Thats a good win and after losing just one game in the last round (sadly!).
I wonder if Neal is thinking he should stick with Venus? Jamie seems to be happy with Peers as partner, not sure if Joe (in his current form) is going to be a good call as 2025 partner!
Also - Henry is up to 7th place in the Race now, doesnt change much in terms of Turin seedings and still needs a couple more wins to get another place and a higher seeding bracket
The real maturing insight here is that the top players win 53% of points (true in general terms!) - the second tier of players win maybe 51% of points - so there is a 1-2% of points difference between the top players and the really good players - a typical match is maybe 20-30 games, 120-180 points. So we are talking 3 or 4 points in a match that make the difference to being a top, top player.
Win those and win them consistently and you are on your way - if Jack is learning when to do that, marvellous.
In the summer he hired Wayne Ferreira to fix his service - I read Ferreira worked on technique and it didnt really work out; Jacks percentage of serves in is and remained quite low. In recent weeks at the US and Vienna, having sacked Ferreira, he worked on his ball toss and not his technique. His percentage first serve in has risen a lot and he is now moving up from 50 something percent in to nearly 70 percent in and reaping the benefits by winning lots of first serve points.
Tennis is a margin sport and getting those margins right (marginal gains) and at the right times, can make all the difference!
I don't think the top players winning 53% of points against a lower tier winning say 51% of points is in general to do with the top players winning more of the big points. They simply win more points in total since they are better.
How I read the The Times article was Jack saying that in general all the top players are winning that roughly 53% of points so it comes down really to the big points - "So it's what you do on the big ones that matters" - meaning that separates who wins most among the top players.
Whatever, it's very useful to win most of the big points
The real maturing insight here is that the top players win 53% of points (true in general terms!) - the second tier of players win maybe 51% of points - so there is a 1-2% of points difference between the top players and the really good players - a typical match is maybe 20-30 games, 120-180 points. So we are talking 3 or 4 points in a match that make the difference to being a top, top player.
Win those and win them consistently and you are on your way - if Jack is learning when to do that, marvellous.
In the summer he hired Wayne Ferreira to fix his service - I read Ferreira worked on technique and it didnt really work out; Jacks percentage of serves in is and remained quite low. In recent weeks at the US and Vienna, having sacked Ferreira, he worked on his ball toss and not his technique. His percentage first serve in has risen a lot and he is now moving up from 50 something percent in to nearly 70 percent in and reaping the benefits by winning lots of first serve points.
Tennis is a margin sport and getting those margins right (marginal gains) and at the right times, can make all the difference!
I don't think the top players winning 53% of points against a lower tier winning say 51% of points is in general to do with the top players winning more of the big points. They simply win more points in total since they are better.
How I read the The Times article was Jack saying that in general all the top players are winning that roughly 53% of points so it comes down really to the big points - "So it's what you do on the big ones that matters" - meaning that separates who wins most among the top players.
Whatever, it's very useful to win most of the big points
To be honest , I read it as you summarised it, but probably explained it more clearly than me. And yes!
And so onto the next round and Jack Draper makes no fashion statements as he breaks Alex de Miñaur in the first set to lead 4-2. Make that 5-2. de Miñaur serving to stay in the first set.
Worryingly Jack broken twice as he loses the second set. Here is a bad combination of J dipping slightly as De Miñaur hits top gear.
So J goes into a third set for the second day running.
Did I hear that Jack has played 8 games in the last 9 days, something like that? Still he's young enough to get away with it. Let's hope he's got something left for this last set.
Jack is so easy to empathise with. His joy and his pain and even his weariness are so accessible to the fans. Can you imagine what a star he will be if he ever wins Wimbledon.