11–20 of 65 posts
Would be interested to see more in-depth numbers backing this up. Anyone know the state of publicly accessible tennis (shot-by-shot) data?
Would be interested to see more in-depth numbers backing this up. Anyone know the state of publicly accessible tennis (shot-by-shot) data?
If anyone knows of shot-by-shot data for just a single tournament, that'd be great to see and explore :)
This is hardly original, Nadal's game has been well-analysed for ages now. However, this is also why a lot of (most?) people prefer Federer to him: because Roger's game is more original and creative. It's a bit like Toyota vs Tesla: one will always sell more cars and make more money because it executes better, but that's not always the point.
Nadal is far from a clay court specialist. 2x Wimbledon champ, 5x finalist. 3 US open titles, 1 Aussie open title and 4x finalist.
Your metaphor of car manufacturers really doesn’t do Nadal justice. It’s more like incumbents always have the advantage, and the challenger always has a harder fight.
Would be interested to see more in-depth numbers backing this up. Anyone know the state of publicly accessible tennis (shot-by-shot) data?
Raw data for a large subset of those matches: https://github.com/JeffSackmann/tennis_MatchChartingProject
Would be interested to see more in-depth numbers backing this up. Anyone know the state of publicly accessible tennis (shot-by-shot) data?
The data is pretty difficult to obtain, but there's some great analysis on Nadal done by Craig O'Shannessy. Craig O' Shannessy is Djokovic's strategy coach and I think a pioneer to the game. He has plenty of posts about Nadal, here is just to get you started, some of the articles are members only, but there are plenty of great ones that aren't.. https://www.braingametennis.com/?s=nadal
It's obvious that it simply has good baseliners (players likelier to win a point once the ball is in play) and big 2nd servers at the top. But there's no data to support this, other than my gut feel of seeing big3 and Isner in there. But what about Kohlschreiber?
While I am sure he does better work for his clients, he seems to have access to shot-by-shot data which I think is most valuable.
Would be interested to see more in-depth numbers backing this up. Anyone know the state of publicly accessible tennis (shot-by-shot) data?
Shot-by-shot stats for almost 6,000 pro matches, including over 300 of Nadal's and 400 of Federer's: http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/meta.html Raw data for a large subset of those matches: https://github.com/JeffSackmann/tennis_MatchChartingProject
Of course Nadal is best on clay.
This is hardly original, Nadal's game has been well-analysed for ages now. However, this is also why a lot of (most?) people prefer Federer to him: because Roger's game is more original and creative. It's a bit like Toyota vs Tesla: one will always sell more cars and make more money because it executes better, but that's not always the point.
Highly disagree with your analysis of why most people prefer Federer to him. Most people prefer Federer because Fed was successful first, then Nadal. So, people were used to seeing Federer dominate and then Nadal came in. Nadal is far from a clay court specialist. 2x Wimbledon champ, 5x finalist. 3 US open titles, 1 Aussie open title and 4x finalist. Your metaphor of car manufacturers really doesn’t do Nadal justice.…