Results
Every match, every number
Tennis match results with full statistics: set scores, serve speeds, ace counts, break point conversion, match duration.
A tennis result is more than a score. Two players may finish 7-6, 6-7, 7-6, but the statistical story behind that scoreline could reveal entirely different match narratives -- one dominated by serve, the other by return. Our results coverage captures the full statistical picture: set scores, ace counts, first-serve percentage, break point conversion, winners, unforced errors, and match duration. Each result is accompanied by a brief editorial note drawing out the key statistical story.
“Tennis is individual combat measured in millimetres and milliseconds.”
Latest match
Player A defeated Player D in the Wimbledon final in straight sets, serving 31 aces -- nearly one per service game. The match lasted just 2 hours 18 minutes, the shortest Wimbledon final since 2019. Player A's first-serve percentage of 71% was above his season average, and he converted 42.1% of break point opportunities. Player D, despite averaging 14.8 aces per match this season, managed only 8 against Player A's return game.
The data tells a clear story: on grass, Player A's serve is close to unreturnable. His 31 aces were the most in a Wimbledon final since 2009, and his first-serve points won percentage of 81% suggests that when the first serve landed, the point was effectively over.
For Player D, the result underscores a season-long pattern: exceptional serve power without the return game to match at the highest level.
Recent results
Clay baseline mastery: 4 aces but 52.8% break point conversion.
Hard-court precision: straight sets, 24 aces, zero breaks conceded in sets 1-2.
Clinical: 60% break point conversion on clay. The baseline grinder at his best.
Hard-court serve dominance: 15 aces in two sets.
Grass-court firepower: 18 aces but only 33% BP conversion -- serve-reliant.
Results archive
The full results archive below captures every tour-level match with key statistical data. Sort by any column to find patterns across surfaces, tournaments, and time periods.
| Date | Tournament | Surface | Winner | Loser | Score | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2026 | Wimbledon -- Final | Grass | Player A | Player D | 7-6(7), 6-3, 6-4 | 2h 18m |
| Jun 2026 | Roland Garros -- Final | Clay | Player C | Player A | 6-2, 6-7(5), 6-4, 6-1 | 3h 28m |
| May 2026 | Rome Masters -- Final | Clay | Player C | Player E | 6-4, 6-2 | 1h 38m |
| Apr 2026 | Monte Carlo -- Final | Clay | Player C | Player B | 6-3, 7-5 | 2h 04m |
| Mar 2026 | Miami Open -- SF | Hard | Player A | Player F | 6-4, 7-5 | 1h 52m |
| Mar 2026 | Indian Wells -- Final | Hard | Player B | Player D | 7-6(3), 6-4 | 1h 58m |
| Jan 2026 | Australian Open -- Final | Hard | Player A | Player B | 6-3, 6-4, 7-6(4) | 2h 41m |
Player C's three consecutive clay titles (Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros) represent the most dominant clay season since 2019. On hard court, Player A remains unbeaten in finals this year. The archive reveals a clear pattern: surface determines the favourite, and the data for 2026 confirms this more decisively than any recent season.
Season storylines
The 2026 season has been defined by a clear rivalry at the top: Player A's serve-dominant game against Player C's clay-court baseline mastery. Their head-to-head this season stands at 2-1, with Player A winning on hard court and grass, and Player C dominant on clay. The surface determines the winner -- a pattern that the historical data confirms across decades of head-to-head rivalries.
Below the top two, Player D's serve statistics demand attention: 14.8 aces per match leads the tour, yet a 79.4% overall win rate places them fourth. The gap between serve power and match-winning consistency remains the defining question of their career.
“The post-match editorial notes are brilliant. A sentence after each result that draws out the statistical story. It's like having a data-literate commentator.”
“I used to watch matches and wonder what the stats meant. Now I read the Prelvox result first, then watch the highlights, and I see everything differently.”