ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2024
Navigating the Court: A Comparison of Distance Demands between Sexes in Grand Slam Tennis.
Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Ensemble of Long Short-Term Memory Models to Automatically Detect End-Range Movement Patterns in Men's Professional Hard Court Grand Slam Tennis.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
- Indicator analysis of the footwork in the world's top badminton athletes based on markerless motion measurement.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Article
- Injury characteristics, outcome, and return to play after ankle sprains and Achilles tendon ruptures in tennis.South African journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Lateral End-Range Movement Profile and Shot Effectiveness During Grand Slam Tennis Match-Play.European journal of sport science · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study analysed critical movement demands of tennis match-play to better inform contemporary approaches to athlete preparation and training. HawkEye data from matches during the 2021 and 2022 Australian Open were utilised. Distance was aggregated for movement cycles, points, games, sets, and matches, alongside total shots played. Data was collated for males (best-of-five sets) and females (best-of-three sets) allowing comparisons both within and between sexes. Overall, no differences within sexes were evident for total distance, however males traversed further per match than females (MDE = 809 ± 139m, ES = 0.86). Female players travelled further in their deciding (third) sets compared to set 1 (ES = 0.28) and while this effect wasn't as discernible for males, the deciding (fifth) set showed some evidence of elevated distance requirements and variability. Between sexes, only female set 3 was different to male set 3 (ES = 0.29). Female and male tiebreak games (i.e. game 13) required players travel further distance compared to other games (ES = ~1.45). Between sex differences were observed for tiebreak games compared to games 1 to 12 (female ES = 1.36 and male ES = 1.53). Players from both sexes generally covered similar distances during points and movement cycles, with between-shot distances of 4.2m-4.5m, notably longer than previous reports. Further, total shots and total match distance (r > 0.97; p < 0.01) shared similar linear relationships. These results highlight that the between shot or movement cycle demands of professional hard court tennis are substantially higher than described in the literature (Roetert et al., 2003). The findings also reveal competitiveness as a key influence on set level distance demands during professional tennis match-play, a consideration in player preparation programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.