I have watched a few matches involving top women players where one has clearly adopted the tactic of going for her second serve about as much as the first to prevent her opponent taking charge in the rally, and stopping her getting any rhythm on return (one with Justine Henin in Sydney comes to mind - she served 15-20 doubles but won), so although none do it regularly it's a tactic employed on occasions.
To work out if its true simply calculate if "%1st serve in" x "%point won on 1st serve" > "%2nd serve won"
If you apply this to the final stages of the Australian open:
Match
Player
%1st in
%1st won
Result
%2nd won
Won Match
Better Strategy
Final
Kim Clijsters
65
66
42.9
40
Yes
Yes
Li Na
72
52
37.44
41
Semi
Wozniaki
64
57
36.48
46
Li Na
64
66
42.24
36
Yes
Yes
Kim Clijsters
63
77
48.51
56
Yes
Zvonareva
65
68
44.2
28
Yes
Quarters
Radwanska
83
50
41.5
57
Kim Clijsters
65.7
65.9
43.3
43.5
Yes
Kvitova
60
48
28.8
32
Zvonareva
59
70
41.3
48
Yes
Schavone
56
57
31.92
42
Wozniaki
67
63
42.21
46
Yes
Petkovic
73
49
35.77
40
Li Na
65
74
48.1
56
Yes
So assuming that the probabilty of serving a fault when hitting a 2nd serve at 1st serve speed is the same as hitting a 1st serve at 1st serve speed, there were only 3 / 14 occasions where a player would have been better off, and only once was it the losing player. Of course, that assumption is wrong - the added pressure on the 2nd serve would reduce the change of it going in.
-- Edited by RBBOT on Friday 18th of March 2011 07:48:42 PM