9th YEAR ISSUE 25, DECEMBER 2001
Bothorel, W. (2000). The tennis
programme for adults in France, 21,
Brabenec, J. & Stojan, S . (1997). Great
player or only a good player?, 12, 7-8.
Brabenec, J. (1999). Competition: the
most desirable form of training, 17, 3.
Brechbühl, J. & Anker, P. (2000). The
action method in tennis, 22, 7-10.
Carballo, C. & Blasco, M. (1999).
Problems in tennis teaching:
statements and possible solutions, 19,
Cooke, K. (1999). The importance of
implicit learning in skill development,
Crespo, M. & Cooke, K. (1999). The
tactical approach to coaching tennis,
Crespo, M. & Cooke, K. (1999). What
research tells us about coaching
methods, 19, 18-19.
Crespo, M. & Miley, D. (1999). Player
Profile, 17, 14.
Crespo, M. (1999). Teaching
methodology for tennis, 19, 3-4.
Crespo, M. (2000). The easy five, 20, 8-9.
Filipcic, A. (1998). From technical to
tactical training, 16, 10-11.
Filipcic, A. (2001). Birth date and success
in tennis, 23, 9-11.
Fraayenhoven, F.v. (1998). A systematical
approach to the development of club
and performance players, 14, 10-12.
Granitto, G., Guizar, N., & Mota, M.
(1998). Drills for improving reception
and projection of the ball, 15, 5-6.
Meier, M.K. (1999). The GAG Method,
Menon, S. (1998). A systematic approach
to training sessions, 16, 11-12.
Menon, S. (2000). A systematic approach
to training sessions: baseline game, 20,
Menon, S. (2000). Systematic approach to
training sessions, 22, 2-3.
Miley, D. (1998). The importance of
competition planning, 16, 5-7.
Miranda, M. (2001). Several issues in
tennis coaching, 23, 6-7.
O’Connell, D. (1999). The six progressive
steps of learning, 17,13.
Pankhurst, A. (1999). Game based
coaching, 19, 11-13.
Pettersson, U. (1997). The Swedish
method of developing players aged
16-21, 13, 11-12.
Polic, M. (2000). Club programming for
wheelchair tennis, 22, 12-14.
Thorpe, R. & Dent, P. (1999). Developing
a more player oriented approach to
coaching tennis, 19, 5-7.
Van Aken, I. (1999). Tactical and
technical learning process, 19, 8-10.
Veasey, P. (1999). Game based approach
to teaching doubles, 19, 13-14.
Wilson, D. (1997). Court practice drills,
ZLesak, F. (1998). Revision is the mother
of all wisdom, 14, 1.
Cooke, K. & Reid, M. (2000). Juniors and
Sports Science on the web, 22, 14.
Crespo, M. (1997). Tennis on the
internet, 12, 10.
Crespo, M. & Cooke, K. (1999). Tennis
coaching on the web, 19, 19.
Crespo, M. & Cooke, K. (1999). What
research tells us about junior tennis,
Crespo, M. (1998). Tennis information on
the internet, 16, 18.
Crespo, M. (1998). Tennis on the internet
– Associations, Organisations and
more, 15, 14.
Crespo, M. (1999). What research tells us
about women’s tennis, 18, 7-8.
Crespo, M. (1999). Women’s tennis on
the web, 18, 13.
Gargini, D. (1998). Reader’s letters, 15,
Giffenig, E. (1999). Training women
players, 18, 5-6.
Hassan, F. (1997). What makes a good
coach?, 12, 9.
ITF News. (1997). Coaching news, 12,
ITF. (1998). ITF instant information
faxback, 16, 19.
ITF. (1998). ITF introduces the ITF Code
of Ethics for coaches, 14-15.
ITF. (1999). ITF Regional training centres,
ITF. (1999). The online service from the
ITF, 17, 8.
Jevans, D. (1999). The new format for
the Fed Cup, 18, 17.
MacCurdy, D. (1997). ITF Update, 13, 13-
Massias, J.C. (1998). Charter for players
on national teams, 15, 2.
Miley, D. (2000).1999 Development
Report, 20, 2-3.
Saviano, N. (1999). USA Tennis High
Performance Coaches Programme
Philosophy, 19, 2.
Stojan, S. (1997). What makes a good
coach indeed?, 13, 14-15.
A series of articles on tennis scoring
systems which have appeared in
sport scientific publications are
summarised below. Coaches
interested in obtaining more
information from these articles can
find them using the relevant
The paper asserts that no-ad scoring
modifies tennis tactics and strategy.
The author states that it permits a
two-set match to be played in under
an hour, yet giving the players a
better opportunity to test their skills
in a competitive situation.
The author indicates that when
not playing advantage the duration
of the matches is shortened and
every point becomes crucial. Tactics
and strategy are more conservative
than in the traditional scoring,
mainly because a point is far more
One feature of no-ad scoring is
that considerable effort and energy
go into a point. In traditional
scoring, at deuce, an error may be
costly but not so much so that it is
always decisive. In the no-ad scoring
however, the player has no second
chance. This led the author to
recommend that players should
learn to think no-ad and limit their
attempts at outright winners.
Coaches should in turn help their
players to evaluate game situations
and to make appropriate decisions.
Goldstein, B.J. (1977). No-ad
scoring in tennis. Scholastic coach,
Tie-break versus “win-by-two
games” tennis rules
This paper compares the “win-by-
two games” tennis rule with the
effect of the tie-break rule on the
what tennis research tells us about
tennis scoring systems
Compiled and summarised by Miguel Crespo and Machar Reid (ITF)
Coaches Review – DEC 01 (UK) 22/11/01 1:05 PM Page 17
18 9th YEAR ISSUE 25, DECEMBER 2001
expected outcome and duration of a
tennis set once the game score has
reached 6-6. Within these situations,
the probability of a particular player
winning each point (when playing a
specific opponent) may be estimated
from previous matches between the
If a player in a social match is
given the option between the two
rules, and she feels that her
estimated probability of winning
each point is less that 0.50, then her
prospects for victory will be
enhanced by choosing the tie-break
The probabilities obtained indicate
that the winner of the set will often
be decided in less than half the
number of points when the tie-break
system is used.
Croucher, J.S. (1982). The effect of
the tennis tie-breaker. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 53,
Probability of winning games
This paper analyses the status of
each point played in a game of
tennis. As well as giving the
probability of each player winning
from any score, it also determines
the relative importance of each
The paper states that every point
is equally important to both players.
Additionally, the importance of a
point is weighed by the expected
number of times the point is played
in a game. Several of the paper’s
conclusions are: 1. The point 30—40
always ranks higher in terms of
importance than the point 15-30, 2.
The first point (0-0) is always of only
average importance, 3. No point has
a consistently high or low ranking
for all probabilities.
Croucher, J.S. (1986). The
conditional probability of winning
games of tennis. Research Quarterly
for Exercise and Sport, 57, 1, 23-26.
New tennis scoring system
This study addressed the problem
of delays incurred in the scheduled
starting times of tennis matches as a
result of unexpectedly long previous
matches and devises a new scoring
system to reduce the problem.
The subsequent aim was to take
the present tennis scoring system
and modify it as little as possible to
produce a new scoring system with a
more predictable duration. The new
system is a best of five half sets
system. This system is very similar to
the present best of three tie-breaker
sets system with only one exception
– the standard deviation of the
number of points in a match is
typically considerably smaller with
the new system.
The half sets operate in the
following way: A half unit is
awarded to a player as soon as that
player’s game score reaches four (4-
0, 4-1, 4-2). The player would
therefore also win the half set and
receive one unit score. If the game
score reaches 3-3, the half set counts
as a draw and each player receives a
half unit. The next half set is played.
The match is over as soon as one
player’s score reaches 3 units.
However, if the unit score reaches
2.5 to 2.5, a tie-break as is currently
used, is played to determine the
Pollard, G.H. (1987). A new tennis
scoring system. Research Quarterly
for Exercise and Sport, 58, 3, 229-
Reaction time and tie-breaks
The aim of this paper was to
evaluate the reaction time of the
return of serve while also comparing
the speed of the serve with the
percentage of tie-breaks at Roland
Garros, Wimbledon and the US
Open (1999). Results showed that:
1. Receivers decrease their success
of returning when the serve is
above approximately 100 mph,
2. Service speed is related to the
surface played upon with grass
having the fastest serves and clay
3. The number of tie-breaks increase
significantly at speeds above 110
4. The higher the speed of the serve
and the faster the surface, the
greater number of tie-breaks that
are played in matches.
Haake, S.J., Rose, P. & Kotze, J.
(2000). Reaction time testing and
Grand Slam tie-break data. In S.J.
Haake & A.O. Coe (Eds.). Tennis
Science & Technology. Blackwell
Science. Oxford. (269-275).
Schutz, R.W. (1970). A mathematical model for
evaluating scoring systems with specific
reference to tennis. Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport, 41, 552-561.
Coaches Review – DEC 01 (UK) 22/11/01 1:05 PM Page 18