Friends… Many of you know that my buddy Craig O’Shannessy is the lead strategy analyst for the WTA and ATP Tours.
I recently had a chance to catch up with him in New Orleans and we had another great conversion that I want to share with you.
Craig has agreed to allow me to share some restricted content from his website www.BrainGameTennis.com with my followers.
We all know that there is a perception amongst players (and some coaches) that going to the net is a thing of that past. Something that just does not work in today’s modern game… Right?
Well… NOT SO FAST!
There is new data fresh off the pro tours that shows playing at the net actually DOES work and it can be proven!
Craig took another deep dive into the numbers at Wimbledon over that past decade so we could have a comparison over many years. Read below to see the surprising findings.
Wimbledon Approaching 2002 – 2015
Craig writes below…
Baseline numbers are not changing.
Growth is only occurring at the front of the court.
Let’s take a look at baseline play v net play at the Wimbledon Championships since 2002.
It’s great to have a wide-angled, 14-year view of baseline and approach data from the Championships to see what’s really changing (or not changing) in our sport.
While the grounds at Wimbledon have been full of change with a multitude of improvements over recent years, the numbers of the game remain pretty steady – definitely a lot more stable at the baseline than the front of the court.
Wimbledon is the home of tennis. Tradition and history reign supreme at SW19.
Let’s take a look back through time, back to 2002, and get a feel for what is happening at the baseline and the net.
GENTLEMEN 2004 – 2015
LADIES 2004 – 2015
This is really simple.
Over the past 14 years, the average winning percentage for baseline play has only fluctuated 1%. It’s going nowhere in a hurry!
Average approach win percentage is not exactly setting the house on fire, but it has moved five percentage points for the men, and four percentage points for the ladies. The good news is that it is trending in a good direction in both draws.
So it’s a really easy question.
Do you want to play more points delivering a 46% win ratio, or less?
Do you want to develop your front-court game to try and create a bigger pool of points for yourself where the average is 66%?
It’s a no-brainer.
By the way, the difference between the two is 43%. (66% divided by 46% = 1.43). A 43% increase in a game of such small margins is staggering.
Tennis development, in general, is linear by nature, evolving over time. That’s not the best way to teach the sport.
It is so much better to go all the way to the end and understand what the end result looks like, and then work backwards to create it. It’s much more efficient, as you already know the steps required.
Thinking “forward” can get you lost, or sidetracked at the very least. Thinking “backwards” keeps the end result in the forefront of your mind. I like to develop players that way.
Jorge summarizing… so let me address the elephant in the room. Many of you are thinking as you read this that cool… this all sounds good…. except for one thing… I suck at the Net.
So how do we deal with the reality that for most players, their front court game is not their strength? In fact, many players have a downright awful net game.
They say you go to battle with the army you have, not the army you wish you had. The same holds true for tennis players. You go into competition with the skills you have and the one you can actually deploy under the pressure of competition.
So my suggestion is to keep adding to your arsenal and working on your net game. The numbers don’t lie… It is more effective to play from the net so let’s make sure that as players we are not standing here a year from now saying well my net game still is not good enough to use. It’s time to get working on our net & finishing skills.
You may never be known as a net rusher or serve & volleyer, but you don’t have to be known as the guy who can’t play at the net.
As far as coaches go… we need to commit to help our players improve in these areas. It can be very tempting to just ignore this area because it takes a while to master, but that sells our students short and will cost them matches in the long run.
Those are my thoughts for you today. I hope you enjoyed this info from Craig and feel free to check him out on his website at www.BrainGameTennis.com.
I think the baseline/net approach stats provided even though it doesn’t say much about the frequency of such endeavors does offer an insight to how “worthwhile” it is to go to the net. Even as pedro said 5 times approach winning 4 (or even 3) sounds like a good proposition.
As long as the frequency is large enough (more than 10), I think the data is significant.
I was just practicing my writing, and didn’t mean to be rude. I take that back,
I just think those stats you show are not relevant at all.
-Coach Pedro, big serve and volley tennis advocate!
The point is Pedro that Jorge is encouraging people to think about the game and so I guess that most of us would thank him for that. All statistics are subject to interpretation and different approaches to analysis – that’s not insulting anyone’s intelligence so there’s no need to be so rude.
Jorge
Awesome Jorge!!
Absolutely love this. I have sent to my students and clients. Today we need to see the value of developing and creating situations to get to the net by using the 3/4 court to open up or heavy ball to sneak attack the more in your tookbox the more opportunities. And teaching the value of slice /underspin getting students of the game very comfortable with the traditional volley so they can create these situations to get to the net. Think outside the box you will see the value in the long run.
Hi Jorge,
Thanks for providing these statistics. However, it clearly fails to support your theory that there is growth at the net.
If Simon came to the net 5 times in his match and won 4 of those points, then his percentage won would be up at 80%. Does this statistic about the percentage of points won tell us anything about the frequency of net approaches?
People are not coming to the net on just any old approach shot anymore. There are many reasons for this, of which technology, court speed, and physical fitness are among the main culprits.
These stats you provided undermine the reader’s intelligence.
Sorry you feel that way Pedro, but I let everyone be heard here. Do others have thoughts…
Hey, Jorge,
TennisTom here (teaching tennis, primarily doubles, for 18+ years. I try to teach my early learners mostly all-court tennis, however I do strongly emphasize net play (where most 2.5’s are uncomfortable). Last night one of my students said, “Tom, can you teach us how to field a fast ground stroke coming at our waist?” Don’t you love questions like that? 15 minutes later she had the basics down and was blocking back 3 out of 4 balls I was feeding to her torso.
So I am totally in agreement concerning coming in to the net.
Wish you much fun and games with the sport you love, TennisTom (North Carolina)
Thanks Tom, that’s awsome
Bang on.!
But what about those same comparisons on hardcopy or clay???
thank you Jorge….I been teaching this for years, mostly because I feel a well rounded game is key, and it puts pressure on your opponents. Besides, personally, I know I don’t stand a chance in long rallies so I do all I can to finish quickly. Jorge you are DA MAN. Keep bringing it.
Great analysis!