Sunday, 13 September 2020 / Published in US Open

2020 US Open Final Preview: Thiem v Zverev

G’day!

It’s a very rare occurrence in recent times in the men’s game when we get a brand new Grand Slam champion. Today is one of those days! I looked through several metrics for both Alexander Zverev and Dominic Thiem in New York the past couple of weeks as well as their rivalry to highlight what to look for in this afternoon’s final.

Let’s get to it!

Double Faults

Here are the unfortunate second serve metrics for Alexander Zverev in the six matches to the final.

Tournament Average

Double Faults = 1124
2nd Serves Hit = 10742
Average = 1 double fault for every 9.6 2nd serves hit

A. Zverev

Double Faults = 49
2nd Serves Hit = 238
Average = 1 double fault for 4.9 2nd serves hit

D. Thiem

Double Faults = 13
2nd Serves Hit = 204
Average = 1 double fault for every 15.7 2nd serves hit

So, Zverev is double-faulting at twice the rate of the rest of the tournament (1 from 4.8 vs 1 from 9.6) and at triple the rate of Thiem (1 from 4.9 vs 1 from 16.7). This is not just some side stat that we don’t really need to pay attention to. The other key thing to take into consideration is that the more pressure there is in the moment, the more the world is going to be glued to their tv sets wondering if a double fault is coming. That’s pressure right there.

Here are Zverev’s six matches to the final

Rd 1 def Kevin Anderson = 6 double faults
Rd 2 def. Brandon Nakishima = 10 double faults
Rd 3 def Adrian Mannarino = 11 double faults
Rd 4 def Alejandro Davidovich Fokina = 2 double faults
QF def Borna Coric = 12 double faults
SF = def Pablo Carreno Busta = 8 double faults

I just can’t see Zverev committing 8-12 double faults against Thiem and still winning the match. If he is able to keep them down in the 0-5 range, then he has a legitimate shot.

Extended Rallies of 9+ Shots

You think that this is a key battleground in the final. It’s won’t be. Consider this…

How good are Thiem and Zverev in longer rallies? You would think that they are amazing and that long rallies are where they knuckle down and really attack the legs and lungs of their opponents. You would think that these two guys – the last two standing – are simply the best at keeping the ball in play once the rally gets long. For sure that’s a key factor for both players as to why they reached the final and the other 126 didn’t, right? Wrong…

Sit yourself down, turn off Sponge Bob, and lock your focus on the next sentence. Read it three times in a row out loud.

BOTH Dominic Thiem and Alexander Zverev have a LOSING record in long rallies.

Zverev: 84 won / 92 lost = -8
Thiem: 90 won / 93 lost = -3

Let’s start with the fact that both players have just won six consecutive matches. They are undefeated and their match metrics should look simply amazing. But not in long rallies. Here’s where they both have crafted their advantage.

Zverev

0-4 Shots: 542 won / 450 lost = +92
5-8 Shots: 167 won / 141 lost = +26
9+ Shots: 84 won / 92 lost = -8

Thiem

0-4 Shots: 380 won / 281 lost = +99
5-8 Shots: 139 won / 100 lost = +39
9+ Shots: 90 won / 93 lost = -3

Both Thiem and Zverev have crafted a big advantage in the 0-4 shot range. It’s the main reason they are in the final and it will be crucial to decide the 2020 US Open champion. Pay very close attention to the first four shots of the rally, which are:

Serve
Return
Serve +1
Return +1

The first four balls in the court will matter more than what follows.

Forehands & Backhands

Forehands

Zverev = 79 winners / 123 errors = -44
Thiem = 69 winners / 156 errors = -87

This is surprising and offers hope for Zverev. I would have expected Zverev’s ratio to be worse, as Zverev is a player that you can attack wide to the Deuce court making him hit a running forehand. Thiem’s forehand is a big weapon from the back of the court. Let’s see if it behaves itself in the final.

Backhands

Zverev = 43 winners / 196 errors = -153
Thiem = 38 winners / 167 errors = -129

Zverev’s backhand is typically rock-solid, but it’s leaking more errors than Thiem’s is and has a worse winner/error ratio. Again, let’s see how it performs when Thiem is throwing the kitchen sink at it.

Net Points

Zverev = 70% won (136/193)
Thiem =78% won (84/108)

Zverev needs to come to the net more than Thiem in the final. When Thiem drifts back in the court to take big cuts at the ball, Zverev needs to move up, take time away, take the ball early, and approach. He needs to pressure Thiem from the front of the court as well as the back of the court.

Baseline Points

Zverev = 47% (347/737)
Thiem = 53% (344/648)

Very surprising to see Zverev under 50% here. 47% is actually quite a low number. He can probably win the final winning 47% if he attacks the net a lot and keeps double faults to under five.

Thiem is quite dominant at 53%. There is no way he loses the final if he posts the same number.

History

Overall, Thiem leads 7-2. Here’s their matches since 2017.

2020 Australian Open Semi-Final: Thiem def Zverev 3-6, 6-4, 7-6(3), 7-6(4)
2019 Nitto ATP Finals Semi-Final: Thiem def Zverev 7-5, 6-3
2018 Roland Garros Quarter-Final: Thiem def Zverev 6-4, 6-2, 6-1
2018 Madrid Final: Zverev def Thiem 6-4, 6-4
2017 Rotterdam Rd32: Thiem def Zverev 3-6, 6-3, 6-4

Who Wins?

Everything points to Thiem winning in 3 or 4 sets. He is not the one that needs to make any adjustments in the final. For Zverev to win, he has got to find a way to win the 0-4 shot rally length more than anything else. Typically, that means bringing more firepower to the first two touches of the ball. That can be risky, but he may have no other choice.

Have a great match, gentlemen! 👏👏

The practice court is clearly broken. Here’s the proof.

Points are "front loaded". By far the majority of the action, and the winning, takes place in THE FIRST 4 SHOTS. The practice court is full of long rallies. Matches are dominated by short rallies. There is a massive disconnect occurring.

We spend too much time grinding, banging balls up and down the middle of the court – that have no real benefit to winning tennis matches.

There are 3 specific rally lengths in tennis. Here is their percentage breakdown of total points.

0-4 Shots = 70%
5-8 Shots = 20%
9+ Shots = 10%

The First 4 Shots is specifically the serve, return, Serve +1 groundstroke and Return +1 groundstroke. Those are normally the shots that get practiced the least, but matter the most to winning tennis matches.

The net is an extremely high percentage place to be!

If you love playing tennis for fun, spend as much time at the baseline as you like. But if you compete – if the score matters – then you must turn your attention to the net to maximize your potential.

The “herd mentality” in tennis thinks it’s too tough to approach the net in today’s game. The conversation starts with improved string technology, more powerful rackets, and finishes with stronger, faster athletes. The herd think approaching is a relic of the past. The herd is WRONG!

AVERAGE WIN %
Baseline = 46%
Net = 66%

Data from ALL Grand Slams provides the facts about approach and volley, and the data is crystal clear – it’s immensely better than staying back at the baseline, grinding for a living.

The baseline is a tough place to create separation. Here's how to do it.

At the 2012 US Open, only 7 men and 14 women had a winning percentage from the baseline. At Wimbledon 2016, Andy Murray won the title only winning 52% of his baseline points - and he is one of the very best at it in the world!

Num3ers deeply explores the data that rules points, especially from the back of the court. Take a "deep dive" into all three rally lengths (0-4, 5-8, 9+), and winner and errors totals from the elite level of our game. The numbers will shock you!

All 4 Grand Slams

Forcing Errors = 41% Men / 37% Women
Winners = 32% Men / 29% Women
Unforced Errors = 27% Men / 34% Women

Num3ers is very much like putting a jigsaw puzzle together. It's about bringing together different data sets together to create the big picture.

Every recorded match from the 2015 Australian Open - Rd2 to the final.

There is a lot happening on a doubles court. Situations and strategies are constantly being adjusted to create mis-matches with court position. It's hard to keep track of - until now. Dou8les Num3ers is the most comprehensive analysis of doubles data in our sport. The focus is on how a point ends, and it's broken down eight ways to Sunday. Specifically, you find critical information on:

Winners rise to the #1 way a point ends (over forced & unforced errors)

- The last shot of the rally is overwhelmingly struck at the net.
- Center Window: the most important part of a doubles court to control.
- Stephen Huss: an in-depth interview on Wimbledon's Centre Court with the 2005 Wimbledon Doubles Champion.

Dou8les Num3ers leaves no stone unturned. Percentage breakdowns of how often the server or receiver hits the last shot highlight the dramatic influence of the serve. The last shot of the rally is significant, and is broken down into the following categories: volleys, overheads, passing shots, lobs and groundstrokes.

When you play a match, you actually play two matches.

When you walk out onto a tennis court, there are two matches that you are about to play. The first is during the point - a part of the match that you have spent a lot of time preparing for on the practice court. But there is a second match, that takes place in the 20 seconds between the points. This is where the mental and emotional aspects of our sport kick in.

Let's face it, there will be adversity in almost every tennis match that you play. The storm clouds are coming. How bug they are, and how long they last for, are up to you.

Between the points is very tennis specific. It provides a roadmap for the 20 seconds between the points, teaching how to handle the adversity that will surely come, and how to build on the successes that will also be present. Your mind is your biggest asset in a match, and Between the Points takes your hand off the self destruct button and stops you beating yourself.

You don't have to be good at everything, but you have got to be good at something.

You can break tennis down into four key elements - serving, returning, rallying and approaching. Each part has specific patterns of play that consistently deliver higher winning percentages than the others. No more guessing. No more opinions. All facets of our sport are covered in this exceptional product, clearly outlining what patterns to gravitate to, and how to best construct the practice court. Data comes primarily from the 2015 Australian Open.

Building Blocks

MEN = 70% errors / 30% winners
WOMEN = 74% errors / 26% winners

Forcing errors is the best way to construct a point.
You can simply break tennis down into primary and secondary patterns of play - and they are all covered here. Primary patterns include serve and return direction, forehands v backhands, and the best way to approach the net. Secondary patterns include drop shots, serve & volley and 1st volley options. If you play tournaments, this product will greatly help you simplify the singles court.

The conversation starts & ends with the Center Window.

The doubles court is like an hourglass. There are two big ends, but a small neck in the middle where all the action happens. Once you learn the power of the Center Window, where you stand to start the point will take on a lot more significance.

Doubles is a lot more about situations, with four people on the court all "dancing" with one another. Learn all the best doubles patterns, broken down for the server, returner, server's partner and the returner's partner.

Doubles Situations

The "J" - the most ideal movement for the returner's partner to attack the net.

The "V" - a better way of understanding where the server's partner should move to.

Volley Targets - there are four main areas to attack. Know which ones are higher percentage. Beach Volleyball - the idea of a "setter" and "spiker" is ideal for the doubles court.

There are certain parts of the court that the ball travels to a lot, and other low percentage areas that you really don't want to cover at all - like the alley! In general, the serving team wants to keep the ball in the middle of the court as much as possible (to help the server's partner), while the returning team benefits from hitting wider and creating more chaos in the point.

SIGN IN YOUR ACCOUNT TO HAVE ACCESS TO DIFFERENT FEATURES

FORGOT YOUR DETAILS?