The top five contenders at the Australian Open: Their journey track.
Posted by tennisplanet on January 14, 2008
Numbers to watch for:
-Federer’s first serve percentage.
-Nadal’s tie-breaks, aces and five setters.
-Djokovic’s first serve percentage, and time on court.
-Roddick’s first serve percentage and unforced errors.
-Nalbandian’s back and stomach.
| Clown | Bagels dished/recd – Sets lost | Tie-breaks | Aces | Unforced. Errors. | Time on court. | 1st serve %age | Matches played |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Federer | 3/0———-2 | 4 | 81 | 137 | 11:02 | 67 | 5 OUT |
| Nadal | 1/0———-0 | 1 | 28 | 86 | 9:46 | 67 | 5 OUT |
| Djokovic | 2/0———-0 | 1 | 56 | 168 | 12:17 | 64 | 6 |
| Roddick | 0/0———-0 | 0 | 23 | 23 | 3:36 | 70 | 2 OUT |
| Nalbandian | 0/0———-1 | 1 | 23 | 56 | 4:25 | 55 | 2 OUT |
Tennis Planet 
cms said
I love these stats, thanks for keeping track.
deb said
Please keep updating this during the tournament.
cms said
Djokovic dished the first bagel. I was hoping it would be one of the other three. Poor Becker, he looked terrible out there. Nerves, I suppose.
Eva said
Serve percentage for Nadal needs to improve too, judging by today’s match against Troicki.
nadalfan said
todays second round match for nadal he looked quite impeccable 9 aces 70% first serves and bagel 4 games lost the whole match good that he isnt messing round on court
backhand said
Look at that. Roddick with the lowest unforced! Half of Djoko and less than Nadal. Who would think? I think a reason for that is that he plays more and more like a chicken. I don’t know if his goal is to make less errors but he isn’t really hitting any winners either. Still no doubt who looks best at the moment….
Eva said
Nadal only dished first bagel, because FEd asked to be scheduled Tuesday evening, so as to give his alittle extra time. That’s why he didn’t lead oof the tournament, with Serena, as is usually done. Than he would have had his what, 2st bagel, or was it 2 first bagels.
Yes, at this point, the statistics do indicate something about the progression. What they don’t show is the quality each player manages to make of their game with the match-up. However, the wins are good: Fed is flying, making his uneven matches look just shockingly good, and not to show off. He is doing what a great player should do, play with your full power, and never let you level drop down to the opponents. (In my view, that’s the danger of the Olympics, among other things.)
So far, though, all looks OK. The front of Nalbandian’s back, as Cliff Drysdale put it, is his real problem, not his back.
Eva said
Alas, Roddick has fallen in five very hard-fought matches against 29-year old Kohlschreiber!
Andy fought very hard, judging by the numbers; but what a pity.
I think that Kohlschreiber is riding on a resurgence, and nobody paid him enough attention. What in heaven’s name is going on?
Have to check this player out; dpn’t know much about him.
But if teels wrong that Roddick shoudl be out by some come-back at this stage!
Eva said
Still fell bad for Roddick, and definitely not ready to write him off at all. Kohlschreiber, whose facts I mixed lup, was #29 ranked, and 24 years old. I think he has one of those hot-streaks: he won some warm-up event, I think.
Nevertheless, he hasn’t accoooplished much at all.
Roddick needs more skills, not much but just a few more than Connors can impart to him. He has tha tremendous weapon, and did some down the line backhands.
What he needs most, I think are a) pacing himself, learning to gather himself together after a point and not rush so much b) footwork needs improvement. Although he is not the fastest runner, and as he siad, it’s just not in his physical makeup, he can and should learn better footwork, because that can make a crucial difference. And more net-play strength.
No matter, he should not be written off by anyone, especiallyl no Americans. What, their hope is Isner and Query? Russsell and Levine? Besides Blake, who is a great player but plays for the love of it more than winning, is the only other contender, as far as I can see it.
Not only that. bukt clearly Roddick is talented, has demonstsrated that in the past, and just some smaller changes–can’t tinker too much–will help him achieve more.
I truly believe that. Even the U.S. media gave him a bad press a couple of years ago. Just don’t understand this mentality. Encourage people, not beat htem into the ground when they already feel down. He rightfully objected at the time,. saying that he was only 24, and they were getting ready to write him off.
Also, eith er sport attitulde specialist–I don’t mean psychologist, Andy is just not that type–to stop being hard on himsel f now, so he can concentrate on what he can do. I don’t think Connors is good in this kind of area at all–his remedy is fist pumping and movements imitating sexual activity.
Yes, Roddick is a “guy’s guy,” but I don’t think he is that type as Connoprs. He still deserves respect for what he has achieved altogether, and for his Davis Cu[p efforts, and for what he can do.
I really think, with a bit of change here and there, he hsould be able to take out Nadal and Djokovic.
Some sympathy, people, for the one who fought and went down. And some encouragement. But pelse don’t beat up on him.
Playing at that level is a daunting task and requirement for anybody. In fact, that in itself should command great respect.
Eva said
Saturday here, just around 1 pm. I wen’t to sleep around 6 a.m., watching that incredible 5 setter with Federer and Tipsarevic that went on for more than 4 hours.
It really was thrilling–Federer serving near-perfectly–winning his service games. Tipsarevic also winning his. The fifth set ending was 10-8, and it was that final set that decided, right down to the wire, the match.
Clearly Roger wasn’t feeling his best at some point. There might have been other issues, but he hung in, and took it in the end.
Tipsarevic played well, but all along I had the feeling that he was playing just a little beyond himself, and not in the same way that FEd can elevate his level of play. From Tipsarevic it was will power, that made him play above his best, I think, but in the end it could not be sustained.
It was great to see Roger win, despite his probelms. But there should be a problem how much time players have to challenge, because several times Tipsarevic was wavering back and forth, taking too long. Also, I think once you hit to return, you should not be able to ask for a challenge.
These Hawkeye rules should be standardized everywhere, and umpires must follow them.
Sorry to see that Baghdatis lost, and nice for Blake that he did manage to get a longer match under his belt.
Llayton is clearly fired up. But I don’t see that much different in his game, basically.
I am sure that all of you know these neews; and many are getting some extra sleep. I was woken at 9 am, unfortunately, and thought it best not to go back to bed.
Go Roger! It was almost like Wimbledon 07, except I think he was play was more powerful, but there, too, it was whenhe was down, in the 5th set, that he just turned it around. Vow!
Clearly, Tipsarevic had something to do with the battle, but also Roger wasnk’t quite himself physically.
cms said
Interesting that even after the marathon 5-setter, Fed still only has 25 minutes more time on the court than Nadal for the same number of matches. Any chance of adding Winners to this cool chart? It would help add perspective to the errors.
Anand_101 said
Time to add a row for the lone ranger on the other side of the draw?