{"id":409,"date":"2011-07-07T19:16:14","date_gmt":"2011-07-07T19:16:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/heavytopspin.com\/?p=409"},"modified":"2011-07-07T19:16:14","modified_gmt":"2011-07-07T19:16:14","slug":"doubly-lopsided-matches","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/2011\/07\/07\/doubly-lopsided-matches\/","title":{"rendered":"Doubly Lopsided Matches"},"content":{"rendered":"

Italian translation at settesei.it<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

On Sunday, Novak Djokovic beat Rafael Nadal by a somewhat unusual score: 6-4 6-1 1-6 6-3. \u00a0A four-setter in the final doesn’t raise any eyebrows, but a 1-6 set … that’s a bit of a head-scratcher, especially on a fast surface. \u00a0Wimbledon is better known for server domination, which means 6-4’s, 7-5’s, tiebreaks, and the occasional 70-68.<\/p>\n

The Djokovic-Nadal score got me curious about two questions:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. How often does a player lose a set 1-6 (or even 0-6) yet still win the match?<\/li>\n
  2. How often does a player both win and<\/em> lose a lopsided (6-1 or 6-0 ) set?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    (Note: Yes, sometimes a 6-1 set includes only two breaks, in which case it is similar to a 6-2 set. \u00a0Yet 6-1\/1-6’s are far less frequent that 6-2\/2-6’s. \u00a0It would be nice to distinguish “two-break” 6-1’s from “three-break” 6-1’s, but for now, all we can do is enjoy the trivia and accept the limitations.)<\/em><\/p>\n

    Bi-directional bagels<\/strong><\/p>\n

    First things first. \u00a0As we might guess, scores such as these are extremely rare at Wimbledon. \u00a0This year, the final was one of only two such matches. \u00a0The other was Xavier Malisse’s second-round win over Florian Mayer, which went in the books as\u00a01-6 6-3 6-2 6-2. \u00a0Last year, only one Wimbledon match qualified: a first-rounder between Victor Hanescu and Andrey Kuznetsov. \u00a0Oddly enough, Hanescu dropped the third set 1-6 after splitting two tiebreaks. \u00a0In neither of these matches did the winner take his own lopsided set, as Djokovic did.<\/p>\n

    In this department, Wimbledon remains unique among the majors–it isn’t just a matter of “clay” and “everything else.” \u00a0At this year’s Australian Open, there were eight matches with 1-6 or 0-6 scores; last year there were 11. \u00a0At the 2010 US Open, there were six. \u00a0These scores are more common at the slams, because the five-set format makes it more likely that the loser of an early set (by any score) can come back to win the match.<\/p>\n

    The numbers<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Last year, there were roughly 2600 tour-level matches that were played to their conclusion. \u00a0(That is, neither player retired.) \u00a0 Of those, about two-thirds were straight-set victories, leaving us with 871 matches that went three sets (or five, at the slams).<\/p>\n

    Of those 871, only 94 matches contained a 1-6 or 0-6 set, and only 30 included a “lopsided” set in favor of both players, as in the Nadal-Djokovic final. \u00a0Both have been somewhat less frequent so far this year; in 1546 matches, 48 saw the winner lose a lopsided set, and 11 saw both players lose a lopsided set. \u00a0Combining the two years of data, the likelihood that any given match will include a 6-1 (or 6-0) and a 1-6 (or 0-6) is almost exactly 1 in 100. \u00a0Again, the five-set format of the slams increases the probability a bit, while the fast courts at Wimbledon have the reverse effect.<\/p>\n

    The offenders<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Which players find themselves in these roller-coaster matches? \u00a0To answer that question, we have to stick with the less-specific filter of matches that include a 1-6 or 0-6 set. \u00a0If we also require a 6-1\/6-0 from the winner, there isn’t enough data to make things interesting.<\/p>\n

    One might guess that the strongest servers would be far down the list, while counterpunchers populate the top. \u00a0That isn’t the case. \u00a0The players who are known for mental lapses–regardless of their serving and returning skills–seem to dominate the upper tier.<\/p>\n

    Looking at all tour-level matches from 2007 through last week, we find that Andy Murray takes the cake. \u00a0He has played in 18 of these matches, dropping a lopsided set in 10 of his victories, while winning a lopsided set in 8 of his losses. \u00a0Murray is in a class by himself–number two on the list is Guillermo Garcia-Lopez, at 13. \u00a0In third place is Djokovic, with 12 (he is 8-4 in such matches), though the Wimbledon final was the only occurence so far in 2011.<\/p>\n

    Twelve men are clustered at 10 and 11 of these matches, and the list features a lot of Frenchmen, and several other players known for questionable mental strength:<\/p>\n