R.Nadal V.S R.Soderling (2010法網) - 網球 Tennis

Table of Contents


French Open


首先先看

R.Soderling

1st 2nd 3rd 4th QF SF F
1st Serve % 60 % 59 % 64 % 72 % 64 % 63 % 56 %
Aces 9 8 20 6 14 18 7
Double Faults 1 6 2 2 6 8 4
Unforced Errors 16 17 49 29 42 63 45
Winning % on 1st Serve 88 % 84 % 79 % 67 % 73 % 76 % 65 %
Winning % on 2nd Serve 83 % 54 % 59 % 60 % 56 % 50 % 55 %
Winners 46 24 55 24 49 62 32
Receiving Points Won 53 % 63 % 37 % 47 % 34 % 39 % 29 %
Break Point Conversions 55 % 67 % 27 % 50 % 44 % 46 % 0 %
Net Approaches 61 % 50 % 67 % 53 % 60 % 71 % 70 %
Total Points Won 89 80 126 84 124 155 81
Fastest Serve Speed 224 220 228 219 227 224 229
Average 1st Serve Speed 193 196 206 203 209 205 204
Average 2nd Serve Speed 157 154 166 163 174 171 171
Elapsed Time 94 71 149 101 150 207 138
Innings 23 20 39 28 40 48 28
Sets 3 3 4 3 4 5 3


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

再來是

R.Nadal

1st 2nd 3rd 4th QF SF F
1st Serve % 68% 80% 76% 74% 73% 76% 77%
Aces 0 1 1 2 4 4 7
Double Faults 0 2 1 0 0 4 1
Unforced Errors 28 12 21 27 34 24 16
Winning % on 1st Serve 71% 80% 70% 63% 73% 75% 74%
Winning % on 2nd Serve 52% 47% 53% 65% 57% 55% 62%
Winners 20 23 38 27 34 37 28
Receiving Points Won 52% 51% 48% 52% 37% 48% 40%
Break Point Conversions 50% 60% 44% 73% 33% 63% 33%
Net Approaches 77% 76% 65% 60% 75% 68% 50%
Total Points Won 102 93 105 109 117 108 100
Fastest Serve Speed 193 201 195 203 203 206 197
Average 1st Serve Speed 176 173 172 184 184 189 179
Average 2nd Serve Speed 136 140 140 142 148 148 143
Elapsed Time 143 105 148 153 155 129 138
Innings 24 25 28 30 36 30 28
Sets(一盤未失) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

R.Soderling SF前的統合 V.S Finals


SF(Sum) Finals

1st Serve % 368 of 577 = 64% 51 of 91 = 56 %
Aces 75 7
Double Faults 25 4
Unforced Errors 216 45
Winning % on 1st Serve 282 of 368 = 77% 33 of 51 = 65 %
Winning % on 2nd Serve 121 of 209 = 58% 22 of 40 = 55 %
Winners 260 32
Receiving Points Won 255 of 598 = 43% 26 of 90 = 29 %
Break Point Conversions 34 of 70 = 49% 0 of 8 = 0 %
Net Approaches 73 of 119 = 61% 14 of 20 = 70 %
Total Points Won 658 81
Fastest Serve Speed 228 KMH 229 KMH
Average 1st Serve Speed 202 KMH 204 KMH
Average 2nd Serve Speed 164 KMH 171 KMH
Elapsed Time 772 138
Innings 198 28
Sets 22 3

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

R.Nadal V.S R.Soderling SF前的比較

R.Nadal R.Soderling

1st Serve % 392 of 528 = 74% 368 of 577 = 64%
Aces 12 75
Double Faults 7 25
Unforced Errors 146 216
Winning % on 1st Serve 282 of 392 = 72% 282 of 368 = 77%
Winning % on 2nd Serve 75 of 136 = 55% 121 of 209 = 58%
Winners 179 260
Receiving Points Won 277 of 582 = 48% 255 of 598 = 43%
Break Point Conversions 34 of 63 = 54% 34 of 70 = 49%
Net Approaches 71 of 101 = 70% 73 of 119 = 61%
Total Points Won 634 658
Fastest Serve Speed 206 KMH 228 KMH
Average 1st Serve Speed 180 KMH 202 KMH
Average 2nd Serve Speed 142 KMH 164 KMH
Elapsed Time 833 772
Innings 173 198
Sets 18 22

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

最後補一下Finals數據

R.Nadal R.Soderling

1st Serve % 69 of 90 = 77 % 51 of 91 = 56 %
Aces 7 7
Double Faults 1 4
Unforced Errors 16 45
Winning % on 1st Serve 51 of 69 = 74 % 33 of 51 = 65 %
Winning % on 2nd Serve 13 of 21 = 62 % 22 of 40 = 55 %
Winners 28 32
Receiving Points Won 36 of 91 = 40 % 26 of 90 = 29 %
Break Point Conversions 4 of 12 = 33 % 0 of 8 = 0 %
Net Approaches 4 of 8 = 50 % 14 of 20 = 70 %
Total Points Won 100 81
Fastest Serve Speed 197 KMH 229 KMH
Average 1st Serve Speed 179 KMH 204 KMH
Average 2nd Serve Speed 143 KMH 171 KMH
Elapsed Time 138 138
Innings 28 28
Sets 3 3



--

All Comments

Vanessa avatarVanessa2010-07-08
以為會有分析的說QQ
Dorothy avatarDorothy2010-07-10
樓上你想要分析什麼東西啊? 其實我在統整時 一直在考慮
Ina avatarIna2010-07-11
哪些東西弄出來作比較會比較好
Tracy avatarTracy2010-07-13
我只是想問 純PO這些數據的意義在哪= =
Andrew avatarAndrew2010-07-15
基本上我非常支持你的做為,辛苦了,不過基本上沒有一個主要
Belly avatarBelly2010-07-16
目的,很容易被人家嫌,自己也會認為做白工,我做那麼辛苦還
Isla avatarIsla2010-07-18
被人家嫌,嘔!
Yedda avatarYedda2010-07-20
有啥好嫌 數據看了自己也可以解讀 況且比洗版新聞強多了
Hedda avatarHedda2010-07-22
我哪有嫌 不是跟同一個人的打的數據作平均
Skylar Davis avatarSkylar Davis2010-07-23
當然樓上講的我認同,你看看3F就知道了
Emma avatarEmma2010-07-25
不是有點怪嗎?
David avatarDavid2010-07-27
為一個主題整理數據 但沒試著去下結論 那數據只是一堆數字
Gilbert avatarGilbert2010-07-28
你就是嫌人家有點怪阿,嚴格來講,當然,放寬標準來講,當然
Quintina avatarQuintina2010-07-30
為啥要結論 純PO數據統合整理不行嗎 有些亂下結論心得文
Ida avatarIda2010-08-01
沒有。以原Po的個性,這應該只是一部份,所以我勸大家不要那
Edward Lewis avatarEdward Lewis2010-08-02
那文字也只是一堆無意義的文字......
Megan avatarMegan2010-08-04
麼早下結論...就這樣
Susan avatarSusan2010-08-06
可以理性一點? 亂下結論心得文跟純數據都一樣
Kyle avatarKyle2010-08-07
原PO也不是第一次PO數據 但是前幾次都有一些文字
Jacob avatarJacob2010-08-09
原來先開嗆的人最有理性 呵.....
Suhail Hany avatarSuhail Hany2010-08-11
原PO若覺得我口氣太嗆我會向他道歉
Carolina Franco avatarCarolina Franco2010-08-12
做結論說不定有爭議 還是不做的好~ 感謝原PO整理!
Una avatarUna2010-08-14
謝謝原PO整理 網球版非大滿貫時期很冷清 我喜歡大家多分享
Valerie avatarValerie2010-08-16
各種文章 新聞也好心得也好數據也罷 總比版上空空的好...
Kelly avatarKelly2010-08-17
這裡可是不能亂PO文的呢連心得都還要經過審核不然就劣文
Edith avatarEdith2010-08-19
真不好意思,造成大家的麻煩,我個人是不太喜歡加文字解讀
Steve avatarSteve2010-08-21
因為總覺得會讓人覺得是個人心得,會造成更大的反彈
Gary avatarGary2010-08-22
當然一個人的輸贏不能只靠數據去解讀,很多人都說要看比賽
Lily avatarLily2010-08-24
當然看比賽可以得到些什麼,但是數據也是可以告訴你些什麼
Robert avatarRobert2010-08-26
我之前的po文有加些許文字,但卻都非正式對球員的表現作
Enid avatarEnid2010-08-28
出講評,只是希望看球賽時的討論,和賽後數據也可以作出些
Jessica avatarJessica2010-08-29
其他的論點罷了。 anyway 感謝推文指導。 我這類數據文
Zora avatarZora2010-08-31
就po到這篇吧,剩下整理好的就我自己想像吧!
Daniel avatarDaniel2010-09-02
數據有的時候會發現跟印象中 差很大的事XD
Cara avatarCara2010-09-03
PO個人心得應該不會怎樣吧~~