Differences in competition statistics between winners and losers in male and female tennis players in Olympic Games

  • Ángel Iván Fernández-García
  • Juan Carlos Blanca-Torres
  • Pantelis Theodoros Nikolaidis
  • Gema Torres-LuqueEmail author
Main Article


The aim of this study was to examine differences in the performance indicators between winners and losers in male and female high-level tennis players. A total of 128 tennis singles matches played on grass court surface at the London 2012 Olympic Games were analyzed. Data were collected from the official website of the Olympics and the following groups of variables were analyzed: serve variables (n = 7), serve return variables (n = 3) and game-related variables (n = 5). The results showed that winners had greater (p < 0.05) values of second serve (%), aces, first and second serve points won (%), points won on first and second serve return (%), break points played and break points won (%). Furthermore, they get more winners with both groundstrokes and net points won (%) than losers in both sexes. Losers also committed more doubles faults than winners, and in the male category more unforced errors, whereas female winners get higher serve maximum speed (p < 0.05). Performance indicators according to the result of the match predicted that break points won, first serve points won (%) and first serve return points won (%) are the most relevant variables in males (SC = 0.434; SC = 0.340; SC = 0.327), whereas it was the break points won (SC = −0.372) in females. Therefore, coaches should consider the variation of the competition statistics by gender if they want to enhance the chances of success of their players.


Match analysis Racket sports Performance indicators 

Unterschiede in Wettkampfstatistiken zwischen Siegern und Verlierern unter männlichen und weiblichen Tennisspielern bei den Olympischen Spielen


In der vorliegenden Studie sollten Unterschiede in Leistungsindikatoren zwischen Siegern und Verlierern im Weltklassetennis der Männer und Frauen untersucht werden. Insgesamt 128 Spiele im Tenniseinzel auf Rasen bei den Olympischen Spielen von London 2012 wurden betrachtet. Die Daten stammten von der offiziellen Website der Olympischen Spiele. Folgende Variablengruppen wurden analysiert: Aufschlagvariablen (n = 7), Return-Variablen (n = 3) und spielbezogene Variablen (n = 5). Die Auswertung ergab, dass Sieger höhere Werte (p < 0,05) in Bezug auf den zweiten Aufschlag (%), Asse, bei erstem und zweitem Aufschlag gewonnene Punkte (%), bei Return des ersten und zweiten Aufschlags gewonnene Punkte (%), gespielte Breakbälle und gewonnene Breakbälle (%) aufwiesen. Weiterhin erzielten sie unabhängig vom Geschlecht mehr Punkte mit Grundschlägen („groundstrokes“) und am Netz (%) als Verlierer. Verlierern unterliefen mehr Doppelfehler als Siegern und bei Männern mehr unerzwungene Fehler, während Siegerinnen beim Aufschlag eine höhere Maximalgeschwindigkeit erreichen (p < 0,05). Leistungsindikatoren gemäß dem Matchergebnis sagten voraus, dass gewonnene Breakbälle, bei erstem Aufschlag gewonnene Punkte (%) und bei Return des ersten Aufschlags gewonnene Punkte (%) die wichtigsten Variablen bei Männern sind (SC = 0,434; SC = 0,340; SC = 0,327), während es bei Frauen die gewonnenen Breakbälle waren (SC = −0,372). Daher sollten Trainer geschlechtsbezogene Unterschiede in den Wettkampfstatistiken berücksichtigen, wenn sie die Erfolgsaussichten ihrer Spieler erhöhen wollen.


Spielanalyse Rückschlagspiele Leistungsindikatoren 


Compliance with ethical guidelines

Conflict of interest

Á.I. Fernández-García, J.C. Blanca-Torres, P.T. Nikolaidis and G. Torres-Luque declare that they have no competing interests.

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants or on human tissue were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1975 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.


  1. Cross, R. (2014). Men’s tennis vs Women’s tennis. ITF Coaching and Sport Science Review, 62(22), 3–5.Google Scholar
  2. Cui, Y., Gómez, M.-Á., Gonçalves, B., Liu, H., & Sampaio, J. (2017). Effects of experience and relative quality in tennis match performance during four Grand Slams. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 17(5), 783–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cui, Y., Gómez, M.-Á., Gonçalves, B., & Sampaio, J. (2018). Performance profiles of professional female tennis players in grand slams. PloS One, 13(7), e200591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Filipcic, A., Zecic, M., Reid, M., Crespo, M., Panjan, A., & Nejc, S. (2015). Differences in performance indicators of elite tennis players in the period 1991–2010. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 15(4), 671. Scholar
  5. Filipčič, T., Filipčič, A., & Berendijaš, T. (2008). Comparison of game characteristics of male and female tennis players at Poland Garros 2005. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnic, 38(3).Google Scholar
  6. Fitzpatrick, A., Stone, J. A., Choppin, S., & Kelley, J. (2019). A simple new method for identifying performance characteristics associated with success in elite tennis. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 14(1), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gillet, E., Leroy, D., Thouvarecq, R., & Stein, J.-F. (2009). A notational analysis of elite tennis serve and serve-return strategies on slow surface. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 23(2), 532–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hizan, H., Whipp, P., & Reid, M. (2011). Comparison of serve and serve return statistics of high performance male and female tennis players from different age-groups. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 11(2), 365–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hizan, H., Whipp, P., & Reid, M. (2015). Gender differences in the spatial distributions of the tennis serve. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 10(1), 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. International Tennis Federation. (2017). Manual de Play Tennis. London: ITF.Google Scholar
  11. Katić, R., Milat, S., Zagorac, N., & Đurović, N. (2011). Impact of game elements on tennis match outcome in Wimbledon and Roland Garros 2009. Collegium antropologicum, 35(2), 341–346.Google Scholar
  12. Klaus, A., Bradshaw, R., Young, W., O’Brien, B., & Zois, J. (2017). Success in national level junior tennis: Tactical perspectives. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 12(5), 618–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kovacs, M. S. (2007). Tennis physiology. Sports Medicine, 37(3), 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lago-Peñas, C., Lago-Ballesteros, J., Dellal, A., & Gómez, M. (2010). Game-related statistics that discriminated winning, drawing and losing teams from the Spanish soccer league. Journal of sports science & medicine, 9(2), 288.Google Scholar
  15. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 159–174. Google Scholar
  16. Ma, S.-M., Liu, C.-C., Tan, Y., & Ma, S.-C. (2013). Winning matches in Grand Slam men’s singles: An analysis of player performance-related variables from 1991 to 2008. Journal of sports sciences, 31(11), 1147–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin, C., Bideau, B., Touzard, P., & Kulpa, R. (2019). Identification of serve pacing strategies during five-set tennis matches. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 14(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meffert, D., O’Shannessy, C., Born, P., Grambow, R., & Vogt, T. (2018). Tennis serve performances at break points: Approaching practice patterns for coaching. European Journal of Sport Science, 18(8), 1151–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Munivrana, G., Filipčić, A., & Filipčić, T. (2015). Relationship of speed, agility, neuromuscular power, and selected anthropometrical variables and performance results of male and female junior tennis players. Collegium antropologicum, 39(Supplement 1), 109–116.Google Scholar
  20. Myburgh, G. K., Cumming, S. P., Coelho E Silva, M., Cooke, K., & Malina, R. M. (2016). Growth and maturity status of elite British junior tennis players. Journal of sports sciences, 34(20), 1957–1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ntoumanis, N. (2001). A self-determination approach to the understandding of motivation in physical education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(2), 225–242. Scholar
  22. O’Donoghue, P., & Ballantyne, A. (2004). The impact of speed of service in Grand Slam singles tennis. Paper presented at the Science and Racket Sports III. The Proceedings of the Eighth International Table Tennis Federation Sports Science Congress and the Third World Congress of Science and Racket Sports.Google Scholar
  23. O’Donoghue, P., & Ingram, B. (2001). A notational analysis of elite tennis strategy. Journal of sports sciences, 19(2), 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ortega, E., Villarejo, D., & Palao, J. M. (2009). Differences in game statistics between winning and losing rugby teams in the Six Nations Tournament. Journal of sports science & medicine, 8(4), 523.Google Scholar
  25. Reid, M., McMurtrie, D., & Crespo, M. (2010). Title: The relationship between match statistics and top 100 ranking in professional men’s tennis. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 10(2), 131–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Reid, M., Morgan, S., & Whiteside, D. (2016). Matchplay characteristics of Grand Slam tennis: implications for training and conditioning. Journal of sports sciences, 34(19), 1791–1798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Söğüt, M. (2017). A comparison of serve speed and motor coordination between elite and club level tennis players. Journal of Human kinetics, 55(1), 171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stare, M., Zibrat, U., & Filipcic, A. (2015). Stroke Effectivness in Professional and Junior Tennis/Ucinkovitost Udarcev V Profesionalnem IN Mladinskem Tenisu. Kinesiologia Slovenica, 21(2), 39.Google Scholar
  29. Varas Caro, I., & Ruano, G. M. Á. (2016). Análisis notacional en jugadores de tenis de élite en función de las variables contextuales. Kronos, 15(1).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health and Sport ScienceUniversity of ZaragozaZaragozaSpain
  2. 2.Faculty of Humanities and Education ScienceUniversity of JaénJaénSpain
  3. 3.Exercise Physiology LaboratoryNikaiaGreece

Personalised recommendations