緒論：過去網球相關的文獻，主要探討選手在球技方面的戰略應用；而使用DEA方法衡量績效，多以選手參加比賽的勝利數、得分率與職涯累計獎金等作為衡量標準，此根據選手職涯累積數值計算，可能存在評估問題。本研究目的在選取適當的投入與產出指標，建立完整的指標連結，並比較ATP選手在兩階段中的表現差異。方法：本研究以投入導向的兩階段DEA，ATP官網所提供之52週的選手參賽表現資料，探討排名前六十四名選手之賽事參與效率，包括整體效率、純技術效率與規模效率。結果：兩階段皆有效率的選手有七位。排名前25名的選手於第二階段的參賽效率值皆高於第一階段；而25名之後的選手在第二階段的表現不若第一階段好，越後面名次的現象越明顯。結論：本研究嘗試提出三個賽事選擇之參考原則：一、賽事選擇：高風險(難度)高報酬；二、場地適應：降低風險以獲高報酬；三、時差調整：確保自身狀況在良好狀態。

Introduction: Most of the past tennis-related literatures focused on the strategic application in the game and used DEA to measure performance based on the number of wins, scoring rate and career prize money. According to the cumulative performance of the player's career, there may be some problems. The study aims to select appropriate input and output indicators, to implement a complete link of indicators, and to compare the differences of ATP players' performance in the two stages. Methods: The study employs two-stage DEA to assess ATP players’ performance including overall technical efficiency, pure technical efficiency, scale efficiency. Besides, trend analysis and the comparison of the two stages are also conducted. All the data is collected players who ranked top 64 in the official website of ATP form April 25, 2016 to April 17, 2017. Results: There are seven players who are efficient in both two stages. The top 25 players have higher efficiency in the second stage than that of the first stage; and the others’ efficiency in the second stage are inferior to those in the first stage. Conclusions: The study tries to propose three competitions-selected principles for the reference: (1) choice of the games; (2) site adaptation; (3) adjustment lag.