# Women's Singles Tennis Match Analysis and Probability of Winning a Point
## 5 Conclusions  
Around 62% of the points analysed were played on first serve. On fast surfaces such as grass and hard courts, a higher number of aces was observed compared to clay. The probability of winning a point on the first serve was around 61% on clay, while on grass and hard courts it was around 70%. On the other hand, the probability of success with the second service remained at around 56% regardless of the surface area. Consequently, the probability of winning a point decreases significantly when starting with a second serve, especially on fast courts. Around 70% of the points studied ended in a short rally (1-4 shots). When the point started with a first serve and culminated in a short rally, approximately 65% of the points were won on clay and 75% on grass and hard courts. In the case of a second serve and a rally of less than five strokes, around 57% of the points were won, regardless of the surface. A remarkable aspect is that 25-27% of all points ended with a combination of a first serve, a short rally, and a final hit after a bounce in the service zone (zone 1). In addition, on 13-14% of occasions, the same sequence occurred, but after starting the point with a second serve. When the rally was short, the serving player won points in equal measure with winners (mainly with her forehand) or due to unforced errors by her opponent, mostly related to forehand errors. On the other hand, in this type of rally, the player on the return side scored points mainly due to unforced errors by her opponent, especially related to her forehand. It is worth noting that most of the winners, both on serve and the return, came with shots aimed at zones 1 or 2. The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app14156761/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app14156761/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app14156761/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app14156761/s1)), Table S1: Description of variables that affect performance on the different court surfaces in the 2021 season, analysis of the distribution of categories of each variable by surface (intra-variable \(\chi\)2) and comparative analysis between court surfaces (\(\chi\)2 inter-variable); Table S2: Analysis of different combinations of variables that affect performance (service, rally length, bounce zone, the finish zone and point ending) as a function of the court surface;
Conceptualisation, I.P.-L., E.O.-G., P.C.-F., X.R.-L.-d.-l.-O., and A.G.-S.; methodology, I.P.-L., E.O.-G., X.R.-L.-d.-l.-O., and A.G.-S.; software, I.P.-L., E.O.-G., X.R.-L.-d.-l.-O., and A.G.-S.; validation, E.O.-G., P.C.-F., and X.R.-L.-d.-l.-O. ; formal analysis, I.P.-L. and A.G.-S.; investigation, I.P.-L., E.O.-G., A.J.S.-P., P.C.-F., X.R.-L.-d.-l.-O., and A.G.-S.; resources, I.P.-L., E.O.-G., P.C.-F., and A.G.-S.; data curation, I.P.-L., E.O.-G., and A.G.-S.; writing--original draft, I.P.-L., [PERSON], and [PERSON]; writing--review and editing, [PERSON], [PERSON]-L.-d.-l.-O., and [PERSON]; visualisation, [PERSON] and [PERSON]-[PERSON]; supervision, [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON]; project administration, [PERSON], [PERSON], X.R.-L.-d.-l.-O., and [PERSON]; funding acquisition, [PERSON] and [PERSON]. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.