RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 257 charted matches · 2005–2024

Andy Murray

Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 66.0% ±2.2 raw 63.7% · tour 63.4% · 21,983 points
Return points won 41.6% ±2.3 raw 38.1% · tour 36.6% · 22,279 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 +0.14 ±0.03 better than 87% of ATP · raw +0.14
Shot selection −0.45 ±0.05 better than 13% of ATP · raw −0.46
Execution +0.94 ±0.16 better than 95% of ATP · raw +0.82
Tactical adaptability −0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 252 matches
Adaptation speed +0.02 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution +0.07 ±0.27 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 20,581 shots · better than 81% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.23 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 90% 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 125,654 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Andy Murray 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 · 8,299 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 40% 48.3%±1.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 18% 46.5%±2.1 43.7%
BH slice crosscourt 14% 45.1%±2.4 42.5%
BH down the line 11% 48.1%±2.6 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 7% 35.1%±3.1 35.1%
BH slice down the line 3% 43.0%±4.8 37.1%
FH inside-out 2% 55.8%±6.2 51.8%
FH inside-in 1% 45.0%±7.4 54.7%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 6,353 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 40% 49.7%±1.6 48.0%
BH slice crosscourt 16% 47.3%±2.5 42.1%
BH through the middle 16% 42.8%±2.5 43.8%
BH down the line 10% 50.8%±3.2 46.5%
BH slice through the middle 9% 39.2%±3.3 35.1%
BH slice down the line 3% 35.5%±5.1 35.8%
FH inside-out 1% 51.4%±7.8 52.6%
FH inside-in 1% 44.9%±9.0 54.3%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 6,136 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 45% 46.2%±1.6 46.6%
FH through the middle 23% 41.7%±2.2 41.5%
FH down the line 23% 48.4%±2.2 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 4% 32.0%±5.0 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 36.5%±6.6 30.9%
FH slice down the line 2% 31.4%±7.1 25.6%
FH down the line + approach 1% 67.4%±9.0 69.3%
FH lob through the middle 0% 25.8%±10.7 23.0%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 5,976 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 23% 52.0%±2.2 52.7%
FH down the line 20% 50.6%±2.3 51.5%
FH through the middle 14% 45.8%±2.8 47.0%
BH through the middle 12% 50.3%±3.0 46.8%
BH crosscourt 12% 52.3%±3.0 49.1%
BH down the line 7% 52.4%±4.0 48.3%
BH slice through the middle 2% 45.3%±6.5 44.8%
BH slice down the line 2% 52.3%±7.0 45.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +5 How much less varied Andy Murray's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 1808 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 48% 71% / 73%
Body 8% 6% 67% / 63%
T 46% 46% 80% / 75%

10,987 normal · 449 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 53% 77% / 73%
Body 8% 6% 61% / 63%
T 45% 41% 70% / 72%

9,055 normal · 1,359 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
Wide47% 64.7%±1.1 n=5,329 41% ▼
Body8% 60.7%±2.7 n=889 0% ▼
T46% 65.1%±1.1 n=5,218 59% ▲

Off equilibrium (p = 0.019): serve T more. Gap 0.5 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide47% 63.0%±1.1 n=4,931 43% ▼
Body8% 59.5%±2.8 n=831 0% ▼
T45% 62.5%±1.2 n=4,652 57% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.10).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.32 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: +0.1±1.1 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. (10,076 repeats, 11,262 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 676 43% +5.7±3.1
1stAd courtT 2,748 32% +3.9±1.5
1stAd courtWide 3,144 29% +1.9±1.3
1stDeuce courtBody 861 41% +4.3±2.7
1stDeuce courtT 2,856 24% −0.6±1.3
1stDeuce courtWide 3,625 30% +3.2±1.3
2ndAd courtBody 1,809 52% +2.9±1.9
2ndAd courtT 711 49% −0.2±3.0
2ndAd courtWide 1,484 51% +2.3±2.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 2,249 52% +3.1±1.7
2ndDeuce courtT 1,156 51% +1.7±2.4
2ndDeuce courtWide 826 49% +1.2±2.8

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 60% · −6.2±3.6 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.9% · won 59% · −7.0±3.2 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 56% · −9.8±3.7 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 56% · −9.5±3.3 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.6% · won 55% · −11.2±3.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.1% · won 56% · +16.2±3.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 4.6% · won 50% · +10.1±2.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 2.1% · won 52% · +11.9±3.9 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.4% · won 47% · +7.6±3.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.6% · won 47% · +6.7±3.5 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 51% · +3.3±2.1 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.8% · won 51% · +3.5±2.2 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 52% · +4.7±3.5 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 3.7% · won 50% · +2.7±2.2 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → BH down the line used 1.0% · won 53% · +4.9±4.1 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → FH down the line + approach used 0.1% · won 75% · +26.3±7.9 vs own baseline · +11.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Novak Djokovic (5/7)
  2. FH down the line + approach → BH slice through the middle → FH volley crosscourt used 0.1% · won 78% · +28.6±8.4 vs own baseline · +9.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Novak Djokovic (6/6)
  3. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → BH crosscourt + approach used 0.1% · won 75% · +25.6±8.3 vs own baseline · +12.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Novak Djokovic (4/6)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → BH crosscourt + approach used 0.1% · won 71% · +21.6±7.9 vs own baseline · +8.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Novak Djokovic (6/9), David Ferrer (5/7)
  5. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.1% · won 65% · +15.8±7.3 vs own baseline · +15.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Yoshihito Nishioka (4/6), Rafael Nadal (34/55)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line + approach used 0.1% · won 67% · +17.6±8.0 vs own baseline · ±0.0 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

FH slice to their forehand · return+4.2175
FH to their backhand · return+4.11,948
FH slice to the middle · rally+3.6526
FH slice to the middle · return+3.5826
BH to their forehand · return+3.5946

Most exposed to

FH drop shot to their backhand · rally−6.4203
FH drop shot to their forehand · rally−5.5134
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1−3.4160
FH volley to their backhand · serve +1−3.3164
FH slice to the middle · return +1−3.3182

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.97, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.83, Pedro Martinez +1.71, Casper Ruud +1.66, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.60

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +2.23, Fabian Marozsan +2.11, Pedro Martinez +2.07, Roberto Carballes Baena +2.06, Roberto Bautista Agut +2.01

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Carlos Alcaraz, Jannik Sinner, Lorenzo Musetti, Novak Djokovic, Botic Van De Zandschulp

Tactical fingerprint

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

Avg rally length4.7
T serves · ad45%
Wide serves · deuce47%
Chipped returns20%
Backhand slice25%
Drop shots / shot1.8%
FH down the line31%
T serves · deuce46%
Points at net9%
Serve & volley2%
BH down the line18%
Through the middle23%
Wide serves · ad47%
Forehand share51%
1st serve in59%
Deep returns23%
Run-around forehands11%
Point-ending shots18.7%
Unforced errors / shot7.7%

Plays most like

  1. Richard Gasquet 2002–2025 plan v
  2. Marcos Baghdatis 2004–2019 plan v
  3. Novak Djokovic 2005–2026 plan v
  4. Daniil Medvedev 2017–2026 plan v
  5. David Nalbandian 2002–2012 plan v
  6. Andreas Seppi 2008–2021 plan v
  7. Learner Tien 2022–2026 plan v
  8. Karen Khachanov 2015–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Michael Chang 1989–1998
  2. Yevgeny Kafelnikov 1994–2002
  3. Aaron Krickstein 1989–1995

Charted matches