Court minutes in tennis betting
It has often been discussed that the best of five set format in Grand Slam events make them the ultimate physical test for male tennis players and that top players should do all they can to avoid playing long matches in the early rounds against inferior opposition.
Readers with a good memory may recall Andy Murray at the French Open in 2014. Leading 6-4 6-1 against Gael Monfils, it looked like an easy victory was on the cards for the Scotsman. However, Murray allowed the enigmatic Monfils back into the match, eventually winning 6-0 in the fifth set.
This turned what looked like a routine victory into a 195 minute battle, and although 195 minutes isn’t nearly the longest Grand Slam match in the latter stages over recent years, it’s one that may have been avoidable, particularly given the fact that Murray played a 247 minute epic with Philipp Kohlschreiber in the third round that year, culminating in a 12-10 final set triumph.
The effects of this accumulated fatigue on Murray should not be underestimated. A French Open semi-final against Nadal is one of the toughest propositions in Tennis at any time, let alone after several lengthy matches against inferior opposition, and Murray - after that victory over Monfils - won just six games in total during a straight-set rout, which took the King of Clay just 100 minutes across three sets.
How long do the top players play on average?
When assessing the top men’s tennis players over the last three years to see who was best at preserving energy prior to the business end of tournaments, one name was out there on his own at the top of the list - Roger Federer.
As can be seen from the table below, the Swiss legend - probably due to both understanding the effects of lengthy matches on his ageing body, as well as a game style which keeps points short - averaged 70 minutes fewer on court to get to the quarter finals of Grand Slam events during this time period, compared to his nearest rival, Marin Cilic:
Average minutes played by top players
Player |
QFs 2016+ |
Minutes |
Mean Minutes |
Federer |
7 |
3130 |
447.1 |
Cilic |
5 |
2589 |
517.8 |
Djokovic |
7 |
3643 |
520.4 |
Querrey |
3 |
1619 |
539.7 |
Murray |
6 |
3375 |
562.5 |
Thiem |
3 |
1691 |
563.7 |
Nadal |
6 |
3410 |
568.3 |
Del Potro |
4 |
2288 |
572.0 |
Berdych |
5 |
2922 |
584.4 |
Nishikori |
4 |
2382 |
595.5 |
Tsonga |
3 |
1798 |
599.3 |
Raonic |
5 |
3009 |
601.8 |
Wawrinka |
4 |
2530 |
632.5 |
Indeed, Federer managed four of the 10 lowest court times to get to the quarter finals of a Slam since 2016, with Cilic and Djokovic recording two apiece as well - it would appear that this trio are considerably ahead of their rivals when it comes to winning quick matches against inferior opposition. Djokovic (312 minutes) spent the least time on court to get to a quarter-final in an individual event, doing so in the US Open in 2016.
On average, players in this three-year sample took 569.23 minutes to reach the Quarter Finals of a Grand Slam, so it is evident that the likes of Milos Raonic and Stan Wawrinka took considerably longer on average to reach this stage.
It’s also worth noting that three players - Albert Ramos (755 minutes, 2016 French Open), Mischa Zverev (763 minutes, 2016 Australian Open) and Lucas Pouille (786 minutes, 2016 US Open) took over 750 minutes to reach the quarter-finals, and none of these three players even won a set, or covered the game handicap line in their subsequent match.
Should bettors take court time into account?
Over the last three years, there were 77 matches when a player had accumulated less court time than their rival in a quarter-final, semi-final or final match in Grand Slam. Blind-backing the fresher player would have won 48 of 76 bets (63.16%) and a hypothetical £100 stake on each of these players (Andy Murray and Milos Raonic had accumulated the same court minutes prior to their match) would have returned £281, at a return on investment of 3.70%.
While this is a small sample, it’s certainly encouraging to consider that the market isn’t quite factoring this enough into its pricing, and a bigger sample would be of great interest. In addition, looking at the 11 players who played over four hours less than their opponent at these stages had excellent results from a tiny sample, and these generated 10.45% ROI and are listed below:
Four hour time difference quarterfinal analysis
Tournament
|
Year
|
Round
|
Player 1
|
Time Spent
|
Player 2
|
Time Spent
|
Difference
|
P1 Price
|
P1 Staked
|
P1 W/L
|
P1 P/L
|
P1 Rolling P&L
|
P1 Rolling ROI
|
US Open
|
2016
|
F
|
Djokovic
|
549
|
Wawrinka
|
1095
|
-546
|
1.35
|
100
|
L
|
-100
|
-100
|
-100.00
|
Aus Open
|
2018
|
F
|
Federer
|
666
|
Cilic
|
1031
|
-365
|
1.25
|
100
|
W
|
25
|
-75
|
-37.50
|
US Open
|
2016
|
QF
|
Djokovic
|
312
|
Tsonga
|
654
|
-342
|
1.16
|
100
|
W
|
16
|
-59
|
-19.67
|
Wimbledon
|
2018
|
F
|
Djokovic
|
953
|
Anderson
|
1279
|
-326
|
1.21
|
100
|
W
|
21
|
-38
|
-9.50
|
French Open
|
2016
|
F
|
Djokovic
|
765
|
Murray
|
1089
|
-324
|
1.35
|
100
|
W
|
35
|
-3
|
-0.60
|
Aus Open
|
2017
|
F
|
Federer
|
834
|
Nadal
|
1157
|
-323
|
2.25
|
100
|
W
|
125
|
122
|
20.33
|
French Open
|
2017
|
F
|
Nadal
|
616
|
Wawrinka
|
939
|
-323
|
1.21
|
100
|
W
|
21
|
143
|
20.43
|
US Open
|
2016
|
QF
|
Monfils
|
482
|
Pouille
|
786
|
-304
|
1.24
|
100
|
W
|
24
|
167
|
20.88
|
Wimbledon
|
2017
|
QF
|
Cilic
|
492
|
Muller
|
778
|
-286
|
1.23
|
100
|
W
|
23
|
190
|
21.11
|
Wimbledon
|
2017
|
F
|
Federer
|
612
|
Cilic
|
885
|
-273
|
1.25
|
100
|
W
|
25
|
215
|
21.50
|
Wimbledon
|
2018
|
QF
|
Federer
|
377
|
Anderson
|
626
|
-249
|
1.08
|
100
|
L
|
-100
|
115
|
10.45
|
Hopefully this has given readers some food for thought for further analysis, and the US Open starting is likely to generate some opportunities to oppose weary players in the near future.
You can get the best tennis odds online with Pinnacle.