Success in national level junior tennis: Tactical perspectives

Abstract

Purpose

Point duration in competitive tennis is becoming shorter, highlighting a greater emphasis on performance of the first strokes of each point, in particular, the performance of the server.

Methods

Descriptive measures of the video-based analysis included stroke type, point outcome and stroke position of the first two strokes of the server (service and first shot) during 10 randomly selected sets of competition on hard court. All participants (male; n = 8) were of the age group 14 years and below and competed in national level events.

Results

The performance of the first serve is characterized by an “in-percentage” of 54.6% and an improved chance of winning the point (for the server) following a first serve (55.9%; P < 0.001) compared to a second serve (42.9%). The majority of stroke positions for first-shot winners were located in the central zone of the court (52.1%; P < 0.01). In comparison to the error rate of all examined strokes, we observed an increased error rate of the first shot (16.5% vs. 22.4%; P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Contrasting to professionals, juniors produce more first-serve errors and win fewer points directly via the serve. Success in junior tennis relies in minimizing errors within short rallies specifically on the first shot of the server. Coaches of national level junior tennis players should focus on strategies to optimize court position following the serve and service percentage to increase competitive success rate. To achieve this, the server should utilize the serve as a “set-up” tool, dictating the direction of the returner’s return of serve within the central zones of the court.

Keywords

Notational analysis performance analysis tennis serve

Introduction

Notational analysis is a tool to evaluate technical and tactical utilization of specific movements during competition as well as to describe movement characteristics such as running distance, movement intensity, and temporal structure. It provides the foundation for age-appropriate training programs and individual match strategy development.^1,2 Match analysis has become a crucial part of professional tennis. Due to physical and technical differences between adults and juniors, it is questionable whether these data are relevant for every age group. Furthermore, understanding tactical progression as a junior tennis player may help future development to senior ranks.

In elite tennis, more than 50% of all points are concluded within short rally durations of less than 8 s or within first five strokes.^3,4 Numerous descriptive investigations have focused on the characteristics of the initial first two strokes in professional tennis (service and return of serve), describing these as key factors to the overall success rate in professional tennis.^2,5,6 The quality of service such as stroke velocity, accuracy, and in-percentage are of pivotal importance in professional tennis and increased within the last decade.^4,7 The type and placement of the service in the service box has an influence of the placement of the return which is relevant for technical and tactical execution of the first ground stroke of the server (first shot) in professional tennis.² However, no research to date has examined the relationship of the first shot and point outcomes in professional as well as in junior tennis, despite some evidence suggesting the first shot is of high relevance to elite performance and should be an integral component of junior training and development.⁴

Junior tennis players require training programs relevant to their stage of development and age group that encompasses physical, technical, mental, and tactical components. This descriptive study uses analysis of match play to provide insights into the tactical dimension of national level junior tennis players. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the importance of the first two strokes of the server in national level junior tennis and to provide specific game characteristics and positional demands. In particular, the service and first shot represent a combined strategic component, instead of individualized strokes. This information would be of particular interest to coaches looking to optimize junior athlete’s success rate and devising training activities tailored to the most common rally scenarios in junior tennis.

Methods

Subjects

The sample consisted of eight national level male tennis players; age group under 14 years. The state ranking position in their age group ranged from 16 to 76. All subjects were right handed and participants of the Victorian Junior Outdoor Hardcourt Championships Boys Singles Draw. Matches included in this study were best of three tiebreak sets and collected from the quarterfinals to semifinals only.

Design

A quantitative analysis of competitive junior tennis based on rally and point profiles was undertaken. A computerized system was developed to collect data from video recordings of 10 randomly selected sets during a national junior tennis event. We used two video cameras that recorded from the bird’s eye perspective and determined type of stroke, court position, and outcome of each stroke. Furthermore, the outcome was subdivided into in-ball (ball lands within boundaries of the singles line; rally continues), winner (in-ball and not intercepted by opponent; end of rally), and error (ball lands outside boundaries of the singles line or it was played into the net; end of rally). To reduce the influence of subjective opinion viewed by the observer, we did not distinguish between forced and unforced error. We used grid divisions for the analysis of court position.⁸ The court was divided into the three main areas, which were subdivided into seven parts: behind the baseline (B), the area between baseline and service line (M), and the net area (N) which is from net to service line (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Grid divisions of the tennis court.

Methodology

A video-based analysis was completed on 10 randomly selected sets for both players within the set. The video cameras were positioned at the top of the fence (bird’s eye view). The total data captured included 1200 rallies/points and 5721 strokes/court positions. A Lenovo Laptop (2.60 GHz; ThinkPad display 1366 × 768) and Kinovea (version 0.8.15) was used for computerized visual analysis of recorded sets.

Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis was processed on the mean of the 2 × 10 sets using Microsoft Excel software. IBM SPSS Statistics Version 22 was used to evaluate Cohen’s Kappa for the reliability check of the point and rally profiles.⁹ The intra-observer reliability was established with three randomly chosen sets (171 strokes) and the results of the kappa statistics show a “very good” agreement (0.81–1.0) with all measurements.⁷

We applied chi-square tests to ascertain statistical differences between type of stroke (i.e. forehand vs. backhand), type of outcome (i.e. winner vs. error), and court position (i.e. baseline area vs. net area).

Results

On average, in junior tennis, almost half of all rallies (49.0%; Figure 2) completed were concluded within 1–3 strokes (overall mean: 4.8 strokes per rally; SD ± 3.7; median: 4) as a consequence of an error (82.8% compared to 17.2% winners; P < 0.001). In general, rallies were characterized by short rally duration (5.81 ± 4.61 s) and a predominant utilization of forehand (44.1%) ground stroke compared to all other type of strokes such as backhand (30.4%), service (21.0%), volley (2.0%), and smash (0.7%).

Figure 2.

Quantity of strokes per rally.

With respect to the type of service (first or second serve), we observed differences between the performance and its impact on the rally progression. The service performance is characterized by an “in-percentage” of 54.6% for the first service and of 82.8% for the second serve. Following a successful first serve, the chance of winning the point for the server is higher (55.9%; P < 0.001) compared to following the second serve (42.9%). The average number of strokes per rally increased following a second serve (5.0 ± 4.1 strokes; median: 4) in comparison to a successful first serve (4.6 ± 3.4 strokes; median: 3). Furthermore, we report a greater number of double faults compared to aces per set (0.7 ± 1.3 aces and 2.2 ± 1.3 double faults).

The first ground stroke of the server (first shot) is characterized by a lower rate of generating winning shots (5.4%) and a higher chance of continuing the rally of 72.2% (in-balls). Compared to general error rate for all rallies (16.5%), we established a significantly higher frequency of first-shot errors (22.4%; P < 0.01). In comparison to other strokes, the first shot was reliant on the forehand ground stroke (56.8%; P < 0.001). If the first shot was the concluding stroke of the rally, we ascertain differences between winning shots and errors: 13.6% of the overall first shot were forehand winners. Errors were made by the forehand with a frequency of 41.5% and backhand ground strokes with a frequency of 33.9%. We report 52.1% (P < 0.01) of the overall percentage frequencies of winners is within the central area of the court (cell B4: 17.4%, cell M4: 21.7%, and cell N4: 13.0%). Errors were made predominantly in baseline cells, with a combined total of 50.5% in cell B4 and B5 of the overall percentage frequency (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Comparison of the cell position of first-shot error and first-shot winner.

Discussion

In national level junior tennis, a large proportion of points are finalized within short rally counts ( ≤4 shots per rally) and length (<6 s). These findings are similar to determined rally durations in professional senior tennis on hard court which are characterized by an average number of 4.5 ± 3.8 strokes per rally and 5.1 ± 5.19 s.¹⁰ The low average number of strokes per rally and short rally duration places a greater emphasis on the initial strokes of each point in junior tennis. In particular, service and the first shot play an important role in the overall success rate.

Compared to the determined factors for short rally duration in junior tennis, in elite senior tennis, higher accuracy and increased velocity predominate the first serve which shortens the length of rallies.^5,7,11 Whereas, high first-shot error rate is the established factor for short rally duration in junior tennis. In contrast to general characteristics of all rallies, first-shot errors occurred more frequently (P < 0.01). Weber and Born mentioned an increased importance of the first shot in elite senior tennis, however the present study highlights the first shot is a determining factor for success in elite junior tennis as well.¹¹ Beside the returner’s performance, the first shot of the server is influenced by the service quality (e.g. service direction) and the impact of the service on time factors of the rally (time pressure). The increased time pressure as a consequence of serving makes first-shot positioning increasingly difficult.¹²

On the contrary, professionals serve more aces than double faults per match (5.8 ± 3.1 aces and 2.6 ± 0.8 double faults), whereas junior tennis players produce fewer aces than double faults.^5,11 Furthermore, the success rate of the first service (54.6%) is lower, as well as the chance of winning the point for the server following a first or second service (55.9% and 42.9%, respectively) compared to service of professional players. Professional’s service performance is characterized by a success rate of more than 60% and a high probability of winning the point following first (70%) and second serve (51%).^2,4,5

In addition, comparing with target values for elite junior tennis players by Weber and Born for in-percentage for the first (>60%) and second service (>85%) as well as the chance of winning the point for the server following a first or second service (>71% and >55%, respectively) the quality of the service of juniors of the age group 14 years and below is lower. This underlines the demand of adapting the guidelines to physical and technical maturation.⁴

Therefore, in junior tennis, where the service itself is less pertinent compared to senior-level tennis, it is important that junior athletes utilize the serve as a “set-up” tool to influence the construction of the point instead of attempting to hit outright winners/aces. Due to the high percentage of forehand ground-stroke utilization as first shot compared to backhand ground stroke, it can be assumed that junior tennis players of the age group 14 years and below favor forehand over backhand ground stroke. Therefore, optimizing the positioning of the server prior to contact of their first shot would help to utilize the preferred type of stroke and improve overall success rate during points.

Previous investigations in professional tennis validated gender-specific differences in temporal structure and service characteristics, as well as common rally patterns.^13–15 However, this is the first investigation to identify important tactical considerations for developmental level tennis athletes. Therefore, future research should be conducted with larger cohorts to investigate the extent of our initial findings, as well as comparisons within national level female tennis players. This research is of high relevance in the talent development and benchmarking processes.

Conclusion

Successful junior tennis (male, 14 years and below) relies on minimizing errors within the first shot following the serve. This can be obtained by taking a central court position which allows forehand dominance. To realize this, the server should utilize the serve as a “set-up” tool, dictating the direction of the returner’s return of serve within the central zones of the court. This may be achieved by strategically placing the first serve down the “T” near the center service line.² Another positive effect of an optimal positional play after serving is a decrease in the first-shot error rate. Physical attributes which coaches should consider in order to exploit these positional/tactical strategies may include coordinative abilities such as dynamic balance, recovery speed, and agility, especially during the periods of time pressure (e.g. first shot).⁴

Practical application

Junior tennis players (male, 14 years and below) should use the serve as a “set-up” tool to effectively structure short rallies (<4 shots) for competitive success on hard court surfaces.

The server should increase success rate of the first service and develop a court position which enables optimal use of the forehand ground stroke (first shot) in order to increase the chance of winning the point following the service.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Hughes

The application of notational analysis to racket sports. In: Hughes

Maynard

Lees

Reilly

(eds). Science and Racket Sports II, New York: Routledge, 2002, pp. 211–220.

Gillet

Leroy

Thouvarecq

et al.

A notational analysis of elite tennis serve and serve-return strategies on slow surface. J Strength Cond Res 2009; 23: 532–539.

Kovacs

. Applied physiology of tennis performance. Br J Sports Med 2006; 40: 381–386.

Weber

Exler

Marx

et al.

Schnellere Aufschläge, kürzere Ballwechsel und höherer Zeitdruck für Grundschläge in der Tennis-Weltspitze. Leistungssport 2010; 40: 36–42.

Reid

McMurtrie

Crespo

. The relationship between match statistics and top 100 ranking in professional men’s tennis. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2010; 10: 131–138.

Unierzyski

Wieczorek

Comparison of tactical solutions and game patterns in the finals of two grand slam tournaments in tennis. In: Lees

Kahn

Maynard

(eds). Science and Racket Sports III, New York: Routledge, 2004, pp. 200–205.

Miller S, Miller S and Capel-Davies J. The role of the ITF science and technical in evaluating and regulating tennis equipment. In: Tennis science and technology 3: Proceedings of the III International Conference on Tennis Science and Technology, London, England, September 2007, pp. 1–19. London: International Tennis Federation London.

Hughes

Meyers

. Movement patterns in elite men’s singles tennis. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2005; 5: 110–134.

Altman

. Practical statistics for medical research, London: CRC Press, 1990.

10.

Takahashi

Wada

Maeda

et al.

The relationship between court surface and tactics in tennis using a computerized scorebook. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2006; 6: 15–25.

11.

Weber

Born

. Die besondere Bedeutung der erweiterten Spieleröffnung im Leistungstennis: Begründung, Leitlinien und Umsetzung in die Trainingspraxis. Leistungssport 2012; 42: 26–32.

12.

Takahashi

Wada

Maeda

et al.

An analysis of time factors in elite male tennis players using the computerised scorebook for tennis. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2009; 9: 314–319.

13.

Brown

O’Donoghue

. Gender and surface effect on elite tennis strategy. ITF Coach Sport Sci Rev 2008; 46: 9–12.

14.

O’Donoghue

Ingram

. A notational analysis of elite tennis strategy. J Sport Sci 2001; 19: 107–115.

15.

Taylor

Hughes

A comparison of playing patterns of play between the top under 18 junior tennis players in Britain and the rest of the world. In: Lees

Maynard

Hughes

Reilly

(eds). Science and Racket Sports II, London: E&FN Spon, 1998, pp. 260–264.