This study is an example of the use of the decision tree analysis technique within the framework of observational methodology, for conducting match analysis in tennis; specifically, it analyses the effectiveness of technical-tactical performance between Novak Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz in the two Wimbledon finals held in 2023 and 2024 (all sequences of play -serves and rallies- from both tournaments were analysed; n = 757). The ad hoc observation instrument designed for the study captures the technical-tactical behavior deployed during tennis gameplay in a diachronic manner. Data recording and coding were performed using LINCE software. Inter-observer reliability was calculated using Cohen's Kappa coefficient. Decision trees generated by different algorithms were compared, with the results obtained through the CRT and CHAID models selected for interpretation. The findings point out key aspects of effectiveness on grass courts for both Novak Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz, namely: the serve emerges as a decisive factor; Alcaraz demonstrates higher effectiveness when serving to central areas, while Djokovic is more successful with wide serves; Djokovic shows difficulties when returning from open positions; short rallies favor the server; offensive play in the early phases of the point proves critical; and, the server's advantage decreases in rallies of two or more strokes.
ReidMCrespoMSantilliL, et al.The importance of the International Tennis Federation's junior boys’ circuit in the development of professional tennis players. J Sports Sci2007; 25: 667–672.
2.
FitzpatrickAStoneJAChoppinS, et al.A simple new method for identifying performance characteristics associated with success in elite tennis. Int J Sports Sci Coach2018; 14: 43–50.
3.
CuiYLiuHLiuH, et al.Data-driven analysis of point by-point performance for male tennis player in Grand Slams. Motricidade2019; 15: 49–61.
4.
DoğanIRevanSArikanS. Analysis of tennis competitions on different court surfaces. Turk J Sport Exercise2021; 23: 60–66.
5.
HughesMFranksI. The essentials of performance analysis: an introduction. London: Routledge, 2007.
6.
Martínez-GallegoRGuzmánJJamesN, et al.Movement characteristics of elite tennis players on hard courts with respect to the direction of ground strokes. J Sports Sci Med2013; 12: 275–281.
7.
O’DonoghuePIngramB. A notational analysis of elite tennis strategy. J Sports Sci2001; 19: 107–115.
8.
FernándezJKinnerVFerrautiA. The physiological demands of hitting and running in tennis on different surfaces. J Strength Conditioning Res2010; 24: 3255–3264.
9.
KilitBŞenelOArslanE, et al.Physiological responses and match characteristics in professional tennis players during a one-hour simulated tennis match. J Hum Kinet2016; 51: 83–92.
10.
Martín-LorenteECamposJCrespoM. The inside out forehand as a tactical pattern in men’s professional tennis. Int J Perform Anal Sport2017; 17: 429–441.
11.
ReidMElliottBCrespoM. Mechanics and learning practices associated with the tennis forehand: a review. J Sports Sci Med2013; 12: 225–231.
12.
GilletELeroyDThouvarecqR, et al.A notational analysis of elite tennis serve and serve-return strategies on slow surface. J Strength Conditioning Res2009; 23: 532–539.
13.
PilesJCrespoM. Tactics for Elite Level Men’s Tennis - Part 1. ITF Coach Sport Sci Rev2012; 20: 12–14.
14.
ReidMCurtrieDCrespoM. The relationship between match statistics and top 100 ranking in professional men’s tennis. Int J Perform Anal Sport2010; 10: 131–138.
15.
CowdenRGFullerDKAnshelMH. Psychological predictors of mental toughness in elite tennis: an exploratory study in learned resourcefulness and competitive trait anxiety. Perceptual Motor Skills2014; 119: 661–678.
16.
CrespoMReidMM. Motivation in tennis. Br J Sports Med2007; 41: 769–772.
17.
KovacsMS. Tennis physiology: training the competitive athlete. Sports Med2007; 37: 189–198.
18.
CrossRPollardG. Grand Slam Men’s Singles Tennis 1991-2009 serve speeds and other related data. ITF Coach Sport Sci Rev2009; 17: 13–16.
19.
KatićRMilatSZagoracN, et al.Impact of game elements on tennis match outcome in Wimbledon and Roland Garros 2009. Coll Antropologicum2011; 35: 341–346.
20.
BarnettTPollardG. How the tennis court surface affects player performance and injuries. Med Sci Tennis2007; 12: 34–37.
21.
FilipcicTFilipcicABerendijasT. Comparison of game characteristics of male and female tennis players at Roland Garros 2005. Acta Univ Palackianae Olomucensis Gymica2008; 38: 21–28.
22.
LosadaJLCasalCAArdáA. Cómo mejorar la efectividad en un jugador de tenis: modelos de regresión log-lineales. Cuad Psicol Deporte2015; 15: 63–70.
23.
LacknerMWeichselbaumerM. Can barely winning lead to losing? Gender and past performance. J Econ Beh Organiz2023; 208: 258–274.
24.
MeffertDO'ShannessyCBornP, et al.Tennis serve performances at break points: approaching practice patterns for coaching. Eur J Sport Sci2018; 18: 1151–1157.
25.
HughesMBartlettRM. The use of performance indicators in performance analysis. J Sports Sci2002; 20: 739–754.
26.
ReidMMorganSWhitesideD. Matchplay characteristics of Grand Slam tennis: implications for training and conditioning. J Sports Sci2016; 34: 1791–1798.
27.
Prieto-LageIParamés-GonzálezATorres-SantosD, et al.Match analysis and probability of winning a point in elite men's singles tennis. PLOS One2023; 18: e0286076.
28.
LamesMMcGarryT. On the search for reliable performance indicators in game sports. Int J Perform Anal Sport2007; 7: 62–79.
29.
AngueraMT. Observational typology. Qual Quant Eur Am J Methodol1979; 13: 449–484.
30.
AngueraMTBlanco-VillaseñorAHernández-MendoA, et al.Diseños observacionales: ajuste y aplicación en psicología del deporte [observational designs: their suitability and application in sports psychology]. Cuad Psicol Deporte2011; 11: 63–76.
31.
AngueraMTMagnussonMSJonssonGK. Instrumentos no estándar. [non-standard instruments]. Avances Medición2007; 5: 63–82.
32.
IbáñezRLapresaDAranaJ, et al.Observational analysis of the technical-tactical performance of elite karate contestants. Rev Cultura Ciencia Deporte2018; 13: 61–70.
33.
AngueraMTIzquierdoC. Methodological approaches in human communication: from complexity of perceived situation to data analysis. In: RivaGAngueraMTWiederholdBK, et al. (eds) From communication to presence: cognition, emotions and culture towards the ultimate communicative experience. Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press, 2006, pp.203–222.
34.
GabínBCamerinoOAngueraMT, et al.Lince: multiplatform sport analysis software. Procedia Soc Behav Sci2012; 46: 4692–4694.
35.
BakemanR. Untangling streams of behavior: sequential analysis of observation data. In: SackettGP (ed.) Observing behaviour, vol. II: data collection and analysis methods. University Park, PA: University Park Press, 1978, pp.63–78.
36.
AranaJLapresaDAngueraMT, et al.Ad hoc procedure for optimising agreement between observational records. Anal Psicol2016; 32: 589–595.
37.
LapresaDAranaJAngueraMT, et al.Application of logistic regression models in observational methodology: game formats in grassroots football in initiation into football. Anal Psicol2016; 32: 288–294.
38.
LandisJRKochGG. The measurements of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics1977; 33: 159–174.
39.
LinCLFanCL. Evaluation of CART, CHAID, and QUEST algorithms: a case study of construction defects in Taiwan. J Asian Archit Build Eng2019; 18: 539–553.
40.
LohWY. Classification and regression trees. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Data Min Knowl Discovery2011; 1: 14–23.
41.
LohWY. Fifty years of classification and regression trees. Int Stat Rev2014; 82: 329–348.
42.
ChenMY. Comparing traditional statistics, decision tree classification and support vector machine techniques for financial bankruptcy prediction. Intell Autom Soft Comput2012; 18: 65–73.
43.
DoganNTanrikuluZ. A comparative analysis of classification algorithms in data mining for accuracy, speed and robustness. Inf Technol Manage2013; 14: 105–124.
44.
EscobarM. El análisis de segmentación: técnicas y aplicaciones de los árboles de clasificación [Segmentation analysis: techniques and applications of classification trees]. Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 2007.
45.
TureMKurtIKurumAT, et al.Comparing classification techniques for predicting essential hypertension. Expert Syst Appl2005; 29: 583–588.
46.
FitzpatrickAStoneJAChoppinS, et al.Investigating the most important aspect of elite grass court tennis: short points. Int J Sports Sci Coach2021; 16: 1178–1186.
47.
MontagnaSOraniVArgientoR. Bayesian Isotonic logistic regression via constrained splines: an application to estimating the serve advantage in professional tennis. Stat Methods Appl2021; 30: 573–604.
48.
Fernández-GarcíaAIBlanca-TorresJCHernández-GarcíaR, et al.Análisis de las variables estadísticas relacionadas con el servicio en tenis masculino de alto rendimiento en categoría junior y absoluto. Cultura Ciencia Deporte2019; 14: 289–295.
49.
GrambowRO'ShannessyCBornP, et al.Serve efficiency development at wimbledon between 2002 and 2015: a longitudinal approach to impact tomorrow's tennis practice. Hum Mov2020; 21: 65–72.
50.
HughesMClarkeS. Surface effect on elite tennis strategy. In: ReillyTHughesMLeesA (eds) Science and racket sports. London: E & FN Spon, 1995, pp.272–277.
51.
MartinCBideauBNicolasG, et al.How does the tennis serve technique influence the serve-and-volley?J Sports Sci2012; 30: 1149–1156.
52.
NikšaDHrasteMLjubicaS. Goodbye to serve and volley style of play: or do we need to change sport performance priorities?J Phys Educ Sport2021; 21: 1890–1896.
53.
CarbochJSimanJSklenarikM, et al.Match characteristics and rally pace of male tennis matches in three grand slam tournaments. Phys Activity Rev2019; 7: 49–56.
54.
MoranteS. Training recommendations based on match characteristics of professional singles tennis. Med Sci Tennis2006; 11: 10–13.
55.
MuriasJMLanattaDArcuriCR, et al.Metabolic and functional responses playing tennis on different surfaces. J Strength Condition Res2007; 21: 112–117.
56.
GirardOEicherFFourchetF, et al.Effects of the playing surface on plantar pressures and potential injuries in tennis. Br J Sports Med2007; 41: 733–738.
57.
HizanHWhippPReidM. Comparison of serve and serve return statistics of high performance male and female tennis players from different age-groups. Int J Perform Anal Sport2011; 11: 365–375.
58.
BarnettTClarkeSR. Combining player statistics to predict outcomes of tennis matches. IMA J Manage Math2005; 16: 113–120.
59.
DonaNEGillPSSwartzTB. What does rally length tell us about player characteristics in tennis?J R Stat Soc A2025; 188: 188–204.
60.
SánchezAGiménezJMSánchezBJ. Diferencias en la distribución espacial del saque en función del rendimiento y tipo de superficie [Differences in the spatial distribution of the serve depending on the performance and type of surface]. Kronos2019; 18: 1–10.
61.
WongRShimadaH. The confounding effects of serve speed and ball placement on success of male and female tennis players at the championships, Wimbledon. Int J Racket Sports Sci2023; 5: 23–31.
