[BostonCard]

Serving is a funny stat.  Hambly’s goal is serve hard and get 90% in.  Yesterday was 88%.    Of course those serve errors when we could have won in three were killers. 
Not having Oglivie for weeks will really hurt.    So agree back row now a of immense proportions weakness
On the plus side Vicini was outstanding

I had the same thought; we had back-to-back service errors late in the third set, which hurt a lot.  However, I am wondering whether, down a couple points, we were deliberately trying to be more aggressive on the serve late in the game.  When you are ahead, trading sideouts is fine; when you are behind, you need to generate points on serve, and the best way to do that is to get the opponent out of system on serve receive.  The risk of that strategy is, of course, a service error and sideout, but when behind it generally makes sense to adopt a riskier strategy.

BC

[BostonCard]

Serving is a funny stat.  Hambly’s goal is serve hard and get 90% in.  Yesterday was 88%.    Of course those serve errors when we could have won in three were killers. 
Not having Oglivie for weeks will really hurt.    So agree back row now a of immense proportions weakness
On the plus side Vicini was outstanding

I had the same thought; we had back-to-back service errors late in the third set, which hurt a lot.  However, I am wondering whether, down a couple points, we were deliberately trying to be more aggressive on the serve late in the game.  When you are ahead, trading sideouts is fine; when you are behind, you need to generate points on serve, and the best way to do that is to get the opponent out of system on serve receive.  The risk of that strategy is, of course, a service error and sideout, but when behind it generally makes sense to adopt a riskier strategy.

BC