RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 30 charted matches · 2020–2023

Aslan Karatsev

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.6% ±2.9 raw 62.2% · tour 63.4% · 2,479 points
Return points won 37.4% ±2.9 raw 36.1% · tour 36.6% · 2,466 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 −0.09 ±0.12 better than 32% of ATP · raw −0.09
Shot selection +0.12 ±0.18 better than 67% of ATP · raw +0.13
Execution −1.95 ±0.63 better than 3% of ATP · raw −1.77
Tactical adaptability +0.13 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 29 matches
Adaptation speed +0.23 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.51 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 59% 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 11,736 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Aslan Karatsev 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 middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 699 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 24% 51.4%±6.0 52.7%
BH through the middle 19% 52.8%±6.6 46.8%
BH crosscourt 15% 52.3%±7.4 49.1%
FH through the middle 14% 39.2%±7.3 47.0%
FH down the line 13% 53.8%±7.7 51.5%
BH down the line 8% 42.8%±9.5 48.3%
BH crosscourt + approach 2% 75.9%±12.6 67.7%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 535 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 44% 48.1%±5.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 22% 48.4%±7.0 43.7%
BH down the line 15% 46.3%±8.1 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 44.8%±11.8 42.5%
FH inside-out 5% 57.3%±12.0 51.8%
BH slice through the middle 3% 36.9%±12.9 35.1%
FH inside-in 2% 60.4%±14.0 54.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 396 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 47% 44.5%±5.7 46.6%
FH through the middle 23% 37.8%±7.5 41.5%
FH down the line 20% 38.7%±8.1 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 6% 23.6%±10.8 24.5%
FH down the line + approach 3% 77.0%±12.4 69.3%

Serve +1: drive to your middle

position worth 52% to the average player · 352 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH through the middle 27% 44.0%±7.6 45.8%
BH through the middle 18% 36.9%±8.7 43.3%
FH crosscourt 18% 45.3%±9.0 58.2%
BH crosscourt 15% 45.1%±9.5 51.8%
FH down the line 13% 55.7%±10.1 56.1%
BH down the line 4% 46.3%±14.3 51.3%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −5 How much less varied Aslan Karatsev's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 231 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 39% ▼ 72% / 73%
Body 12% 9% 60% / 63%
T 41% 52% ▲ 69% / 75%

1,215 normal · 54 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 55% 45% ▼ 74% / 73%
Body 13% 19% 60% / 63%
T 32% 36% 77% / 72%

971 normal · 177 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% 60.0%±3.2 n=591 45% ▼
Body12% 55.0%±6.1 n=151 0% ▼
T42% 62.7%±3.4 n=527 55% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.12).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide54% 66.2%±3.1 n=616 67% ▲
Body14% 58.6%±5.9 n=160 1% ▼
T32% 63.4%±4.0 n=372 32%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.10).
Optimal mix: +1.0 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.77 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±3.0 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. (880 repeats, 1,477 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 117 39% +1.8±6.6
1stAd courtT 301 28% −0.4±4.0
1stAd courtWide 317 24% −3.0±3.8
1stDeuce courtBody 135 39% +2.1±6.2
1stDeuce courtT 333 26% +1.2±3.8
1stDeuce courtWide 296 29% +1.4±4.1
2ndAd courtBody 156 46% −3.2±6.0
2ndAd courtT 76 55% +6.2±7.9
2ndAd courtWide 182 44% −4.3±5.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 205 51% +1.9±5.4
2ndDeuce courtT 220 47% −2.5±5.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 73 43% −4.9±8.0

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.1% · won 66% · ±0.0±8.0 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 65% · −0.3±9.1 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.0% · won 61% · −4.9±9.4 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 60% · −5.7±8.1 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 58% · −7.4±8.6 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.1% · won 51% · +10.4±10.3 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.8% · won 48% · +6.8±9.5 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 5.0% · won 46% · +4.8±7.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.0% · won 47% · +6.3±10.4 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.2% · won 46% · +4.9±10.2 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH through the middle → BH through the middle used 3.7% · won 56% · +8.6±8.0 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.5% · won 54% · +7.4±7.5 vs own baseline
  3. BH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 56% · +9.3±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 55% · +8.4±10.7 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.6% · won 54% · +7.3±10.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 57% · +7.7±9.8 vs own baseline · +8.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Camilo Ugo Carabelli (5/9), Jaume Munar (5/7)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.3% · won 60% · +11.0±12.4 vs own baseline · +25.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Camilo Ugo Carabelli (7/8)
  3. BH through the middle → BH through the middle → BH through the middle used 0.4% · won 58% · +8.9±11.8 vs own baseline · +21.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 54% · +4.7±8.3 vs own baseline · +7.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jaume Munar (1/7), Grigor Dimitrov (4/9)
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 56% · +6.9±11.1 vs own baseline · +9.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jaume Munar (4/6)
  6. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 1.1% · won 54% · +4.7±8.9 vs own baseline · +8.3 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 · serve +1+1.8126
BH to their backhand · return+1.7296
FH to their forehand · return+1.0167
FH to the middle · return−0.1390
Body 1st serve · ad court−0.3160

Most exposed to

T 2nd serve · deuce court−2.4220
FH to their forehand · serve +1−1.8263
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.6530
Wide 2nd serve · ad court−1.1182
BH to their backhand · serve +1−0.8165

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard, Reilly Opelka, Joao Fonseca, Brandon Nakashima, Matteo Berrettini

Tactical fingerprint

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

Unforced errors / shot14.8%
Deep returns38%
Point-ending shots31.0%
Wide serves · ad54%
Wide serves · deuce47%
Run-around forehands23%
Through the middle26%
Forehand share53%
Points at net11%
BH down the line19%
Serve & volley1%
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Avg rally length3.7
Chipped returns10%
T serves · deuce42%
1st serve in58%
FH down the line27%
Backhand slice9%
T serves · ad32%

Plays most like

  1. Roman Safiullin 2017–2025 plan v
  2. Jan Lennard Struff 2014–2025 plan v
  3. Lloyd Harris 2019–2024 plan v
  4. Marin Cilic 2009–2026 plan v
  5. Arthur Fils 2023–2026 plan v
  6. Nikoloz Basilashvili 2017–2025 plan v
  7. Sam Querrey 2010–2022 plan v
  8. Jiri Lehecka 2019–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. James Blake 2002–2011
  2. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  3. Marcelo Rios 1995–2001

Charted matches