AbstractThe duration of matches has been a common concern in professional tennis. Governing bodies have recently begun to introduce new match formats, like Fast4, to curb match lengths yet the impact of these formats on the professional game remains poorly understood. In this paper, we develop a shot-level Monte Carlo match simulation approach for estimating the duration, points played, and upset probability given a specific match format. Our model is built on validated models of the in-play and between-play time of matches using Hawk-eye tracking data and publicly available shot-level tennis statistics. When we applied our models to a variety of match formats with serve characteristics representative of current elite players, we found that Fast4 formats had an expected duration of 60 minutes, best of 3 averaged 90 minutes, and best of 5 averaged 120 minutes. Our results also showed that longer matches favor the better player and make match outcomes more predictable. Fast4 formats had a typical upset frequency of 20% compared to 13% for best of 3 matches and 10% for best of 5 matches. The modeling approach we have developed can be a useful resource for tennis governing bodies in assessing the impact of new match formats.
Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports – de Gruyter
Published: Mar 28, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.
Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.
It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera