Comparative analysis reveals changes in tactical characteristics and stroke utilization in men’s tennis doubles.
We aimed to compare tactical characteristics in professional men´s tennis doubles by notational analysis of two historical samples of matches collected at least 20 years apart. Samples were taken either between 1985 and 1990 (D<1990: 57 matches, 9.305 points, 34.428 strokes) or in 2011 (D>2010: 8 matches, 1.002 points, 4.297 strokes) during official ATP tournaments. Players were internationally ranked (D<1990: 76 ± 89; D>2010: 102 ± 91) and all matches were played on clay courts following ITF rules. Notational analysis was done by tagging video recordings following the same self-programmed notation software model. Absolute and percentage numbers of stroke rates, winners, and errors as well as specific tactics for services (e. g. Serve & Volley), returns (e. g. Chip & Charge), volleys and groundstrokes (e. g. positioning) were analysed. Coding was done by two experienced tennis coaches. Interrater reliability was calculated by Cohen ́s Kappa and items with r < 0.9 were excluded. Differences between D<1990 and D>2010 were calculated by independent t-tests. Significance level was set at p<0.05. Rally length (3.7±0.3 vs. 4.2±0.5 strokes per point, p<0.001) increased significantly from D<1990 to D>2010. The percentage of serves (32.5±3.9 vs. 23.8±3.5 %) and volleys (25.1±4.0 vs. 17.3±5.7 %) decreased while the percentage of groundstrokes increased over time (8.8±3.6 vs. 26.9±7.0 %) (p<0.001). Serve & Volley application was reduced to one third in D>2010 (98.7±2.0 % vs 33.9±33.4 %) with a high individual variation. Positioning of Returns (more often behind the baseline) and volleys (shorter distance to the net) changed in D>2010 (p<0.001). Tactical characteristics in men´s tennis doubles completely changed within a time frame of 20 years mainly attributed to a decreased Serve & Volley application from most but not from all double players. The current variability in technical and tactical demands must be considered by individualized coaching guidelines.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raasch et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: