Truths, Lies and Tennis Statistics / Matthew Walton / 25 April 2008 /

"Magical" Matthew Walton invites us to scratch beneath the "surface" to find astounding discrepancies amongst the different players depending on the surface they're playing on

"Magical" Matthew Walton shows how a knowledge of players most loved and hated surfaces can help YOU find winners.

As we know, the study of statistics is a vital pursuit if we are to improve our betting. To some it might be a cursory glance over a handful of figures, to others a full-on investigation, trawling through reams of data. Either way, your betting should be much improved in terms of quality (and quantity ... of profits, that is) given some familiarity with the facts and figures.

However, moving on from a basic appreciation of the material which is presented to us on countless websites and in numerous books, we can also benefit by the application of a little bit of lateral thinking to the problem of finding winners.

The commonly known statistics will only take you so far and all too often a slavish following of them will lump you in with the herd, chasing ever-decreasing prices about 'obvious' bets - and we don't want that do we?

In the table below you'll see figures for a number of players, selected at random, from the world rankings. These reflect the number of matches they have played on each surface so far during their careers.

This forms Part 1 of a two part article about playing surfaces - so do be sure to check back next week! - in which we'll discuss the importance of court conditions. In short, how differing surfaces can have a radical effect on match outcomes.

We'll use the table below to open the debate with an illustration of player preferences when it comes to court surfaces. We've chosen these guys completely at random but the study can work for all players on tour.

Remember also, when you look at the table, this year we have 65 ATP Tour events with 30 on hard courts (46%) plus 23 on clay (35%) and 6 apiece on both carpet and grass (making up the other 19%). As a result, don't be surprised to see the first two columns, hard and clay, dominate our findings.

Initially, let's just go back to school. And we mean this quite literally! The subjects you enjoyed most were the ones you were best at (and the ones you were best at you enjoyed the most). In the same way, surely the surface you play on most often is the one you feel most at home on, one where you should play your best tennis and consequently get your best results.

Hence, you can use the clear preference of the players as a guide to your own betting and it's interesting to see how widely these figures differ from player to player.

You'll see that Roger Federer has played just 20% of his matches on clay whilst David Ferrer has played nearly 49% of his matches on dirt.

Hyung-Taik Lee has played 65% of his matches on hard courts and Mario Ancic 55% but they've both played very little on clay - just 17% and 16% respectively.

Kevin Anderson has yet to move away from hard courts whilst Marcel Granollers-Pujol wouldn't know one if he saw one!

Even when we get to the more specialist surfaces, those less frequently used, we see a wide disparity in the figures. Rafael Nadal's 2% activity on carpet compared to Nikolay Davydenko's 10%, Mario Ancic up at 14% on grass and David Ferrer down on 3%.

For sure, with some players who are still in the early stages of their careers the figures can be a little misleading if taken too literally but used in association with other statistical aids (head-to-head form, recent match performances, track record in tournaments) it adds greater depth to the form and so, we assume, a better return on our bets.

The real value is when the figures are used to split two seemingly very close players. Ones which the casual, or ill-informed, observer would lump together as being of a similar standard. These figures tell us if they really are.

Take the example in the box below and you'll see exactly what we mean.

It's funny how two players who have played many times, and have a close overall record, have an individual surface record which aligns very closely with their match percentages. Hewitt has a clear lead on hard courts and grass, Safin is the dominant carpet player. As for clay ... well, back Safin next time they meet!

Yes, we're straying a little into the area of horseracing and results being determined purely by the going (or in this case the surface) but the preference of certain players is important - and next week we'll show you how it's not just the number of matches played on a surface that should be considered but the specific winning percentage on each individual surface which also has a significant bearing on the outcome.

In the meantime, make sure you scratch a little below the 'surface' when considering your bets.

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: