Which points are most important in a tennis match? (technical discussion)

[faultsnaces]

Hi all - I would really like to discuss a particular academic paper with someone(s) who have a background in statistics; the article at issue is "PERFORMING BEST WHEN IT MATTERS MOST: EVIDENCE FROM PROFESSIONAL TENNIS" by GONZALEZ-DIAZ, GOSSNER, AND ROGERS. You can find the article online at

http://eio.usc.es/pub/julio/papers/tennis_web.pdf

and a slide presentation is at:

http://eio.usc.es/pub/julio/slides/PerformingBest.pdf

This paper sets out a model for determining the importance of individual points in a tennis match, which identifies 'important' points as those points which are most correlated with winning or losing the match from a purely statistical sense. The model of point importance in this paper has been used in other studies, but I'm specifically interested in discussing it as an acquaintance of mine recently wrote a tennis book that largely depends on a particular variation / interpretation of this model. There are some technical statistical details to this model that i think make it less relevant for particular purposes, and it's that aspect I would really like to discuss. (Lies, damn lies, and statistics - and all that.)

Anyway, please drop me a line if interested in discussing, thanks.
-frank

[stotty]

All you need is Bill Tilden's advice on that one...Match Play and Spin the Ball.

Tilden goes through matchplay and the value of each point....15/15, 15/30...etc. The book, written in 1925, is timeless and anything else you've read is just reinventing the wheel. That said, I will read your posted articles with interest....back soon.

don_budge, let's get the book out!

[don_budge]

Hi all - I would really like to discuss a particular academic paper with someone(s) who have a background in statistics; the article at issue is "PERFORMING BEST WHEN IT MATTERS MOST: EVIDENCE FROM PROFESSIONAL TENNIS" by GONZALEZ-DIAZ, GOSSNER, AND ROGERS. You can find the article online at

http://eio.usc.es/pub/julio/papers/tennis_web.pdf

and a slide presentation is at:

http://eio.usc.es/pub/julio/slides/PerformingBest.pdf

This paper sets out a model for determining the importance of individual points in a tennis match, which identifies 'important' points as those points which are most correlated with winning or losing the match from a purely statistical sense. The model of point importance in this paper has been used in other studies, but I'm specifically interested in discussing it as an acquaintance of mine recently wrote a tennis book that largely depends on a particular variation / interpretation of this model. There are some technical statistical details to this model that i think make it less relevant for particular purposes, and it's that aspect I would really like to discuss. (Lies, damn lies, and statistics - and all that.)

Anyway, please drop me a line if interested in discussing, thanks.
-frank

All you need is Bill Tilden's advice on that one...Match Play and Spin the Ball.

Tilden goes through matchplay and the value of each point....15/15, 15/30...etc. The book, written in 1925, is timeless and anything else you've read is just reinventing the wheel. That said, I will read your posted articles with interest....back soon.

don_budge, let's get the book out!

I'm with Stotty on this one faultnaces. I read a bit about your report and I realized that I would have to go back to school for about a year before I could begin to comprehend the math involved. It's like my golf game which a quit on nine years ago because of lack of time and energy. I am trying to resurrect her but I have found that I have to relearn the game and put in the kind of work that I did when I was a beginner. It wouldn't take me thirteen years to reach the level that I did the first time but I reckon it would take me at least two or three. Seeing as I am nine years older doesn't help matter in this regard.

My eyes started to glaze over when I got to the technical aspect of this article and I couldn't make myself go any farther. So I am curious as to what you make of this without my participating in the discussion.

That being said...the book that Stotty is referring to is actually "How to Play Better Tennis: a complete guide to technique and tactics" written by Bill Tilden in 1950. Chapter 16 is called "Maintaining Pressure on Your Opponent". In this chapter is a subheading called "Playing to the score". Tilden produces a rather basic, yet brilliant, synopsis about how one goes about playing to the score complete with important points and what the individual points mean. This is more of a tactical discussion, which is quite different than the one that faultsnaces is getting at.

"Match Play and the Spin of the Ball" is the Bible of tennis according to Harry Hopman, the late great tennis coach of the legendary Australians back in the 50's and 60's. Written in 1925 it is brilliant and prophetic expose that is a must read for any one claiming to be a student of the game of tennis. I did get the book out, Stotty. It is never far beyond my reach. I reread the sixth chapter called "The All-Court Game". What can I say...it is brilliant. I know that I sound like him when I talk about tennis. He would have the same misgivings about the modern game of tennis that I do.

[bottle]

"Match Play and the Spin of the Ball" is the Bible of tennis according to Harry Hopman, the late great tennis coach of the legendary Australians back in the 50's and 60's. Written in 1925 it is brilliant and prophetic expose that is a must read for any one claiming to be a student of the game of tennis. I did get the book out, Stotty. It is never far beyond my reach. I reread the sixth chapter called "The All-Court Game". What can I say...it is brilliant. I know that I sound like him when I talk about tennis. He would have the same misgivings about the modern game of tennis that I do.

I agree with this but think when you value and like something you shouldn't pound on it and invoke it too often. Some is okay but if you overdo it, as you do, don_budge, you can have the exact opposite effect from that you desire. I know from having taught literature at a lot of different levels. If I liked a particular book and said so too much, nobody would hold it against me, but they (and especially tough kids hard to reach) would come to think of me as a priest of literature at which point I was finished. Because their focus would be on me and not the book. That said, I remember in particular Tilden on the subject of fourth game and know I should revisit that.

[arturohernandez]

I read through the article without sweating the model details too much. Basically, they say that the ability to win critical points as well as returning and serving ability lead to success in Tennis. This is not surprising. What is surprising is that break points are not the only critical points. In fact, critical points depend on the match. In a close match, there are a lot of critical points besides break points. And some players are really good at winning these points. For example, Tommy Robredo was really good at winning critical points.

So now my question is what is a critical point and if you could identify them in a match, could you use this information to tip the scale in your favor.

[faultsnaces]

Hi Arturo - yes, if you could identify the critical points and play those particularly well, could be a great improvement. But there are a few issues with this:

- Why not just play all points better; or, if you can play particular points better, why not play all points that way?

- Top pros play critical points better than lower pros; this has been shown with statistical analysis per that paper and related studies. But other (better, IMHO) statistical analyses have shown that a key distinguishing attribute of top pros is that they play all points the same, whether 'important' points or lesser points. A great approach to emulate this would be to simply do your best to ignore the score. Then again, that's not so easy - and what is the right level of 'risk' to take in playing a particular player? Analysis would seem to indicate that the real distinguishing factor of top pros is that they are properly able to gear their overall game / level of risk to a particular opponent....

- How can you tell the important points? There are two interesting aspects to the papers and other analyses of point importance: 1) point importance varies with the relative differential between the players, and 2) the statistically important points are not necessarily the same as the 'consequential' points that we readily perceive. The first of these poses a particular problem at the amateur level, though less of a problem in practice than might be apparent from the math. The second issue, consequential points are often not statistically significant, is a bigger practical problem - it seems odd that deuce points are often more important than game determining points....

[stotty]

There is a human side to playing points that goes much deeper than playing to the score. Sometimes players buckle and capitulate way before anything truly critical happens score-wise. It's about inexplicable nuances and feelings as well. A player can be 2-2 and 15-15 then have long rally and lose the next point....a feeling or uneasiness can then occur. Feelings of insecurity or a loss of confidence can spring up just about anywhere in a match based on nerves, the assertiveness of an opponent, or just about anything....sometimes something ineffable.

[johnyandell]

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members/mentalgame/allen_fox/diabolical_scoring_system/

What do you guys think of Allen's views on this?

[stotty]

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...coring_system/

What do you guys think of Allen's views on this?

It's an interesting article....but we all get used to the nature of tennis points in the end. Sure, you pay a hefty price for losing one particularly point but that's tennis and everyone knows the importance of the biggies.

A good analogy of the point I was trying to make would be the Borg/Connors Wimbledon final where Borg led Connors 4-0 in the fifth. Connors then came back to win the next four games and had real momentum. Borg admitted at this point it was a match he was definitely going to lose. But somewhere in that ninth game Connors threw in a double fault, and just from that double fault alone, Borg had a 'feeling' he could win again. He indeed went on to win that match. This is what I mean when I say feelings can have a huge impact on a match and it isn't just about the scoreline or the size of a particular point. That feeling that Borg had wasn't just ebb and flow...it was the cause of the ebb and flow. It is the human side of big tennis matches which is so interesting, at least to me. So often tennis reflects life itself.

I have often wondered what Connors was thinking after throwing in that double fault. Were his feelings similar to Borg's or entirely different?

[faultsnaces]

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...coring_system/

What do you guys think of Allen's views on this?

A few points, in no particular order:

- I definitely agree with Fox's conclusion; he gets the 'right' answer -- doing your best to treat all points the same (even though they most definitely are not).

- And as usual / always, I agree with stotty - love the Borg / Connors example! Tennis is (gentlemanly) combat, and yeah, it's mentally stressful to play to your ability regardless of the current match stats. I think this is perhaps the highest level of the game: after you get the basics, the fitness, the strokes, the footwork, the strategy, that last crux move is doing it all under all circumstances against all comers.

- Statistical analysis is interesting and can be enlightening, but it's also fraught with challenges, particularly challenges of interpretation. To wit: we all know intuitively which points in a match are the 'big' points - they have big consequences. Break point, game point, set point, match point - all are big, consequential, points. We can say that winning those points is consequential and thus in a most concrete sense, important.

- Applying statistical reasoning to the tennis scoring system, we can simulate / analyze two players playing infinite numbers of matches against each other, and we can look at which points have the highest correlation with the outcome of the match. (This is the approach taken in the paper I referenced in the original post.) When we do this purely mathematical analysis, we find the result may be a bit counter-intuitive: for two evenly matched players, the 'important' points are the deuce points - points with no obvious important consequences! Skew the players so that one is more favored to win than the other, and we see other points become important, and in a lop-sided matchup, we see very few points as being 'important' for either player. Which all seems very wrong - and we all know that old saw about lies, damn lies, and statistics. (Did Twain ever see a tennis match?!) Understanding this conundrum provides additional insight; the issue comes down to the correlation statistics considering the frequency of the points and recognizing that the scoring system has a tremendous capability to determine the correct winner, the stronger / better player, even when the players are very closely matched.

- An illustration of the statistical importance: two mismatched players at match point in favor of either player. The statistical approach says this is an unimportant point! Why? Match point in favor of the favored player is no big deal, as if he loses it, he will most likely just get another in the near future. Match point for the underdog is no big deal, as it's very unlikely for him to have gotten here, and he will probably lose this point -- other points were far more important to get to this point. The statistical logic is correct per the rules of math, and yet this counters the intuition of the consequences of winning / losing the point. The problem of the statistics is not with the math, but rather with the loaded term 'importance' - statistical importance is not the same thing as consequential!

- The statistical analysis approach discussed here is of very limited utility during a match, particularly lower level matches where less is known about the two players; the reason is that the analysis rests on knowing a priori the relative strength of the players (the difference in probability of winning the match). Players are rarely / never evenly matched during a game (there is a statistically significant advantage to serving, at all levels of the sport), so its virtually impossible to accurately imply this scoring importance model. Other analysis approaches do not suffer from this disadvantage....

- The statistical analysis may not be useful to think about during a match, or then again, perhaps some selective tidbits could be useful. It may help some players to remember that deuce points are important, to not relax at deuce. And to remember that consequential points for the underdog are statistically unimportant - just play Kreise's "ordinary stuff is good enough." Judicial selection of certain insights from intuition and certain insights from statistical analysis may nicely counter each other and help players even out their innate emotional response to the score.

- I disagree with Fox's preferred equal scoring model, the basketball scoring model. (In fact, basketball should adopt tennis scoring.) The tennis scoring system is an amazing innovation in the history of sports, way ahead of it's time: the big insight of the scoring system is that by basing the system on counting 'runs' of points - two in a row, three in a row, four in a row - the scoring system gains much more statistical power for playing a given number of points. Or said inversely, matches length is shorter for a given "statistical power" of determining the correct (better / stronger) winner. The key to winning a tennis match is to win more points in a row than your opponent, to exceed their runs of points. And you must do this on basic points as well as under opposite situations -- serving versus receiving, deuce vs ad court, left end vs right end. It's an amazing scoring system.

- With the above, we can see that the 'important' points in a match are actually the points that follow a given win / loss of a point: stop your opponent from getting two, three, four in a row; achieve two, three, four in a row for yourself. But...is this useful to think of in a match? Kreise has a model for this, but I wonder if it's not better to try to help players to just play every point the same, rather than play to the score....

-frank

[johnyandell]

Frank I agree. The better players may win the "important" points because they try to play all points the same. If you believe one point or the other is critical to win that added pressure is a possible negative.

[nickw]

Interesting topic, always nice to get away from technique. Just a few thoughts of mine.

Humans rarely have the capability to play with the idea that every point is equally important, it requires consistently high levels of concentration and intensity that most are not capable of. At pro level, you rarely see a player manage this without any blips. At lower levels, even tougher to do.

The importance of deuce (and 30-30) is definitely under-estimated by many players, especially lower levels. These points will always result in one player having a game point (or set point or match point), huge for the player who gains that opportunity, and quite damaging for the player who has to defend against it. Your probability of winning a particular game will become higher the more game points you have, and every 30-30 and deuce point will offer a game point to the winner. Importance of these points can't be under-estimated.

Then comes the question of how can you exploit the knowledge of knowing which are the important points. For me, the answers come from tactical knowledge and then confidence. The first is available to everyone, the second is a complex aspect of human nature that is not so easy to control.

I would hope my players would look to play the percentages on the big points, and ask the question of the opponent if they have the skill to play a good point under pressure. For example, returning 2nd serve at break point: Trying to blast a down the line winner will normally result in your chances to win the point being lower than if you had tried to get a heavy deep ball crosscourt or up the middle.

Then comes confidence, which I believe is the most powerful force at work in any competitive tennis match. When it comes to the important points, the player feeling confident will be far more likely to execute a quality point, thereby increasing their chances of winning it. The whole subject of confidence is vastly complex, but at a basic level we all know it's power, and we all know that when lacking confidence, your ability to execute your game can greatly diminish. The Borg/Connors example is classic, Borg throws in a double-fault at 4-4 having been 0-4. The confidence was there to bring the scores level, but that moment makes Borg question whether he has the confidence to go on and win. Likewise, down the other end, Connors gets a confidence boost from this unexpected moment. Momentum can shift on one point, and those points are often when one player's confidence has slightly reduced at the same time as the other player's has slightly increased, like a double effect.

Finally, I love a game called 'Big Point Little Point', which I took from someone somewhere, and have used regularly for many years. Every point counts as a little point, but 3 little points in a row scores you a 'big point'. The total score of the match is only in 'big points'. Therefore, players only get rewarded when they win three consecutive points, which of course will always give a huge boost to the scoreboard no matter what the score when you manage it (except perhaps 6-0 down in a tie-break!).

And thanks for the book recommendations stotty and don_budge, I'll be seeking them out.

[don_budge]

How To Play Better Tennis...A complete guide to technique and tactics

A technical discussion. Yikes...just what we need. It's enough to take the fun out of it. Here...read the following from Bill Tilden's "How To Play Better Tennis...a complete guide to technique and tactics. You can read all of the tennis literature you like but if you haven't thoroughly studied Bill Tilden's "How to Play Better Tennis" and equally importantly "Match Play and Spin of the Ball" you will have a difficult time convincing any true student of the game that you are likewise.

Part Three of "How to Play Better Tennis" is called "Match Play Tactics and Tennis Psychology". Chapter 12 in this part of the book is called "Courage". Tilden spells it out word for word and he begins with the immortal words from Rudyard Kipling's poem "If".

"If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same."

He is brilliant like no other tennis author has ever been. He has no equal. Tilden is the book. He follows in this section with Chapter 13..."Exploiting Your Opponents Weaknesses". In this chapter you will find the famous words of his..."Never change a winning game and always change a losing game". Chapter 14 is called "General Tactics and Stategy". The tactics here are "Old School" for sure but nevertheless as brilliant as white light. Teach your students this until they can recite them like a litany. He ends this chapter with more words of wisdom from Kipling.

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And to hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the will which says to them: "Hold on."...

Tilden writes..."Oh yes! Those lines indeed describe a champion.

Chapter 15 is called "Outside Conditions: Weather; Court Surface, The Entire Tournament Program". At the end of this chapter he makes a stunning prophecy about one Richard Gonzalez who just happens to be the model of my teaching paradigm. He writes..."One reason why I believe that Pancho Gonzales will be a great performer for years to come is that, in 1948 an d1949, although his record was marred by many minor losses, he produced when he had to, and won all the important United States championships, on every type of court surface. That shows true championship quality to a remarkable degree".

Finally we arrive at Chapter 16...perhaps the most important chapter of all. "Maintaining Pressure On Your Opponent". In this chapter he discusses "Playing to the Score" like no other has before or since. Here is the blueprint for playing the scoring system and when learned every single point becomes one of those thousand points of light you hear about or read about. It is inspirational and when the student begins to understand and apply this to his game you know that you have a player. A tennis player. A real freaking live tennis player.

Please read carefully and fill in the dots. When you are playing the game each and every point has a consequence...two consequences as a matter of fact. When you learn to play to weigh the consequence of the two outcomes...you have in a big sense arrived. This is where the serve and volley and multi-dimensional game comes into play. Serving tactics...approach shots...volleys and of course groundstrokes.

This is your tactical blueprint. William Tilden is the Book...of tennis.

[don_budge]

How To Play Better Tennis...A complete guide to technique and tactics

Playing to the Score

Playing to the Score...

Every point in a match is naturally important but there are certain points in each game, certain games in each set, and certain sets in a match that are crucial. the player who knows those points and games, and makes special effort to win them, will greatly increase his chances of victory. The crucial points in a game are the third and the fifth. The crucial games in a set are the fourth, particularly the seventh, and the ninth. The crucial sets are the first, in a two-out-of-three match, and the third, in a three-out-of-five match.

While understanding the psychology of these vital moments in tennis, never lose sight of the fact that every point, game, and set counts, and you must play to win them. Do not think that you can play carelessly at other times, if you play well at the critical stages. What I mean, in stressing them, is that you should exert extra effort at these times.

Consider the third point of a game! Your score is given first. The score stands 30-0, 15-all, or 0-30. In he first case, if you win the next point it gives you 40-0, an dyou will win that game about nine times out of ten. If, however, the score is 15-all, then that point means the advantageous position to you at 30-15 (or at 15-30, if you are receiving), from which you can press on to game. At 0-30, if you win the third point you still have a life-not too good, but still a chance-whereas if you lose it and are 0-40, then you have only about one chance in ten for the game.

The fifth point means that the score stands at 40-15, 30-all, or 15-40. Here you are playing a point which, in two cases, actually means the game, while in the other case you are both fighting for a very important advantage. Certainly, if you’re ahead at 40-15, you cannot afford to be careless, since a lost point will make it 40-30, and one more point won by your opponent evens the game at deuce. Yet many players play that 40-15 situation with an air of having such a commanding lead that they need not worry about it. I see more games booted away by a careless, half-concentrating shot at 40-15 than at any other time, and second to that is at 30-0, where the situation is fairly similar. The necessity for special effort on the 30-all and 15-40 situations is so obvious that I need do no more than point it out.

There are many psychologically important games. For that matter, every game is important, and no player should throw one away by carelessness of inattention. The psychological effect of winning the very first game, particularly if you can break your opponent’s service, may determine an entire match. If you possibly can, break your opponent’s first service game, and hold your own. Still, the chips are not really down until about the fourth game. Here is the first big psychological moment in the game score.

Let’s look at the possibilitiies. The score may be 3-0, 2-1, 1-2, or 0-3. This next game really puts it up to you. If you win it and lead at 4-0 (in the first instance), you hold a double service break and will win the set an overwhelming majority of times. If you lead at 2-1, you are playing to establish or hold a service break, and to stay in the lead at the halfway point in the set. This is a big advantage that may well make your opponent “press” in an attempt to recover. But if he wins this fourth game you are all even, with the psychological edge to him, particularly if he broke your serve to do it, since he has cut down your lead. If you are on the short end of 1-2 or 0-3, the reverse of all the above is true, and you must win the fourth game to stay in the set.

Strange to say, the psychological advantage of winning the fourth game is greater than that of the fifth or sixth, although both the latter are important, but the really big moment comes in the seventh game. The set usually hangs on it. The score is 5-1, 4-2, 3-all- 2-4 or 1-5. Since the set ends, if the player leading at 5-1 wins the game, you can forget that situation. With that lead he will almost always win the set anyway. It is the 4-2 situation that is so vital, particularly if it is on your own service. Here you have the chance to push your opponent into an almost hopeless position. If you win this seventh game, he must win three games in a row to get even to a deuce set, a far from pleasant prospect. On the other hand, if he breaks your service, he is within a game of being even, with his own service to follow. Encouraged by his success in breaking your delivery, he will probably reach 4-all easily. Once more, you will have allowed the psychological edge to get away from you and pass to him. Always make your greatest effort to consolidate a 4-2 lead. The 3-all situation explains itself, since you are both fighting for the obvious advantage on the first step after the halfway mark of the set. If you are down 2-4, you must win that game to stay in the set, as shown conversely above.

[don_budge]

How To Play Better Tennis...A complete guide to technique and tactics

The ninth game often winds up the set, of course, The score is 5-3, 4-all, or 3-5. Since a victory for either man with five games means the set, I need only say, win it at all costs. The 4-all situation is where you are fighting for the set itself. If you win, the pressure on your opponent is greatly increased, since he will have his back to the wall. If you lose that ninth game, then you will be the one who will be fighting for his life. Give all you own in the ninth game, and if you win it, many times your opponent cracks and the tenth is easy.

It goes without saying that every set is of extreme importance. Any time you drop a set you are in danger, but in a two-out-of-three-set match, the first set usually carries the victory with it. I believe that the man who wins the first set wins 80 per cent of the two-out-three-set matches played. If you are a set in, your opponent is placed under the tremendous pressure of knowing that he cannot afford to let you have an chance at another. Therefore, he is forced to work at top speed all through the second set, which, even if he wins it, may well take such a toll of his physical and nervous reserves that he will have nothing left in the third set. In a three-out-of-five-set match, the climactic set, in my opinion, is usually the third. The first is naturally of great psychological value, but it is not actually decisive. If you can win both the first two sets, so much the better. Still, the third set is the critical one. If the score is 2 sets to 0, a victory in the third means the match. If you are behind at 0-2, you must win the third or the match is lost. But in many three-out-of-five-set matches, the players divide the first two sets and stand at 1-all. Now the real importance of that third set comes to the fore. If you win it and lead, 2 sets to 1, the discouragement to your opponent is tremendous. By the end of a third set, any player will be feeling the physical strain, more or less. To face the necessity of winning two sets in a row places a great burden on the mental and physical courage of your opponent. It looks like an awfully long road back. You may even be able to afford taking the chance of running him in the fourth set and, even if you lose it, tire him so much that he will be easy in the fifth. It is, of course, better to keep pressure on in the fourth set, and take no chances.

There is much more to playing to the score than just learning what point, games, and sets are crucial. You must know how to put the pressure on your opponent in the most effective and winning way. Putting pressure on your opponent is not just hitting hard and rushing the net. There are many other ways, just as difficult for him and much safer for you. The method should be determined by the situation. When you have a commanding lead, and an error will cost your opponent a vital point, perhaps even a game or set, give him every opportunity to make it. Keep that ball going back to him at all costs and always, if possible, to a new place so that he must move to reach it. Every time he hits the ball he is aware that, if he makes an error, it’s costly, and each return you send back to him makes him more and more nervous and tense. If he should give you a weak mid-court return, which he is very apt to do under pressure of that kind, then attack it deep, not too hard, very safe and sure, and go in behind it! Pass the buck to him. Now he must take a chance or lose, for if he defends, you have the kill. He will probably go all out for his shot and miss. Whenever you have your opponent where he cannot afford to take a chance, keep the ball going back and vary spin, speed, direction, an depth consistently, but never so much that you are in real danger of missing. Give yourself plenty of margin. Only if you have let him off the hook by making errors yourself. Make him earn his way off, if he can, by the sweat of his brow and his own good shots, because, if he should get off, he will have a psychological up lift that will make him very dangerous.

Always use your service aggressively at the crucial moments of a match, if you are behind. If you are ahead, be certain that your service keeps your opponent on the defensive, but you need not give it quite so much as when you are behind. When you are in the hole and fighting to attack, so do so the first logical chance. Do not take unnecessary risks, though you must risk enough to surprise and upset your opponent if you ever to pull up from behind and win.

Many a player player plays a set-point or a match-point to him or against him, and doesn’t realize that anything crucial is going on, because that score does not say so. I mean by that, the final result of many sets and matches hangs upon points which come up early in the first set. Let’s take a hypothetical situation, which illustrates very nicely the crucial point and crucial game theory I have discussed in this chapter.

Two players of almost equal ability, are battling in a match that each is very eager to win. Both men are keyed up and inclined to be jittery. Mr. A leads, 4-2 and 40-15 on his own service, and feels he the set in hand. On the next point Mr. A reaches the net, and Mr. B hits him an easy drive which if Mr. A played carefully, he could put away fro a win. Instead, without taking proper care, he attempts a drop-volley, and misses the shot: 40-30 instead of a won game and a 5-2 lead. Annoyed, Mr. A goes back and serves a double fault. Deuce. Mr. B cheered up by these two reprieves given him by Mr. A makes two fine shots and the score is now 3-4, with Mr. B’s serve coming up. He is back again match, and he eventually wins it. Actually, if Mr. A had played his 4-2, 40-15 volley carefully, he would have won the game, and probably the set and match.

In my opinion, the match-point was that missed volley, but neither man knew it at the time. So keep alert for the psychological value of certain points, played early, and sense the possibility of the equivalent of set-point, or match-point, coming p for you when you least expect it. Many a match can be turned by taking advantage of the unexpected reprieve, or the lucky break in your favor. Always be on your guard against giving your opponent another chance he hasn’t earned. Consolidate your gains whenever you pile up an advantage, and be ready to jump in and grab an opening if it’s given to you.