RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 10 charted matches · 1989–1995

Andrei Chesnokov

Archetype: Blocks returns short · Works the corners

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 62.4% ±3.0 raw 60.7% · tour 63.4% · 1,403 points
Return points won 40.7% ±3.1 raw 39.3% · tour 36.6% · 1,453 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 −0.17 ±0.25 better than 18% of ATP · raw −0.16
Shot selection −0.21 ±0.42 better than 30% of ATP · raw −0.20
Execution +1.04 ±0.51 better than 96% of ATP · raw +1.19
Tactical adaptability −0.12 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 10 matches
Adaptation speed +0.04 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.67 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 41% 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 8,919 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Andrei Chesnokov 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.

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 638 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 49% 48.1%±4.5 48.0%
BH through the middle 26% 48.6%±6.0 43.8%
BH down the line 17% 54.8%±7.2 46.5%
BH slice through the middle 3% 35.1%±12.4 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 2% 36.9%±14.3 42.1%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 614 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 47% 43.8%±4.7 47.6%
BH through the middle 25% 49.6%±6.3 43.7%
BH down the line 23% 44.6%±6.4 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 2% 40.3%±14.5 42.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 429 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 52% 45.9%±5.2 46.9%
FH down the line 24% 42.9%±7.4 44.8%
FH through the middle 19% 38.1%±7.9 41.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 416 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 20% 50.3%±8.1 49.1%
FH down the line 18% 53.4%±8.4 51.5%
BH down the line 17% 54.0%±8.5 48.3%
FH crosscourt 17% 55.5%±8.6 52.7%
BH through the middle 11% 62.7%±9.8 46.8%
FH through the middle 9% 44.7%±10.6 47.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +4 How much less varied Andrei Chesnokov's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 141 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 43% 61% / 73%
Body 20% 14% 64% / 63%
T 38% 43% 64% / 75%

661 normal · 28 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 50% 46% 66% / 73%
Body 21% 13% 67% / 63%
T 29% 41% ▲ 67% / 72%

527 normal · 113 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
Wide41% 57.5%±4.6 n=285 54% ▲
Body20% 59.3%±6.2 n=139 7% ▼
T38% 55.7%±4.8 n=265 39%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.69).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 60.1%±4.3 n=318 37% ▼
Body20% 64.7%±6.3 n=125 19%
T31% 61.7%±5.3 n=197 44% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.53).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.25 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: −2.8±5.4 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. (465 repeats, 844 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 20 42% +5.2±11.5
1stAd courtT 146 33% +4.6±5.8
1stAd courtWide 228 31% +3.8±4.7
1stDeuce courtBody 62 46% +9.0±8.5
1stDeuce courtT 190 36% +10.6±5.3
1stDeuce courtWide 174 32% +5.2±5.4
2ndAd courtBody 40 51% +1.8±9.8
2ndAd courtT 18 47% −1.8±11.9
2ndAd courtWide 207 43% −5.1±5.3
2ndDeuce courtBody 84 51% +1.6±7.7
2ndDeuce courtT 170 48% −1.2±5.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 38 51% +2.5±10.0

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH down the line used 2.6% · won 69% · +7.4±9.8 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 2.2% · won 61% · −0.9±10.8 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.6% · won 61% · −0.9±10.4 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 61% · −1.1±9.5 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 60% · −2.3±11.1 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 7.4% · won 47% · +6.0±8.1 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, short used 2.3% · won 50% · +9.7±11.4 vs own baseline
  3. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.2% · won 47% · +6.8±11.5 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.2% · won 44% · +3.0±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.3% · won 43% · +2.0±11.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 57% · +9.1±7.2 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 2.7% · won 59% · +10.8±8.3 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.6% · won 55% · +6.5±7.5 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 52% · +3.9±7.4 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → BH down the line used 3.6% · won 52% · +4.0±7.6 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH down the line used 0.6% · won 59% · +10.8±10.8 vs own baseline · +15.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Michael Stich (5/8), Michael Chang (4/6)
  2. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 0.3% · won 63% · +14.4±12.6 vs own baseline · +41.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Michael Chang (12/14)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 57% · +8.5±9.9 vs own baseline · +11.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Michael Chang (17/27)
  4. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 0.9% · won 56% · +7.5±9.7 vs own baseline · +11.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Michael Chang (22/36)
  5. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 58% · +9.9±11.5 vs own baseline · +21.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Thomas Muster (14/20)
  6. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 53% · +4.2±6.9 vs own baseline · +5.1 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 to their forehand · return+5.1139
BH to their backhand · return+2.7256
Body 1st serve · ad court+2.1125
BH to the middle · serve +1+2.1184
BH to the middle · rally+1.9527

Most exposed to

FH to the middle · rally−2.4332
FH to their backhand · serve +1−2.3195
BH slice to the middle · rally−2.3122
FH to their backhand · rally−2.2735
BH slice to the middle · return−1.7129

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Pedro Martinez, Yoshihito Nishioka, Raphael Collignon, Nishesh Basavareddy, Roberto Carballes Baena

Tactical fingerprint

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

Avg rally length5.6
BH down the line29%
FH down the line32%
Points at net13%
1st serve in62%
Through the middle25%
Wide serves · ad50%
Wide serves · deuce41%
Serve & volley1%
T serves · deuce38%
Backhand slice6%
Chipped returns4%
Drop shots / shot0.2%
T serves · ad31%
Run-around forehands2%
Deep returns14%
Point-ending shots14.8%
Unforced errors / shot5.9%
Forehand share40%

Plays most like

  1. Jenson Brooksby 2021–2026 plan v
  2. Mats Wilander 1982–1995 plan v
  3. Michael Chang 1989–1998 plan v
  4. Jarkko Nieminen 2003–2014 plan v
  5. Miloslav Mecir 1985–1990 plan v
  6. Sergi Bruguera 1990–1997 plan v
  7. Novak Djokovic 2005–2026 plan v
  8. Valentin Vacherot 2024–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jenson Brooksby 2021–2026
  2. Jarkko Nieminen 2003–2014
  3. Novak Djokovic 2005–2026

Charted matches