Tuesday, 03 February 2026 / Published in Alex De Minaur, Australian Open, Carlos Alcaraz, Novak Djokovic, Tommy Paul

A New Order Owning The Baseline Down Under. G’day Carlos.

G’day,

The statistic, “Baseline Points Won”, tells a lot about how a player performed in a match and a tournament.

It’s important to note how this stat is calculated. For example, let’s say Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic are crushing the ball at each other from the baseline just like they did in the Australian Open final. The point ends with Djokovic committing a backhand error in the net. That will be logged as a baseline point lost for the Serb. If Alcaraz is standing at the baseline when the point ends, it will be logged as a baseline point won by him. But if Alcaraz came forward to the net, it would be a net point won for him.

The bottom line is that both players don’t need to be at the baseline in order for a baseline point to be awarded to at least one of them.

Now, let’s examine Alcaraz’s baseline points won for the tournament.

Alcaraz Baseline Points Won 2026 Australian Open

Rd 1: Won 54% (51/95) vs. Adam Walton
Rd 2: Won 51% (61/120) vs. Yannick Hanfmann
Rd 3: Won 60% (48/80) vs. Corentin Moutet
Rd 4: Won 51% (59/115) vs. Tommy Paul
QF: Won 55% (60/109) vs. Alex De Minaur
SF: Won 50% (108/217) vs. Alexander Zverev
Final: Won 52% (74/143) vs. Nova Djokovic
Tournament = Won 52% (461/879)

Firstly, think about how incredibly dominant Alcaraz was from the back of the court during the Aussie Open fortnight. His forehands were lethal. His backhands were rock solid. He seemed untouchable from the back of the court, but still lost 48% of his baseline points.

Incredible, really.

IMPROVE YOUR BASELINE IQ

Webinar 7: Baseline Strategy & Patterns

Webinar 73: Winning On Defense

Webinar 69: Reduce Net Errors

Webinar 66: Depth Is The Diamond

Webinar 35: Backhand Cage

The key here is that baseline points won is such a tough metric to forge a sizeable margin in.

When Andy Murray won the 2012 US Open, he only won 50% of baseline points for the tournament.

When Roger Federer won the 2017 Australian Open, he only won 48% of his baseline points.

Serena Williams also won the Australian Open in 2017. She won only 48% of the baseline points.

So, the more you learn about baseline points won, the more you understand that Alcaraz winning 52% (and losing 48%) is actually quite impressive. Remember, his opponents could have been at the baseline or the net when the point ended.

The 2026 tournament average for baseline points won was 47% for men and 48% for women.

Historically, you can win the tournament by being at the tournament average, but you clearly need to be better than the person standing on the other side of the net in week 2 when contesting the round of 16 to the final. It’s interesting to note that Alcaraz still won 50% of his baseline points when badly cramping against Zverev in the semi-finals.

Now, let’s turn our attention to Djokovic’s performance from the baseline for the tournament.

Djokovic Baseline Points Won 2026 Australian Open

Rd 1: Won 58% (44/76) vs. P. Martinez
Rd 2: Won 62% (58/93) vs. Francesco Maestrelli
Rd 3: Won 60% (64/107) vs. Botic Van de Zandschulp
Rd 4: Jakob Mensik withdrew with a pulled stomach muscle
QF: Won 43% (35/81) vs. Lorenzo Musetti
SF: Won 48% (74/153) vs. Jannik Sinner
Final: Won 42% (55/132) vs. Carlos Alcaraz

Djokovic’s tournament was clearly played in two parts. He was a rockstar in the first three rounds from the back of the court, and must have seriously liked his chances of winning at Melbourne Park for an unprecedented 11th time. He was averaging 60% points won and was basically untouchable from the baseline.

Then, more good news for the Serb! He didn’t have to play Mensik in the fourth round. He could rest his body. He could stay fresh.

Then everything unravelled against Musetti before Musetti retired with an injury. The Italian felt a tweak in his upper right leg and a trip to the semi-finals was cancelled. Djokovic could only muster winning a lowly 43% from the baseline in this match. No matter what else you do, no matter how many aces and return winners you strike, your goose is cooked. You can’t win this match only winning 43% of baseline points. It was the great escape Down Under.

Djokovic bounced back against Sinner and needed to win 48% to have any chance of winning the match. He did. He hit that number right on the button. At the same time, he held Sinner to only 46% baseline points won, which illuminated his mathematical pathway to the final.

In the final, Alcaraz dominated the baseline exchanges against Djokovic and clearly won the statistical battle as well.

Baseline Points Won In The Final

Alcaraz = 52% (74/143)
Djokovic = 42% (55/132)

Fifty-two percent baseline points won by Alcaraz in the final was a dominant number. That knocked Djokovic all the way down to only 42% baseline points won, which is never going to get the job done.

Djokovic did well coming forward to the net against Alcaraz, winning a healthy 63% (20/32). Alcaraz won 70% (14/20) at net, which supported his baseline points won very nicely.

SUMMARY

In order for Djokovic to defeat Musetti, Sinner, and Alcaraz, he needed to win a minimum of 48% baseline points in each match. He pulled it off in one match (against Sinner), but only winning 43% against Musetti and 42% against Alcaraz clearly identified where he struggled in those matches.

The 38-year-old Djokovic finally succumbed to the 22-year-old Alcaraz. Djokovic took a lot out of the gas tank in the semi-finals to defeat Sinner in five grueling sets, finishing at 1.30 am local time in Melbourne. It would have been much later than that when Djokovic finally lay his head on his pillow and went to sleep.

Djokovic had a Herculean tournament. He started so strong, got some luck against Mensik and Musetti, and used up a lot of energy to upset Sinner in the semis. The adrenaline was pumping in the final as he sprinted to a 6-2 lead against Alcaraz.

And everything changed in an instant. Here’s what Alcaraz had to say post-match about the final.

ALCARAZ QUOTES

“Well, I think, as I said before, tennis can change just one point. One point, one feeling, one shot can change the whole match completely.

So the first set, I think he played great. I was hitting the ball well. I was moving well. I think all I can say I played well the first set, but you know, in front of me I had a great and inspired Novak, who was playing great, great shots.

So in the second set I think the first game he made few easy mistakes that he hadn’t had in the first set, so that gave me a lot of, like, calm, or I just trust and I believe that the match could change a little bit if I stayed there mentally strong or mentally positive, trying to be solid, I just change a little bit tactically that it already didn’t work in the first set.

So I changed a little bit, and I think that that helped a lot to get into the match again, and I feel comfortable and calmer in the match.”

Djokovic got broken at 1-1 in the second set, 2-2 in the third set, and at 5-6 in the fourth set. He played a brutal 24-shot rally at love all at 5-6 that took his legs from under him.

That single point represented a changing of the guard Down Under. It was the final statement of who now owned the baseline on Rod Laver Arena.

The practice court is clearly broken. Here’s the proof.

Points are "front loaded". By far the majority of the action, and the winning, takes place in THE FIRST 4 SHOTS. The practice court is full of long rallies. Matches are dominated by short rallies. There is a massive disconnect occurring.

We spend too much time grinding, banging balls up and down the middle of the court – that have no real benefit to winning tennis matches.

There are 3 specific rally lengths in tennis. Here is their percentage breakdown of total points.

0-4 Shots = 70%
5-8 Shots = 20%
9+ Shots = 10%

The First 4 Shots is specifically the serve, return, Serve +1 groundstroke and Return +1 groundstroke. Those are normally the shots that get practiced the least, but matter the most to winning tennis matches.

The net is an extremely high percentage place to be!

If you love playing tennis for fun, spend as much time at the baseline as you like. But if you compete – if the score matters – then you must turn your attention to the net to maximize your potential.

The “herd mentality” in tennis thinks it’s too tough to approach the net in today’s game. The conversation starts with improved string technology, more powerful rackets, and finishes with stronger, faster athletes. The herd think approaching is a relic of the past. The herd is WRONG!

AVERAGE WIN %
Baseline = 46%
Net = 66%

Data from ALL Grand Slams provides the facts about approach and volley, and the data is crystal clear – it’s immensely better than staying back at the baseline, grinding for a living.

The baseline is a tough place to create separation. Here's how to do it.

At the 2012 US Open, only 7 men and 14 women had a winning percentage from the baseline. At Wimbledon 2016, Andy Murray won the title only winning 52% of his baseline points - and he is one of the very best at it in the world!

Num3ers deeply explores the data that rules points, especially from the back of the court. Take a "deep dive" into all three rally lengths (0-4, 5-8, 9+), and winner and errors totals from the elite level of our game. The numbers will shock you!

All 4 Grand Slams

Forcing Errors = 41% Men / 37% Women
Winners = 32% Men / 29% Women
Unforced Errors = 27% Men / 34% Women

Num3ers is very much like putting a jigsaw puzzle together. It's about bringing together different data sets together to create the big picture.

Every recorded match from the 2015 Australian Open - Rd2 to the final.

There is a lot happening on a doubles court. Situations and strategies are constantly being adjusted to create mis-matches with court position. It's hard to keep track of - until now. Dou8les Num3ers is the most comprehensive analysis of doubles data in our sport. The focus is on how a point ends, and it's broken down eight ways to Sunday. Specifically, you find critical information on:

Winners rise to the #1 way a point ends (over forced & unforced errors)

- The last shot of the rally is overwhelmingly struck at the net.
- Center Window: the most important part of a doubles court to control.
- Stephen Huss: an in-depth interview on Wimbledon's Centre Court with the 2005 Wimbledon Doubles Champion.

Dou8les Num3ers leaves no stone unturned. Percentage breakdowns of how often the server or receiver hits the last shot highlight the dramatic influence of the serve. The last shot of the rally is significant, and is broken down into the following categories: volleys, overheads, passing shots, lobs and groundstrokes.

When you play a match, you actually play two matches.

When you walk out onto a tennis court, there are two matches that you are about to play. The first is during the point - a part of the match that you have spent a lot of time preparing for on the practice court. But there is a second match, that takes place in the 20 seconds between the points. This is where the mental and emotional aspects of our sport kick in.

Let's face it, there will be adversity in almost every tennis match that you play. The storm clouds are coming. How bug they are, and how long they last for, are up to you.

Between the points is very tennis specific. It provides a roadmap for the 20 seconds between the points, teaching how to handle the adversity that will surely come, and how to build on the successes that will also be present. Your mind is your biggest asset in a match, and Between the Points takes your hand off the self destruct button and stops you beating yourself.

You don't have to be good at everything, but you have got to be good at something.

You can break tennis down into four key elements - serving, returning, rallying and approaching. Each part has specific patterns of play that consistently deliver higher winning percentages than the others. No more guessing. No more opinions. All facets of our sport are covered in this exceptional product, clearly outlining what patterns to gravitate to, and how to best construct the practice court. Data comes primarily from the 2015 Australian Open.

Building Blocks

MEN = 70% errors / 30% winners
WOMEN = 74% errors / 26% winners

Forcing errors is the best way to construct a point.
You can simply break tennis down into primary and secondary patterns of play - and they are all covered here. Primary patterns include serve and return direction, forehands v backhands, and the best way to approach the net. Secondary patterns include drop shots, serve & volley and 1st volley options. If you play tournaments, this product will greatly help you simplify the singles court.

The conversation starts & ends with the Center Window.

The doubles court is like an hourglass. There are two big ends, but a small neck in the middle where all the action happens. Once you learn the power of the Center Window, where you stand to start the point will take on a lot more significance.

Doubles is a lot more about situations, with four people on the court all "dancing" with one another. Learn all the best doubles patterns, broken down for the server, returner, server's partner and the returner's partner.

Doubles Situations

The "J" - the most ideal movement for the returner's partner to attack the net.

The "V" - a better way of understanding where the server's partner should move to.

Volley Targets - there are four main areas to attack. Know which ones are higher percentage. Beach Volleyball - the idea of a "setter" and "spiker" is ideal for the doubles court.

There are certain parts of the court that the ball travels to a lot, and other low percentage areas that you really don't want to cover at all - like the alley! In general, the serving team wants to keep the ball in the middle of the court as much as possible (to help the server's partner), while the returning team benefits from hitting wider and creating more chaos in the point.