主办单位:成都体育学院
ISSN 1001-9154 CN 51-1097/G8

成都体育学院学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (1): 154-162.doi: 10.15942/j.jcsu.2025.01.15

• 运动训练与人体科学 • 上一篇    

优秀男子单打网球运动员不同类型场地比赛的技战术关键指标研究

刘畅1, 侯会生1, 王怡雪2, 蒋丽萍3   

  1. 1. 中央民族大学, 北京, 100081;
    2. 北京市第三十五中学, 北京, 100037;
    3. 中国人民大学附属中学丰台学校, 北京, 100074
  • 收稿日期:2024-08-01 发布日期:2025-04-28
  • 通讯作者: 侯会生,教授,博士,博士生导师,研究方向:体育教学与训练;E-mail:hhsheng7602@126.com。
  • 作者简介:刘畅,讲师,博士,研究方向:网球教学与训练;E-mail:343323507@qq.com。
  • 基金资助:
    国家社科基金项目“冰雪体育场馆智慧化转型升级的国际经验与中国方案研究”(20CTY002);中国网球协会决策咨询研究项目“十四五”时期网球项目体教深度融合工作推进策略研究”。

Analysis on the Key Performance Indicators of Techniques and Tactics of Excellent Men’s Single Tennis Players in Matches on Different Types of Courts

LIU Chang1, HOU Huisheng1, WANG Yixue2, JIANG Liping3   

  1. 1. Minzu University of China , Beijing 100081;
    2. Beijing No.35 High School, Beijing 100037;
    3. Fengtai School of the High school Affiliated to Renmin University of China, Beijing 100074
  • Received:2024-08-01 Published:2025-04-28

摘要: 文章采用问卷调查法、德尔菲法、录像观察法和数理统计法对2017—2021年210场网球“四大满贯”以及大师赛的比赛录像(硬地、红土、草地各70场)进行数据分析,并引入关键表现指标理论体系,建立判别函数模型,找出运动员在不同类型场地比赛时影响比赛胜负的技战术关键表现指标。结果:不同类型场地中,影响比赛胜负的技战术关键表现指标模型分别是Y(硬地场)=-12.00+10.73×接发球得分率+8.74×一发得分率+4.15×二发得分率;Y(红土场)=-13.26+13.67×接发球得分率+7.53×一发得分率+5.68×制胜分与非受迫性失误比值(W/U);Y(草地场)=-9.63+10.27×接发球得分率+4.70×二发得分率+4.95×网前得分率;模型的Wilks’ lambad统计量依次为0.40、0.31、0.45,X2值依次为124.93、136.43、74.58,P值均小于0.05。结论:硬地场技战术关键表现指标包括一发得分率、二发得分率和接发球得分率;红土场技战术关键表现指标包括一发得分率、制胜分与非受迫性失误比和接发球得分率;草地场技战术关键表现指标包括网前得分率、二发得分率和接发球得分率。不同场地比赛中接发球得分率始终是对比赛结果影响力最大的技战术关键表现指标。

关键词: 网球运动员, 不同场地, 训练负荷, 网球技战术, 关键表现指标

Abstract: This study used the methods of questionnaire surveys, Delphi method, video analysis and mathematical statistics to analyze and study the data of 210 games in the Grand Slam Tennis and the Tennis Masters Cup from 2017 to 2021, including 70 games on hard court, clay court and grass court respectively. By introducing a theoretical framework of key performance indicators and establishing discriminant function models, this study identified tactical performance indicators affecting match outcomes of athletes on different court types. The results showed that the models for key tactical performance indicators influencing match outcomes on different court types were as follows: Y (hard courts) = -12.00 + 10.73 × return scoring rate + 8.74 × first serve scoring rate + 4.15 × second serve scoring rate; Y (clay courts) = -13.26 + 13.67 × return scoring rate + 7.53 × first serve scoring rate + 5.68 × winners to unforced errors ratio (W/U); Y (grass courts) = -9.63 + 10.27 × return scoring rate + 4.70 × second serve scoring rate + 4.95 × net scoring rate. The Wilks’lambda statistics for the models were 0.40, 0.31, and 0.45 respectively, with chi-square values of 124.93, 136.43, and 74.58, all having p-values less than 0.05. Conclusion: Key tactical performance indicators on hard courts include first serve scoring rate, second serve scoring rate, and return scoring rate. On clay courts, they include first serve scoring rate, W/U ratio, and return scoring rate. On grass courts, they include net scoring rate, second serve scoring rate, and return scoring rate. Across different court types, return scoring rate is consistently the most influential tactical performance indicator affecting match outcomes.

Key words: tennis player, different courts, training load, tennis techniques and tactics, key performance indicators

中图分类号: 


版权所有 © 《成都体育学院学报》编辑部
地址:中国 · 四川省成都市体院路2号 邮编:610041  电话:028-85095371 E-mail:cdtyxb1960@163.com
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发