{"id":597,"date":"2011-12-08T13:52:38","date_gmt":"2011-12-08T18:52:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/heavytopspin.com\/?p=597"},"modified":"2011-12-08T13:52:38","modified_gmt":"2011-12-08T18:52:38","slug":"point-by-point-profile-jo-wilfried-tsonga","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/2011\/12\/08\/point-by-point-profile-jo-wilfried-tsonga\/","title":{"rendered":"Point-by-Point Profile: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga"},"content":{"rendered":"

Continuing with our point-by-point player profiles<\/a>, let’s look at Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. If anyone from outside can break into the big four, he’s got to be on the short list after his big finish to the season.<\/p>\n

Using all of his grand slam matches from 2011, we can begin to analyzes his tendencies on serve and return.<\/p>\n

The first table shows the frequency of different outcomes in the deuce<\/a> court, in the ad court, and on break point, relative to Tsonga’s average. For instance, the 0.974 in the upper left corner means that Tsonga wins 2.6% fewer points than average in the deuce court.<\/p>\n

OUTCOME       Deuce     Ad  Break  \nPoint%        0.974  1.028  0.931  \n                                   \nAces          1.005  0.994  0.718  \nSvc Wnr       1.013  0.985  0.826  \nDbl Faults    1.082  0.909  0.758  \n1st Sv In     1.017  0.981  0.955  \n                                   \nServer Wnr    0.884  1.127  0.986  \nServer UE     1.030  0.967  1.140  \n                                   \nReturn Wnr    1.054  0.941  1.567  \nReturner Wnr  1.073  0.920  1.136  \nReturner UE   0.887  1.124  1.026  \n                                   \nRally Len     0.992  1.009  1.036  <\/pre>\n
Unlike all of the right-handers we’ve looked at so far, Tsonga wins more points in the ad court.  He doesn’t win quite as many cheap points, as he hits a few more aces and service winners in the deuce court.  But the end result is what matters, and it seems that he sets up the point better in the ad court, as shown by his high rate of winners in the rally, and his avoidance of return winners at any stage of the point.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately for Jo-Willy, his success in the ad court doesn’t always transfer to break points.  Winning 7% fewer service points than average on break points isn’t bad, but given the inherent advantage of his ad-court tendencies, it seems within reach for him to fight off a few more break points.<\/p>\n
Next, this is how he performs on a point-by-point<\/a> basis.  Win% shows what percentage of points he wins at that score; Exp is how many he would be expected to win (given how he performs in each match), and Rate is the difference between the two.  A rate above 1 means he plays better on those points; below 1 is worse.<\/p>\n
SCORE   Pts   Win%    Exp  Rate  \ng0-0    302  63.6%  66.6%  0.95  \ng0-15   108  64.8%  65.3%  0.99  \ng0-30    38  68.4%  62.9%  1.09  \ng0-40    12  75.0%  58.8%  1.27  \n                                 \ng15-0   188  66.5%  67.4%  0.99  \ng15-15  133  60.9%  66.2%  0.92  \ng15-30   78  71.8%  65.7%  1.09  \ng15-40   31  54.8%  63.2%  0.87  \n                                 \ng30-0   125  63.2%  68.2%  0.93  \ng30-15  127  66.9%  66.5%  1.01  \ng30-30   98  73.5%  65.5%  1.12  \ng30-40   43  58.1%  62.9%  0.92  \n                                 \ng40-0    79  74.7%  68.8%  1.08  \ng40-15  105  66.7%  67.7%  0.98  \ng40-30  107  72.0%  66.8%  1.08  \ng40-40  108  65.7%  65.7%  1.00  \n                                 \ng40-AD   37  75.7%  64.6%  1.17  \ngAD-40   71  64.8%  66.3%  0.98  <\/pre>\n
As with so many other players, there is a gap in performance between logically equivalent points.  30-40 and 40-AD should be about the same; the only difference is that returners might be a little better at 30-40, having won 60% of points instead of 57% to get to the first 40-AD point.  But while Tsonga dominated at 40-AD (admittedly with only 37 such points to draw on), one of his weakest points was 30-40.  There’s a similar gap between 30-30 (another of his best) and 40-40 (precisely average).<\/p>\n
Serving Against Tsonga<\/b><\/p>\n
We can go through the same exercises for Tsonga’s return points.  The next two tables are trickier to read.  Look at them as Serving against Tsonga<\/i>.  Thus, the number in the upper-left corner means that when serving against him, players win 3.3% more points than average in the deuce court; he is a better returner in the ad court.  That’s partly attributable to the fact that righties serve better in the deuce court, but while JW’s tendencies aren’t quite as extreme as David Ferrer’s, they are more than we would expect.<\/p>\n
(I’ve excluded return points against lefty servers.  Since lefties and righties have such different serving tendencies, limiting the sample to righty servers gives us clearer results, even as the sample shrinks a bit.)<\/p>\n
OUTCOME       Deuce     Ad  Break  \nPoint%        1.033  0.963  0.896  \n                                   \nAces          1.215  0.756  0.918  \nSvc Wnr       1.079  0.911  0.809  \nDbl Faults    0.918  1.093  0.547  \n1st Sv In     1.014  0.985  0.997  \n                                   \nServer Wnr    0.968  1.036  0.930  \nServer UE     0.916  1.094  0.948  \n                                   \nReturn Wnr    0.740  1.294  0.381  \nReturner Wnr  0.892  1.123  1.466  \nReturner UE   0.979  1.023  0.370  \n                                   \nRally Len     0.971  1.033  1.136  <\/pre>\n
By just about every measure, Tsonga is a better returner in the ad court.  He prevents aces and service winners at a high rate, hits plenty of winners at every stage of the point, and forces his opponent to try for more, leading to more double faults.  That success follows him onto break points, where he is more conservative (very few return winners or unforced errors) but wins 10% more points than average.<\/p>\n
Here’s more on Tsonga’s return game, again with numbers from the perspective of players serving against him.<\/p>\n
SCORE   Pts   Win%    Exp  Rate  \ng0-0    297  67.0%  65.1%  1.03  \ng0-15    97  58.8%  64.6%  0.91  \ng0-30    40  62.5%  64.4%  0.97  \ng0-40    15  60.0%  64.1%  0.94  \n                                 \ng15-0   194  66.0%  65.4%  1.01  \ng15-15  123  70.7%  64.4%  1.10  \ng15-30   61  42.6%  63.6%  0.67  \ng15-40   44  45.5%  63.5%  0.72  \n                                 \ng30-0   128  68.8%  66.0%  1.04  \ng30-15  127  65.4%  65.0%  1.01  \ng30-30   70  64.3%  64.2%  1.00  \ng30-40   45  55.6%  63.8%  0.87  \n                                 \ng40-0    88  69.3%  66.6%  1.04  \ng40-15  110  73.6%  65.4%  1.13  \ng40-30   74  66.2%  64.5%  1.03  \ng40-40   82  65.9%  63.8%  1.03  \n                                 \ng40-AD   28  53.6%  65.0%  0.82  \ngAD-40   54  68.5%  63.2%  1.08  <\/pre>\n
Unfortunately, the sample sizes are getting a little small–Tsonga didn’t play as many grand slam matches as the big four, so it’s tough to do much analysis here.  There is some evidence that he dominates more than expected once he gets ahead of the server, as seen in the rates at 15-30, 15-40, 30-40, and 40-AD.  Tsonga seems to be a streaky player–anyone capable of reeling off several consecutive games against Federer on a hard court would need to be–and these numbers support that, at least in his return game.<\/p>\n
Tsonga wraps up our point-by-point profiles.  Because we only have point-by-point data for the grand slams, there just isn’t enough information to work with for players outside of the top six.  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Continuing with our point-by-point player profiles, let’s look at Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. If anyone from outside can break into the big four, he’s got to be on the short list after his big finish to the season. Using all of his grand slam matches from 2011, we can begin to analyzes his tendencies on serve and … Continue reading Point-by-Point Profile: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[96],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-597","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-research"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/597","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=597"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/597\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=597"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=597"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tennisabstract.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=597"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}