Navigation

Research Institute

For the past 8 years I have conducted numerous studies on the ITF Junior Circuit and the ATP / WTA Tours.  These have shaped my philosophy enormously and validated both my beliefs and dispelled long-held coaching myths about the game.  Below you will find a selection of studies that I think will shape your outlook on coaching.  Enjoy!

If you would like to join the McCrawMethod Research Team for 2008 and be part of this years studies, please contact me then click here.

2006 Point Sequence - WTA Tour

This study was conducted on the WTA Tour at the 2006 Australian Open (Hard Court - Rebound Ace), Roland Garros (Clay Court) and Wimbledon (Grass Court) Championships.  It attempted to investigate the sequence in which points were won and to explore the connection between this and winning games, sets and matches.  The intended use of the study was to assist in the tactical development of junior tennis players. Download Research.

The conclusions of the study and implications for coaches and players are:

  1. Not all points in tennis have equal weighting.  If you win certain points you gain a statistical advantage over your opponent.
  2. While the total number of points won in a match is important, the sequence in which a player wins points is more important.
  3. The significance point sequence has on determining the outcome of a match necessitates players be educated on it's importance.
  4. Knowledge of point sequence should serve as a platform from which players build tactical intentions and act as a framework for decision making during a match.

2007 Point Outcome - WTA Tour

This study was conducted on the WTA Tour at the 2007 Australian Open (Hard Court - Rebound Ace), Roland Garros (Clay Court) and Wimbledon (Grass Court) Championships. It attempted to investigate the connection between outcome type, percentage of point outcomes and court surface.  The intended use of the study was to assist in the tactical development of junior tennis players. Download Research.

The conclusions of the study and implications for coaches and players are:

  1. Grand Slam level tennis is still a game of unforced errors.  Regardless of the surface speed and point outcome (4 shot combinations), unforced errors remained the highest outcome type (winner, unforced error, forced error).
  2. Point outcome is not surface dependent. There was no significant difference between point outcome on Hard, Clay and Grass Courts.
  3. Rule 1 (Cross-court to Cross-court combination) outcome type was not surface dependent.  There was no significant difference in the number of winners hit, unforced errors committed or forced errors created, across all three surfaces.
  4. Rule 2 (Cross-court from Down-the-line) winners increased as surface speed increased.  Players should look for and create opportunities to hit Rule 2 winners on fast courts.
  5. Rule 3 (Down-the-line to Down-the-line) was by far the lowest point outcome used.  It was the most surface dependent rule for outcome type.  Players created more forced errors (on their opponent) on Hard Court and hit an equal number of winners on Clay and Hard Court.  Players committed the highest number of unforced errors on Grass.
  6. Rule 4 (Down-the-line from Cross-court) was the most frequent point outcome.  Unforced errors were by far the highest outcome type, so players should learn to balance the reward of hitting a winner over the risk of making an unforced error. Finally, as surface speed increased so did the number of forced errors, hence players should realise that creating forced errors on fast surfaces is equally if not more effective than hitting a winner.
  7. The surface speed does not dictate the point outcome used at the Grand Slam level.  It may influence the outcome type, however, the largest influence recorded was a change of 12.5%, which equates to 12 points in 100. 

The most significant coaching implication from this study is: WTA players do not change their game when changing surfaces to end points any differently.  They may however, change the type of shot hit during the point to achieve a different outcome type, but the point ending combinations are the same no matter the speed and type of surface.

For further discussion on coaching and player development implications that came from the study click here.

2008 Research Projects

ATP Tour - Point Outcome and Sequence Study

Australian Open Results are in!  Download to see if the Men play any differently to the Women on Hard Courts.  The results may suprise you.  Stay tuned for the results from Clay and Grass Courts later in the year.

This year my aim is to conduct the same research we did on the WTA Tour (see above) to see if the same conclusions hold true for the men's game.

For the past eight years I have asked countless coaches from around the world if they believe the game is played differently on Hard, Clay and Grass Courts.  The overwhelming answer I hear is a resounding yes!  If fact, I am amazed at how much detail some coaches go into about their tactical based training for different surfaces.  "On clay we do this..., but when we switch to grass we do that...."

We know from the WTA Tour studies that there is very little difference across the three surfaces.  Will it be the same for the men?

If you would like to join the McCrawMethod Research Team for 2008 and be part of this years studies, please contact me. Then download the following 4 files to get started:

  1. Research Project Notes - Background to research and how to chart match.
  2. Project Template - Use this when charting the matches.
  3. Match Sample - An example of a completed template to support the notes.
  4. Match Results - Send this back to me so I can collate results.

Good Luck and see you at the courts!

Pete.