Great article really breaking down the patterns of play with in depth statistics on this instant classic

While Murray and Djokovic are widely recognised for possessing two of the most lethal backhands in the game, the outcome of this match was far more dictated by their forehands.

Forehand winners almost doubled backhand winners with 19 to 10 and they also made slightly less errors with 54 forehand errors to 55 backhand errors.

Both players were always looking to upgrade their artillery from a backhand to a forehand to be able to do more damage throughout the match. Of the 19 total forehand winners, 13 were hit standing in the Ad court as a run-around forehand.

What is interesting is that the run-around forehand tactic produced only 14 total errors in the Ad court but contributed a sizeable 40 forehand errors when the players were standing in the deuce court.

Even with two of the world’s best backhands on display, the Ad court is still a place where the forehand is always on the prowl. The Ad court accounted for 68% of total forehand winners but only 26% of total errors.

Their backhands numbers were extremely close with Murray hitting six winners to Djokovic’s four while Murray made 28 backhand errors to Djokovic’s 27.

Djokovic was also far more willing to approach to finish the point, winning 22/33 (66%) coming forward on all shots including Murray’s three drop shots.

Murray came forward less, but was very successful winning 14/16 (87%) on all short balls. Murray focused on attacking Djokovic’s backhand, particularly playing behind him, where he hit thirteen of his sixteen approaches.

Neither player served particularly well, with Murray only making 55% of his first serves for the match while Djokovic could only manage 59% and 53% in the first two sets. He did serve considerably better in the third set, making 71% which helped to not face a break point in the deciding set.

Both players focused on serving wide with their first serve in the deuce court to open up a hole for the next shot. Djokovic was more successful winning 13/17 (76%) while Murray only won 9/20 (45%).

Djokovic targeted the wide serve in the Ad court as their primary location, winning 7/11 (63%). Murray far preferred to go down the middle in the Ad court where he attempted 35 serves, made 23 and won 15. He only won seven points serving out wide in the Ad court with first serves.

Djokovic faired significantly better returning 1st serves with his forehand, winning 19/44 (43%) but only 6/23 (26%) off his backhand. Murray only won 9/30 (30%) returning first serves with his forehand and won 10/28 (35%) with his backhand.

This Houdini-like victory keeps Djokovic’s main goal alive for 2012 to leap frog Roger Federer and finish as the year-end No. 1. The confidence from being knocked down but not out in Shanghai helps build the confidence to bring his dream to reality in the coming weeks.

Craig O'Shannessy uses extensive tagging, metrics and formulas to uncover the patterns and percentages behind the game.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/10/Features/Brain-Game-Shanghai-Final-Djokovic-Grabs-Momentum.aspx

What I found interesting is that Djokovic came to net so much more often than Murray did. Again for the second straight matchup Novak has double the net approaches he actually had closer to triple the approaches in the USO final. He had a very strong success rate approaching a player of murray's ability in movement and in returning. Although I will say this one of his numbers conflicts with what the US broadcast was saying. Goodall and Koenig were saying at the end of the 1st set Djoko was in the 40s, this guy says Djoko was in the 50s in the first set. I watched the match and to me it seemed like at best Djokovic was in the mid to low 40s first serve percentage first set. So I don't about this particular conflict in the stats or who is right.

I still marvel at the return of serve of Djokovic and Murray. I wonder what it is that makes them so good?? I know they are both really quick but is it more a case of amazing reflexes or do they just anticipate serve that much better.

I remember watching Agassi back in the day and seeing him step into the court to return serve. I would almost say these two guys return even better than him. With so many other quick players out there like Nadal and Monfils, it really is Murray and Djokovic that rule the roost in this area of the game. I often wonder what it is that enables them to get so many serves back that nobody else can even get near.

Must have phenomenal reflexes or perhaps they do just anticipate that much better, rather like a goalkeeper in a penalty shootout going the right way.

What is almost more amazing is that when they get to these serves, they return them with precision and so much pace. I remember in the wimbledon final between nadal and djokovic, Nadal was almost looking on in disbelief at some of the returns novak was making, they were all landing within a foot of the baseline ever time !!

Yeah, I noticed more forehand dominance than seen with these two in the past. Interesting analysis.

Huge amount of errors compared to winners. Surprised the winners is so low, but I suppose normally we look at total winners, which includes service and volley, where winners and more likely, but here only groundshots.

And normally we look at unforced errors. Guess this article quotes total errors including forced.

slashermcguirk wrote:I still marvel at the return of serve of Djokovic and Murray. I wonder what it is that makes them so good?? I know they are both really quick but is it more a case of amazing reflexes or do they just anticipate serve that much better.

I remember watching Agassi back in the day and seeing him step into the court to return serve. I would almost say these two guys return even better than him. With so many other quick players out there like Nadal and Monfils, it really is Murray and Djokovic that rule the roost in this area of the game. I often wonder what it is that enables them to get so many serves back that nobody else can even get near.

Must have phenomenal reflexes or perhaps they do just anticipate that much better, rather like a goalkeeper in a penalty shootout going the right way.

What is almost more amazing is that when they get to these serves, they return them with precision and so much pace. I remember in the wimbledon final between nadal and djokovic, Nadal was almost looking on in disbelief at some of the returns novak was making, they were all landing within a foot of the baseline ever time !!

Yes Slasher in fairness to agassi the new strings are very good for returning. Still I think when you look at big, agile, players like Djoko and Murray it is impressive that with their height they still have that explosive first step and anticipation needed for returning. Returning serve and serving is a huge chess battle, it the opponent going wide, is he going kick or flatter, or possibly even with a fake kick. All of these things involve paying attention to your opponents patterns. Novak did one thing that really helped him in this match on Murray's serve. In the deuce court he picked up on Murray's tendency to go wide to Novak's forehand the weaker returning side and Murray's favorite serve on that side. By the end of the second and third set he completely took away murray's favorite serve. So reading the game, picking up on your opponents tendencies, reading the toss the arm and the swing of your opponent are all things that the great returner do to buy that extra split second that is the difference between a good return and meatball return.

Murray in particular is so good at going after the second and hitting it for an outright winner in his match against Roger I have never seen anyone man handle Fed's great second serve like that on a fast hardcourt. If the second serve was within murray's strike zone most likely he was hitting outright winner or taking command of the point with a great return. For his part I was stunned during the Djoko and Murray match at how many aces Djokovic brought back and then went on to win the point. He must of brought returned half a dozen or more 1st serves that against 99 percent of the tour would have been aces. Then he went to win like half of those points.

Henman Bill wrote:Yeah, I noticed more forehand dominance than seen with these two in the past. Interesting analysis.

Huge amount of errors compared to winners. Surprised the winners is so low, but I suppose normally we look at total winners, which includes service and volley, where winners and more likely, but here only groundshots.

And normally we look at unforced errors. Guess this article quotes total errors including forced.

I have always felt that forced errors are a valuable statistic that simply doesn't ever get discussed. Yes both guys were really trying to hit through with the forehand it is just so difficult in that respect when these two play with their skills as returners and retrievers.

As a Murray fan I'd really like to see him looking to go forward a bit more. Obviously, especially against someone like Novak you have to choose your moments. However, Murray has phenomenal hands, as he showed when he did go forwards and that extra string to his bow would just make the slight difference in this match up. No way should he be going to the net less than Novak. The best example was the crucial tweener point, when he should have been all over the net after the lob.

In respect of the backhand/forehand stats, it would be useful to know whether they are purely unforced errors (seem very high if so). It would also be good to have the forced errors added to the stats. However, it does accord with the flow of the match. Murray, particularly, relies heavily on his bomb of a forehand more so in this match up than any other. The 167kmh return he hit was just scary. Whilst a couple of big errors on that wing contributed heavily to the defeat, it was great to see him shrug off the errors and just keep going for it.

Born Slippy wrote:As a Murray fan I'd really like to see him looking to go forward a bit more. Obviously, especially against someone like Novak you have to choose your moments. However, Murray has phenomenal hands, as he showed when he did go forwards and that extra string to his bow would just make the slight difference in this match up. No way should he be going to the net less than Novak. The best example was the crucial tweener point, when he should have been all over the net after the lob.

In respect of the backhand/forehand stats, it would be useful to know whether they are purely unforced errors (seem very high if so). It would also be good to have the forced errors added to the stats. However, it does accord with the flow of the match. Murray, particularly, relies heavily on his bomb of a forehand more so in this match up than any other. The 167kmh return he hit was just scary. Whilst a couple of big errors on that wing contributed heavily to the defeat, it was great to see him shrug off the errors and just keep going for it.

Agree fully here Born Slippy Murray did not shy from hitting the big forehand whenever he could and he was hitting it pretty flat and early as well we didn't see him consistently pushed 2 and 3 meters behind the baseline like in other matches. I do wonder this about Murray in this matchup though why is it that in all their matchups it seems that Djokovic is so much more likely to finish at the net. How many drive volleys, over heads, and volleys did Djoko hit when compared to Murray. But you instinct that murray should be up there more often seems to be supported by the facts because he did so well once he did go up there. However that is also a function of being selective if he runs up more often that percentage will certainly come down.

Two of the best returners in the game for sure and very evenly matched.

The difference in yesterday's match was in the latter stages Andy did look tired and was thought to be carrying a viral infection which he picked up in Japan, (he was doing a lot of coughing in his previous matches), having said that it still doesn't take away Novaks great fight back to win the Tournament.

Let's hope both are fully fit for the O2 and if/when they meet we can have lots more of what they are capable of producing!

Good article socal, and I fully agree with born slippy about Murray approaching the net. He's got great hands, great reflexes and is a really good volleyer, so I don't know why he doesn't approach more. That tweener point in particular... I think every other player in the top 10 would have been at the net to finish that point off, and the fact that he didn't ultimately cost him the match.

Good to see such quality forehand stats, especially for Murray as it helps dispel this 'passive / weak forehand' nonsense that still gets spouted every now and then. It's a weapon now, and seems to be getting better. I used to worry about the forehand side, particularly low mid court balls on that side, but not anymore.

As for the returning, well both players are just astonishing. Both have lightning reactions. Novak looks ever so slightly quicker to the naked eye, but then Murray always seems to have loads of time... Maybe it's the slightly bigger wing span.

Novak edges it in terms of consistently finding the baseline, Murray maybe edges it in terms of finding angles. The 2 best returners since Agassi certainly, and better than Agassi in terms of coverage.

Danny_1982 wrote:Good article socal, and I fully agree with born slippy about Murray approaching the net. He's got great hands, great reflexes and is a really good volleyer, so I don't know why he doesn't approach more. That tweener point in particular... I think every other player in the top 10 would have been at the net to finish that point off, and the fact that he didn't ultimately cost him the match.

Good to see such quality forehand stats, especially for Murray as it helps dispel this 'passive / weak forehand' nonsense that still gets spouted every now and then. It's a weapon now, and seems to be getting better. I used to worry about the forehand side, particularly low mid court balls on that side, but not anymore.

As for the returning, well both players are just astonishing. Both have lightning reactions. Novak looks ever so slightly quicker to the naked eye, but then Murray always seems to have loads of time... Maybe it's the slightly bigger wing span.

Novak edges it in terms of consistently finding the baseline, Murray maybe edges it in terms of finding angles. The 2 best returners since Agassi certainly, and better than Agassi in terms of coverage.

Nice to speak to a man who knows his tennis Danny, a very good post, due respect to the others on the thread good posts all around. Well Agassi was a more balls to the wall kind of returner in the mode of Connors. And it makes sense considering the technology and the conditions prevailing in that period. I think there isn't much between Novak and Andy in terms of returning. Andy hits more outright winners than Djoko, although Djoko hits quite a few. On the flip side I think Novak is the best guy at killing aces and bringing them back into play right now. Nadal is great at it as well but he plays so much farther back, Novak cuts those balls off in a much more advanced and aggressive position than lets say Nadal.

On Murray's forehand I agree it is a shot that is underrated and overly attacked. It isn't as fluid or clean as the other 3 guys in the top 3 although he can hit it a ton and hit it through anyone when he is hitting it consistently. However he does not hit the down the line forehand up to snuff in my mind. Not that he never hits it well but he errors a lot and doesn't drive through the up the line forehand as well as he should. To me that is the next step in his evolution on the forehand. His inside out and especially cross forehand are great, the up the line forehand to me is much less penetrating and at the same time more likely to error.

sportslover wrote:Two of the best returners in the game for sure and very evenly matched.

The difference in yesterday's match was in the latter stages Andy did look tired and was thought to be carrying a viral infection which he picked up in Japan, (he was doing a lot of coughing in his previous matches), having said that it still doesn't take away Novaks great fight back to win the Tournament.

Let's hope both are fully fit for the O2 and if/when they meet we can have lots more of what they are capable of producing!

Yes I am so excited about the prospect of these two titans in their prime fighting it out over and over again. Judging by the quality of the second set we saw last night we are in for a treat.

I agree that Murray's FH down the line is not as comfortable for him as inside out or cross court. I have seen him hit it, and hit it well... But he tends to choose not to. I think he mentioned in his book that he has always liked to go CC and to the opponents shoe laces more, and so maybe it's just not a shot he's ever really developed to its potential.

Certainly if he could steal a shot off Djokovic he'd take the FHDTL, and if Novak could steal one off Andy he'd take the wonderful slice that he can hit in so many ways. I think the Murray slice is so underrated, and comfortably the best in the men's game.

He can thank the tendinitis for it, as when he was out for months a few years ago he couldn't hit through the ball in training so day after day would be using the slice and it improved out if sight according to his book. Consequently he has a very effective slice on both wings, but the backhand slice is a dream.

Thing is, nobody should be surprised at how good a match yesterday was. AO was a superb match, moving one way and then the other... And the US open final may have been a wind fest for an hour and a half, but from the mid point in the second set (when Murray said it died down) there was some unbelievable points played. I know this because I watched it again yesterday, and the way they were both hitting the ball - particularly in the fifth set - was awesome.

Even the Olympic match does not get the credit it deserves. Both players were tremendous in that match, once again coming down to whoever executed slightly better on the big points.

Yes Danny since last year when these two play you know it is going to be a baseline war of the highest order. The combination both of the pace of shot and how fast these guys are running side to side, and up and back, makes you think you are watching the game almost on fast forward. It doesn't look human especially watching Djoko, because he has that speed but then he has almost a plasticman, double-jointed quality on the stretch. If you want to know what I mean go back and watch a match back in the 80s in terms of baseline rallies, and then watch this match. With due respect of course the older guys didn't have these strings and racquets or conditions either, but if you watch those guys and then fast forward to today you will be stunned by the difference. Both the pace of shot, the speed of movement side to side, and of course the greater frequency of these baseline exchanges makes the modern baseline rally look supercharged to what we saw in the past. That is part of the reason I oppose all this talk of speeding up the conditions to make it easier to hit through.

socal1976 wrote:

Yes Slasher in fairness to agassi the new strings are very good for returning.

From Agassi's autobiography. Chapter 26, fifth page of that chapter, page 343 in this edition:

"I've always played with ProBlend, a string that's half Kevlar, half nylon...the most dramatic change in recent years is the strings. The advent of a new elastic polyester string, which creates vicious topspin, has turned average players into greats and greats into legends." After trying the new strings Agassi further comments: "In a practice session I don't miss a ball for 2 hours. Then I don't miss a ball for the rest of the tournament. I've never won the Italian Open before, but I win it now, because of..miracle string."

That tournament was in 2002. So Agassi did switch to a more modern string in 2002. Although growing up with it may be a different story?

Hm Agassi goes on to blame his string for 2002 Wimbledon defeat since hte topspin from the strings apparently make the ball sit up more on grass. But then says he came up with a compromise solution.

Yes I do stand corrected henman bill Agassi was a huge fan and one of the earliest guys to switch to them. It totally changed his game from a flat ball hitter to a much heavier hitter with incredible control. That is what these strings give you fantastic control on the pass and return. I have always had pretty good groundstrokes but since I changed to luxis I hit shots that frankly were out of my league 10 years ago. I mean I can hit cross court passes with my backhand from behind the baseline and pulled wide. On the forehand that shot is actually kind of easy with the new strings. You just wipe up and across the face of the ball with a real fast swing and as long as you get there in time to make good contact you almost can't help but make that shot.

I don't have as much experience as you. I did some research into strings when I brought my racket a year and a half ago, but think I came to the conclusion that top professional strings wouldn't make sense for an amateur like me, anyway, I can't even remember what I got in the end.

socal1976 wrote:Yes I do stand corrected henman bill Agassi was a huge fan and one of the earliest guys to switch to them. It totally changed his game from a flat ball hitter to a much heavier hitter with incredible control. That is what these strings give you fantastic control on the pass and return. I have always had pretty good groundstrokes but since I changed to luxis I hit shots that frankly were out of my league 10 years ago. I mean I can hit cross court passes with my backhand from behind the baseline and pulled wide. On the forehand that shot is actually kind of easy with the new strings. You just wipe up and across the face of the ball with a real fast swing and as long as you get there in time to make good contact you almost can't help but make that shot.

Great, because before these strings you needed all sorts of skill.