Technical Statistical Preview for Chapter 4 of NextGen Challenge

It’s been just over two months since Final Eight pitted Sinner and Alcaraz against each other. On that occasion, it was Altotsino who won. In the middle there was also a file Umag final, this time in the Top 3, where Sinner still reigns supreme. The Italian comes to this appointment and thus with a positive score of 2-1, the son of these last two successes. In short, Jannik is in confidence who will challenge “Charlie” Alcaraz on the strength of a positive streak, even if we imagine the number of challenges in the coming years will be updated a lot.

But let’s go try and put some data in a row that can help us give a picture of the situation;

Tournament tournament: From this point of view, Alcaraz has a slight advantage, as the Italian stayed on the field for exactly two hours longer than the Murcia native (10:46 vs. 12:46); However, they both played a very complicated round of 16 matches, ending in the fifth set on both occasions, as the two aspiring stars (?) started with the underdogs. For Alcaraz, if he wins in addition to the No. 1, there will also be pride in being able to get close to Pete Sampras, as the only New York Slam winner in the Open Era.

Peace story: For both is the pillars of Hercules in their young careers. The slam quarter is the limit that is expected to be crossed. Usually, when a player is close to uncharted territory, the pressure, even involuntary, caused by the fact that he is in a moment of career transformation: a move that both consider necessary and almost deserved, but which must also be managed at a subconscious level. It would be interesting to see who would be able to become more mentally free, which does not mean that I drain it with the soul of someone who has nothing to lose. In fact, the opposite is probably true: they both have a lot to lose


But what do the pros or the bettors think? Apparently for the various sports betting houses is the favourite, and obviously there is also one, which is Carlos Alcaraz. The odds are much lower if the Spaniard wins (on the order of 1.6 times the stake) compared to 2.5 if Yannick wins.

Another synthetic index is provided by the organizers themselves, who in cooperation with IBM offer a strength index, the same index presented at Wimbledon, given that the technology partner in both cases is IBM. This index is generated using artificial intelligence algorithms that intercept both player performance metrics measured over the last 52 weeks, and unstructured information derived from social and news channels, to give a “momentum” measurement to each player; Some doubts arise spontaneously over the quality and volatility of this last metric, in Jank’s latest vision among tennis players still in contention, with Tiafoe whose prices have skyrocketed after the victory over Nadal.

Another interesting game that US OPEN offers is the possibility of seeing the “feelings” of the audience going through the US OPEN website, where we can see a certain deviation from what is expected of IBM’s AI.

Going into detail, the lack of H2H being deep enough, and given that the players’ careers are still in a preliminary stage, the way that seemed logical to us was to check the boys’ performance against the top ten players in service and response sectors and key pressure points; A number that due to the explosive growth of small rifles is instead a bit more powerful.

service performance

In this section, the data appears to agree with the Spaniard, who makes up for poor performance in terms of aces and double faults with better first-on-field ratios and related transitions.

If we look at the recent matches with Ivashka and Cilic, we can take into account some considerations;

  • Sinner was able to survive thanks to ringworm and overall superiority of evasive game; However, 46%, the obvious result of a black day on the service, could not be replicated with the Spanish tennis player, under the penalty of a resounding “sweep”, as they say in the US when it comes to grand qualifiers. Sports tournaments. On the other hand, what had to be saved was the good percentage of the first shift (73%)
  • Alcaraz, on the other hand, had a headache in service with Cilic: if the percentage of top players on the field is well above average (72%), what is missing is the turnover percentage (only 62%) of points. He won the first, a number that must necessarily go up against Sinner

Performance in response and drawing

In this case, we have compiled statistics on points won in the second serve, regardless of whether the second is in the serve or in response; The assumption is that these are the situations where the most lengthy quirks can occur and where the ability to trade more appears. The reference perimeter is always the perimeter of matches versus the top ten.

In this case, too, the performances are quite similar, with a certain prevalence on Alcaraz’s ability to turn second serve balls, and greater pessimism on Sinner’s continued ability to bring games home in response.

Also in this case, if we look at the offers answered in the two round of 16 matches, we have some interesting pointers;

  • The foul in his match against Ivaska was generally in line with his standards in terms of turnover performance on the second serve (49%) while certainly making the difference in the second by the Belarusians, who were cheerfully celebrating in that instance (67% of the turn)
  • And vice versa, in the match against Cilic, Alcaraz was in control of his second serve (60%) of the turn, and in any case was decisive in responding to the second for the Croat (52%). Numbers that show how the Spaniard was on the ball, would have allowed him to close the game early, and should have.

Performance on break balls

Turning to achievement percentages in break points and the ability to save skins on your serve against level opponents (remember we always skim data for matches against the top ten), we see a very different trend between the two

While Alcaraz is more steadfast when cornered and forced to save his serve, Sinner is more pessimistic when it comes to seizing break opportunities.

Going to take a peek again at the previous round’s performance we have some pointers:

  • Sinner appeared equally vulnerable when he had to save his serve (43% of broken points saved) while positioning himself according to his stats in terms of conversion and (46%)
  • Likewise, the Cardinal turned out to be very difficult at the time he had to save himself (only 44% of break points saved) and was as usual a waste of time at the time of conversion (33%)

In conclusion, what match can we expect?

Sure, the first thing Sinner fans hope for is that the boy from San Candido can adjust his sight and return to serve first on the field, which is certainly the prerequisite for a balanced game.

Second, the boys come from performances that are exceptional in the mental aspect; Especially compared to their standards, they weren’t very convincing when it came to saving the break points they had. The mental aspect that will be particularly important, also in light of the fact that for one of the two doors will open the semi-Grand Slam door, a goal the two will reach several times in their careers, but will achieve today. With her nervous the first time