on clay. Then again, maybe getting that free point would be easier than winning a rally on clay.

He's won a very good % of his 2nd serve points against a good portion of the ATP as his FH is a lot better/consistent now, not to mention that he's a better volleyer as well. Against a Murray, Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal, he might be better served to go for the big 1st serve on 2nd since he's lost more points on second against these guys than against other players, even though he's had really good %'s won on 2nd against Nadal (Queen's), and Federer (Cincy). He knows that he's going to probably lose against these players, but there's always that chance that he plays 3 TB's and his opponents make mistakes like Federer in Cincy and Djokovic in Madrid. He's 2-15 against that group of 4 so a change up of gameplan wouldn't hurt, and it would certainly be interesting to see him try it.

Just my thoughts, NYCTF :worship:

dodo
07-24-2009, 12:07 AM
i think the mental aspect in this might be huge. people like federer might really blow a fuse, if he were to try this. fed has already said, that playing ivo is not "real tennis". now if there were not even 2nd serve rallys, if he were to be really frozen out of karlovic's games, that would really disturb his rhythm. he will end up feeling he might as well sit on the bench and see if karlovic loses his serve to an empty court.