2012 Australian Open: Time taken per point played for the "Top 8" (Men)

...

Well done the Stats master.

I couldn't resist adding another 4 top players

Up to Rounds 3/4 we have

AO Open 2012
Player	Ave
Federer	35.6
Tsonga	40.7
Murray	41.8
Djokovic	42.3
Ferrer	43.3
Berdych	44.8
Nadal	48.3
Del Potro	49.0

Updated for End of Round 4.

Some of these players appear to lack consistancy and are unable to keep the ball in court long enough to give value for money on a pound/minute rate. This is unfair on spectators

I suggest that any player with a second/point average of less than say 43 seconds/point should be forced to have a ralley of at least 4 before they can score a point. Anything less than that and they have to replay the point. This would help players with their consistancy and give the spectators better value for money.

Nore Staat wrote:Updated for End of Round 4.

Fantastic effort.

This could possibly make sense in terms of injuries-
Federer has really been injury free, keeping the points short while Nadal/Del Potro have had more serious injuries...

HarpoMars wrote:This could possibly make sense in terms of injuries-
Federer has really been injury free, keeping the points short while Nadal/Del Potro have had more serious injuries...

He withdrew from Doha 2012 and Paris 2008 with back issues. He was injured prior to TMC 2005.

Tenez would love to say Del Potro and Nadal (and Djokovic) are injured due to their playing 'styles'.

laverfan wrote:

HarpoMars wrote:This could possibly make sense in terms of injuries-
Federer has really been injury free, keeping the points short while Nadal/Del Potro have had more serious injuries...

He withdrew from Doha 2012 and Paris 2008 with back issues. He was injured prior to TMC 2005.

Tenez would love to say Del Potro and Nadal (and Djokovic) are injured due to their playing 'styles'.

Fair enough, but what's to say that it isn't connected?

HarpoMars wrote:

laverfan wrote:

HarpoMars wrote:This could possibly make sense in terms of injuries-
Federer has really been injury free, keeping the points short while Nadal/Del Potro have had more serious injuries...

He withdrew from Doha 2012 and Paris 2008 with back issues. He was injured prior to TMC 2005.

Tenez would love to say Del Potro and Nadal (and Djokovic) are injured due to their playing 'styles'.

Fair enough, but what's to say that it isn't connected?

Agreed HarpoMars. Delpo and Nadal have been trying to come to the net a bit.

I'm astonished by the Del Potro figures. A guy not built to get invoved in long rallies is doing so at the world's hottest Slam? And this in the opening 3 rounds - when he's not played anyone of note

Great stats, even if it's just for this, as it illustrates that maybe the Argentinean is a good way off the Top 4 than first thought

laverfan wrote:

HarpoMars wrote:

laverfan wrote:

HarpoMars wrote:This could possibly make sense in terms of injuries-
Federer has really been injury free, keeping the points short while Nadal/Del Potro have had more serious injuries...

He withdrew from Doha 2012 and Paris 2008 with back issues. He was injured prior to TMC 2005.

Tenez would love to say Del Potro and Nadal (and Djokovic) are injured due to their playing 'styles'.

Fair enough, but what's to say that it isn't connected?

Agreed HarpoMars. Delpo and Nadal have been trying to come to the net a bit.

Haha, maybe

Surprised by Del Potro. Del Potro, Nadal and Federer are at the extreme. If you look at the others they are close together.

Updated for End of the Quarter Finals, with a little extra analysis.


Murrays says he will need to prepare himself for long rallies and to take his chances for attack in order to challenge Djokovic in the Semi-Final.


Here is a comment from Djokovic on his Quarter Final Match against Ferrer:
"I found it very difficult after a long time to breathe because I felt the whole day my nose was closed a little bit, I just wasn't able to get enough oxygen. I needed more time, which I didn't have - but in these conditions, at this stage of the tournament, when you're playing someone like David, your physical strength and endurance come into question. But I am not too concerned about that at all. I'm really fit."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/16716557.stm

I am not sure I understand your analysis. The reason Fed's time went up and Delpo's went down is that they actually played each other and both are at teh extremes of teh spectrum. That means their average time between points increased for Fed.

I bet you that the time between points will increase again tomorrow when he plays Nadal.

Ferrer	42.8	52.1	9	44.7
Djokovic	43.4	52.1	9	45.1
Berdych	44.8	50.5	6	45.9
Nadal	48.3	50.5	2	48.8

We can see the effect of teh physical game. The tougher it gets the longer they need to breath in between points...unless we are still talking about OCDs of course.

Hi Tenez, it will be a combination of players taking breathers and players playing longer (or slower) rallies.

For the Del Potro v Federer match, Del Potros previous average was 49 secs/pt while Federers average was 35.6 secs/pt. The average time/point for their match was played at 6 seconds below Del Potro's average and 8 seconds above Federer's average.

These differences can be interpreted as:
For Del Potro: combination of playing shorter rallies + waiting less for his opponent to serve + being forced (maybe?) to speed up his own serving action (than in his previous matches).
For Federer: combination of playing longer rallies + waiting longer for his opponent to serve (than in his previous matches).

Nore Staat wrote:Hi Tenez, it will be a combination of players taking breathers and players playing longer (or slower) rallies.

I know but from expereince that combination is essentially the time taken between points. pick 10 random points and you will see th emain factor is time taken between points.

With the Australian Open the match conditions can be dramatically different - from playing mid-day or mid-afternoon in the blazing summer heat to playing in the evening or late at night.

Has anyone ever noticed individual players (e.g Djokovic or Nadal) changing their time between serves at the Australian Open depending on whether they are playing in the heat of the day or in the "coolness" of the evening/ night? In theory the Umpire is supposed to ensure more uniformity in this by ensuring players don't go over the alloted maximum times to play the next point.

I don't care if Federer and Nadal take all the time in the world tomorrow during points and in between points. I intend to watch it all...

Hawkeye for your benefit I hope Murray stands in for Federer tommorow.

Why?

Actually I would love Murray to be able to stand in for Federer. That's the draw I wanted. Do you know if it can be arranged?

It may be a more interesting match. There may still be a chance to change it but we'd all have to contact the people who rigged the draws up til now. Even then it would take all their skill at this point. I'm sure Murray will be delighted to be on court again so soon.

break_in_the_fifth

Ha ha! If only. Murray wouldn't mind he has hardly been on the court. All of his opponants decided not to show up. I think Djokovic might be a bit cross though!

Updated for the semi-final, just one more match to go.

For the Federer v Nadal semi-final, the average time per point played was 48.3 seconds, which was typical of Nadal's previous matches, while for Federer it was about 13 seconds longer per point on average. Watching the match the average rally length seemed to be around 5 strokes, played with intensity. Perhaps the differences in duration is mainly due to the extra time Nadal takes for gaining breath and thinking his next move, rather than any significant change in average rally length (as has been argued all along by Tenez).

For the Djokovic v Murray semi-final, the average time per point played was 50.4 seconds.

Certainly looks like Fed's been dragged into Nadal's world rather than the other way around.

NS... Can you add the data from the finals?

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/scores/stats/day19/1701ms.html

Rough calculation is 369 points. 353 minutes.

62.72 seconds per point.

ESPN Time tracker and Henman Bill's post on match thread show time taken between points.

But if those match time include rain delay and roof closing....then it's absurd.

62.7s per point is the record as far as I know.

Santoro - Clement RG 2004 R1 (played over two days).

(235/463) - (228/463)

393 minutes (6 hours 33 minutes) - 463 points - 50.93 seconds/point.

Tenez wrote:But if those match time include rain delay and roof closing....then it's absurd.

The match was scheduled for 730p Melbourne and finished at 1:45am Melbourne. (See the attached picture). This is 375 minutes compared to the match time of 353 minutes, a 22-minute differential.

I remember a 10-minute roof delay and about 10-15 minute start up time. So the match time does not include the delay and roof parts.

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/news/galleries/2012-01-30/201201291327854177355.html

[quote="laverfan"]Santoro - Clement RG 2004 R1 (played over two days).

(235/463) - (228/463)

393 minutes (6 hours 33 minutes) - 463 points - 50.93 seconds/point.

Tenez wrote:But if those match time include rain delay and roof closing....then it's absurd.

The match was scheduled for 730p Melbourne and finished at 1:45am Melbourne. (See the attached picture). This is 375 minutes compared to the match time of 353 minutes, a 22-minute differential.

I remember a 10-minute roof delay and about 10-15 minute start up time. So the match time does not include the delay and roof parts.

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/news/galleries/2012-01-30/201201291327854177355.html

PS: It is amazing that the Santoro-Clement match took 393 minutes, the AO 2012 took 40 minutes less, 353 minutes, but the point difference is 94 points as well as Clay vs. HC.

laverfan wrote:PS: It is amazing that the Santoro-Clement match took 393 minutes, the AO 2012 took 40 minutes less, 353 minutes, but the point difference is 94 points as well as Clay vs. HC.

What's amazing is the referring!!! though it;s clear to me the poor guy is under heavy instructions not to bother them about it, I don't understand why the crowd accepts it.

Tenez wrote:

laverfan wrote:PS: It is amazing that the Santoro-Clement match took 393 minutes, the AO 2012 took 40 minutes less, 353 minutes, but the point difference is 94 points as well as Clay vs. HC.

What's amazing is the referring!!! though it;s clear to me the poor guy is under heavy instructions not to bother them about it, I don't understand why the crowd accepts it.

Pascal Maria did ask both Djokovic and Nadal to speed up not once, but several times, IIRC. There were no time penalties, though.

As requested, the final match has been added to conclude the table. Djokovic beat Nadal, 5-7 6-4 6-2 6-7 7-5 in a five set match lasting 5 hr 53 minutes, with a match average, time per point of 57.4 seconds. Of course this time doesn't include the time when the play was suspended for rain / roof closing, during which the two players also took a toilet break. The official time seems to include all the other time when the match was in play, including time between sets, hawkeye challenges and replayed points.

The increase in time per point taken compared to their previous matches seems predominantly to be associated with the increase in breathing time taken in order for them to maintain their intensity without passing out etc.

I think if the umpire had tried to speed them up he would probably have been lynched. He did if I recall correctly, request they get a move on, once for a new set, and twice for a change of ends, but never during a game.


PS LF in your comment you divided the total points by the minutes (then multiplied by 60) - rather than t'other way around

laverfan wrote: ... ESPN Time tracker and Henman Bill's post on match thread show time taken between points.

Hi Laverfan, can you provide the link to the ESPN time tracker - does one have to register to access the info?

All I could find was the usual match stats on ESPN (I haven't registered), where did you find the time taken between points stats. Does it also include rally lengths for each point ... or any accessible stat on rally length?