English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of the current study was to analyze players’ interactions in serve and serve return situations and examine the way points were decided due to players’ positions and surfaces. Fourteen ATP 1000 tournament matches were analyzed (7 on hard surface; 7 on clay surface). The type of surface did not affect the way points ended (χ²=9.26; p &gt; 0.05) but did influence serve return vertical positioning (χ²=270.86; p &lt; 0.001). The return positioning, both lateral (χ²=92.68; p &lt; 0.001 on deuce side - χ² = 78.98; p &lt; 0.001 on advantage side) and vertical (χ²=33.59; p &lt; 0.001), and the type of serve (χ²=45.13; p &lt; 0.001) affected the way points were decided. The results from the present study suggest that tennis players should use, or at least seek, strategies based on aggressiveness and consistency of the 1st serve and also indicate that in the 2nd serve return, players are more offensive, and that on hard surfaces, players stand a few steps inside the court to return the serve, differently from clay surfaces. It recommended that serve returns should combine aggression, by inside the court positioning, and accuracy.

Analysis of serve and serve return on different surfaces in elite tennis players