RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 215 charted matches · 1988–2006

Andre Agassi

Archetype: Blocks returns short · Works the corners

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 65.7% ±2.2 raw 64.5% · tour 63.4% · 20,775 points
Return points won 41.1% ±2.4 raw 38.5% · tour 36.6% · 21,479 points

Serve and return points won, refitted against every opponent at once so a record built on weak or strong opposition is put on the same scale. Career, all surfaces, with a 90% margin. Raw is the plain share of points won.

Value per 100 shots

Direction choice +0.32 ±0.03 better than 99% of ATP · raw +0.32
Shot selection −0.27 ±0.09 better than 26% of ATP · raw −0.27
Execution +0.69 ±0.17 better than 88% of ATP · raw +0.72
Tactical adaptability +0.09 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 212 matches
Adaptation speed +0.08 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.06 ±0.37 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 11,464 shots · better than 64% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.13 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 97% of ATP

Points gained per 100 shots compared with an average tour player in the same position, adjusted for the strength of the opponents faced, with a 90% margin (shots clustered by match). Raw is before the opponent adjustment. Built on 100,472 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Andre Agassi goes on to win after each option in the positions they face most often, shrunk toward tour average when the sample is small. Showing the 8 most-used options; teal marks the best one with at least 30 shots.

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 6,097 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 52% 53.0%±1.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 12% 46.4%±3.0 43.7%
BH down the line 12% 52.5%±3.1 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 7% 44.9%±3.9 42.5%
FH inside-out 6% 57.2%±4.3 51.8%
FH inside-in 4% 58.9%±5.2 54.7%
BH slice through the middle 2% 31.1%±5.9 35.1%
FH through the middle 1% 56.1%±9.0 45.2%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 3,933 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 28% 57.5%±2.4 52.7%
BH crosscourt 20% 53.5%±2.9 49.1%
FH down the line 19% 57.8%±2.9 51.5%
FH through the middle 12% 49.3%±3.7 47.0%
BH through the middle 9% 48.4%±4.2 46.8%
BH down the line 4% 54.7%±6.2 48.3%
FH down the line + approach 4% 71.1%±5.8 70.5%
BH crosscourt + approach 2% 64.9%±8.6 67.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 3,925 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 51% 50.8%±1.8 46.6%
FH down the line 24% 48.5%±2.6 44.7%
FH through the middle 21% 44.6%±2.8 41.5%
FH down the line + approach 2% 71.8%±8.2 69.3%
FH slice through the middle 1% 25.8%±10.2 24.5%
FH slice down the line 0% 18.0%±10.8 25.6%
FH drop shot crosscourt 0% 62.1%±13.9 52.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 3,521 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 51% 53.4%±1.9 48.0%
BH down the line 13% 53.9%±3.7 46.5%
BH through the middle 11% 53.0%±4.1 43.8%
BH slice crosscourt 9% 44.7%±4.4 42.1%
FH inside-out 4% 62.7%±6.1 52.6%
FH inside-in 4% 63.1%±6.4 54.3%
BH slice through the middle 3% 27.2%±6.4 35.1%
BH drop shot down the line 1% 51.9%±11.1 47.8%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +8 How much less varied Andre Agassi's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 1633 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 50% 55% 71% / 73%
Body 9% 6% 63% / 63%
T 41% 40% 73% / 75%

10,144 normal · 375 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 58% 64% 69% / 73%
Body 4% 3% 67% / 63%
T 37% 33% 70% / 72%

8,454 normal · 1,258 break-point 1st serves

Is the serve mix in equilibrium?

Game theory says a well-mixed server wins equally often with every direction they use. If one direction wins more, it's underused and points are being left behind. This is the minimax test Walker and Wooders ran on Wimbledon finals, applied to every charted first serve. Win rates include faults. "Optimal" allows for returners reading a habit. No measurable response (−0.05 ± 0.15 points per 100 serves for every 10 points of habitual usage), measured from ATP servers whose mix drifted between matches. Shifts stay within the range servers' habits actually vary, the only range that response was measured over.

Deuce court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 65.2%±1.1 n=5,278 63% ▲
Body8% 62.3%±2.6 n=884 0% ▼
T41% 63.9%±1.2 n=4,357 37% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.12).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide59% 63.6%±1.0 n=5,733 50% ▼
Body4% 62.6%±3.8 n=405 0% ▼
T37% 64.4%±1.3 n=3,574 50% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.57).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.36 points per 100 first serves What the optimal mix would win over the current one, both courts. More exploitable than 100% of ATP servers. Tested on matches they weren't fitted on, ATP mixes picked this way win 0.33 per 100 first serves on average.

Repeating the previous direction to the same court: ±0.0±1.2 points per 100 against switching. Negative means returners read repeats. Tour-wide, repeating costs women about 0.4 points per 100 and costs men nothing, so men's returners don't measurably anticipate direction. (9,429 repeats, 10,372 switches.)

Return by serve direction

Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 641 42% +5.0±3.1
1stAd courtT 2,331 30% +1.6±1.5
1stAd courtWide 2,849 28% +0.9±1.4
1stDeuce courtBody 671 41% +4.1±3.1
1stDeuce courtT 2,859 23% −2.3±1.3
1stDeuce courtWide 2,769 28% +1.0±1.4
2ndAd courtBody 1,077 55% +6.1±2.5
2ndAd courtT 788 54% +5.0±2.9
2ndAd courtWide 2,382 52% +3.2±1.7
2ndDeuce courtBody 1,507 53% +3.5±2.1
2ndDeuce courtT 1,861 53% +2.8±1.9
2ndDeuce courtWide 1,214 51% +2.8±2.3

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Andre Agassi's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 61% · −5.6±2.9 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 58% · −8.2±3.5 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 55% · −11.1±3.7 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 56% · −10.0±3.0 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.6% · won 54% · −12.1±3.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 6.1% · won 53% · +11.2±2.4 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.9% · won 55% · +14.0±3.5 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 3.6% · won 53% · +12.1±3.2 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.3% · won 56% · +14.3±3.9 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.8% · won 54% · +12.5±3.6 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH inside-in used 1.5% · won 61% · +8.6±4.4 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.7% · won 56% · +3.5±2.1 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 4.2% · won 56% · +3.5±2.7 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.6% · won 58% · +5.0±4.3 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.1% · won 57% · +4.4±5.1 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Andre Agassi wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.

  1. FH down the line + approach → BH lob through the middle → Smash crosscourt used 0.1% · won 78% · +24.5±7.6 vs own baseline · −0.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jim Courier (8/10)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 60% · +6.3±3.2 vs own baseline · +6.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andrei Pavel (3/13), Alex Corretja (4/11)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 64% · +10.3±5.3 vs own baseline · +10.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jim Courier (1/10), Lleyton Hewitt (3/9)
  4. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → FH down the line + approach used 0.1% · won 76% · +22.1±8.8 vs own baseline · +14.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 63% · +9.7±5.4 vs own baseline · +7.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roger Federer (4/14), Pete Sampras (4/13)
  6. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 63% · +9.9±5.6 vs own baseline · +6.0 vs tour on the same sequence

Strengths and vulnerabilities

Value per 100 shots compared with the average player hitting (strengths) or facing (vulnerabilities) the same shot. Only shot types seen at least 120 times.

Hurts opponents most with

BH volley to their backhand · rally+5.0265
BH to their forehand · return +1+4.0959
FH to their forehand · return+3.42,008
BH to their forehand · serve +1+3.11,319
BH to their forehand · rally+3.12,785

Most exposed to

BH slice to their backhand · return−4.72,186
BH volley to their backhand · rally−4.2320
FH slice to their backhand · return−4.0150
FH volley to their forehand · rally−3.8489
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1−3.7409

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Andy Murray, Kei Nishikori, Richard Gasquet, Casper Ruud, Novak Djokovic

Tactical fingerprint

Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the ATP average, in standard deviations.

Wide serves · ad59%
Wide serves · deuce50%
1st serve in63%
Point-ending shots24.2%
Run-around forehands19%
BH down the line20%
Avg rally length3.9
FH down the line30%
T serves · ad37%
Serve & volley2%
Points at net9%
T serves · deuce41%
Drop shots / shot0.8%
Unforced errors / shot8.4%
Backhand slice10%
Deep returns21%
Chipped returns6%
Forehand share48%
Through the middle16%

Plays most like

  1. Paul Henri Mathieu 2002–2016 plan v
  2. David Nalbandian 2002–2012 plan v
  3. Marcelo Rios 1995–2001 plan v
  4. Magnus Norman 2000–2001 plan v
  5. Yevgeny Kafelnikov 1994–2002 plan v
  6. Nishesh Basavareddy 2024–2025 plan v
  7. Valentin Vacherot 2024–2026 plan v
  8. Kei Nishikori 2011–2025 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Nishesh Basavareddy 2024–2025
  2. Valentin Vacherot 2024–2026
  3. Kei Nishikori 2011–2025

Charted matches