RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 47 charted matches · 2012–2022

Benoit Paire

Archetype: Rallies through the middle · Crosscourt backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 62.4% ±2.6 raw 59.0% · tour 63.4% · 3,678 points
Return points won 38.6% ±2.7 raw 36.1% · tour 36.6% · 3,639 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 −0.04 ±0.08 better than 46% of ATP · raw −0.04
Shot selection −0.01 ±0.17 better than 52% of ATP · raw −0.01
Execution −1.09 ±0.52 better than 23% of ATP · raw −1.05
Tactical adaptability +0.14 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 43 matches
Adaptation speed +0.10 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.88 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 25% 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 16,639 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Benoit Paire 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 forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 733 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 35% 40.1%±4.9 46.6%
FH through the middle 25% 37.0%±5.6 41.5%
FH down the line 20% 43.7%±6.3 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 10% 35.8%±8.2 24.5%
FH slice down the line 5% 27.5%±9.9 25.6%
FH slice crosscourt 3% 23.0%±10.9 30.9%
FH down the line + approach 1% 72.9%±13.4 69.3%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 665 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH through the middle 22% 42.9%±6.4 47.0%
FH crosscourt 18% 47.9%±6.9 52.7%
FH down the line 14% 40.8%±7.5 51.5%
BH crosscourt 13% 42.0%±7.8 49.1%
BH through the middle 13% 34.6%±7.5 46.8%
BH down the line 8% 44.6%±9.7 48.3%
BH slice through the middle 2% 44.0%±14.0 44.8%
BH drop shot down the line 2% 51.1%±14.3 49.4%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 628 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 48% 43.0%±4.5 47.6%
BH through the middle 23% 41.2%±6.4 43.7%
BH down the line 13% 47.2%±8.3 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 6% 27.6%±9.7 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 45.3%±12.5 42.5%
BH drop shot down the line 4% 45.2%±12.5 47.2%
BH down the line + approach 2% 57.5%±14.8 66.2%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 479 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 23% 51.2%±7.3 52.4%
FH through the middle 16% 46.2%±8.3 46.5%
BH crosscourt 15% 39.3%±8.4 48.7%
BH through the middle 14% 33.3%±8.4 46.5%
BH down the line 11% 44.6%±9.7 48.4%
FH down the line 11% 48.4%±9.8 51.8%
BH drop shot down the line 4% 33.1%±12.6 43.0%
BH crosscourt + approach 3% 56.8%±14.4 65.9%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −3 How much less varied Benoit Paire's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 363 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 52% 51% 76% / 73%
Body 5% 7% 65% / 63%
T 43% 42% 77% / 75%

1,831 normal · 76 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 66% 61% 74% / 73%
Body 6% 6% 61% / 63%
T 28% 34% 72% / 72%

1,481 normal · 287 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
Wide52% 60.6%±2.5 n=985 65% ▲
Body5% 58.7%±7.2 n=97 0% ▼
T43% 59.5%±2.8 n=825 35% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.82).
Optimal mix: +0.1 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide65% 58.5%±2.4 n=1,152 58% ▼
Body6% 49.8%±7.0 n=110 0% ▼
T29% 58.8%±3.5 n=506 42% ▲

Off equilibrium (p = 0.050): serve T more. Gap 0.8 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.4 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: −0.2±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. (1,949 repeats, 1,632 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 111 38% +0.7±6.7
1stAd courtT 516 28% −0.1±3.2
1stAd courtWide 430 29% +1.9±3.5
1stDeuce courtBody 102 37% +0.4±6.9
1stDeuce courtT 444 26% +1.0±3.3
1stDeuce courtWide 662 27% +0.2±2.8
2ndAd courtBody 256 54% +5.1±4.8
2ndAd courtT 188 50% +1.1±5.6
2ndAd courtWide 236 49% +0.7±5.0
2ndDeuce courtBody 282 48% −1.0±4.7
2ndDeuce courtT 193 46% −4.0±5.5
2ndDeuce courtWide 214 43% −5.3±5.2

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 61% · −4.7±7.9 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.7% · won 59% · −7.4±7.7 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 57% · −8.7±8.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 57% · −9.0±7.9 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.1% · won 54% · −11.8±8.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 3.1% · won 51% · +12.5±7.7 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.1% · won 43% · +4.9±7.6 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.6% · won 42% · +3.9±8.1 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.1% · won 38% · −0.1±7.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.3% · won 37% · −1.8±7.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.6% · won 49% · +8.3±10.1 vs own baseline
  2. FH slice through the middle → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 50% · +9.8±11.4 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 45% · +4.4±7.6 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → BH down the line used 1.7% · won 46% · +6.0±10.0 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 2.2% · won 44% · +4.0±9.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. Wide serve → BH through the middle return → FH volley crosscourt used 0.3% · won 58% · +14.6±12.4 vs own baseline · +4.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 48% · +5.5±9.1 vs own baseline · +4.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Dominic Thiem (5/11)
  3. BH through the middle → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 52% · +8.7±12.4 vs own baseline · +12.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt return, mid → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 51% · +7.6±12.9 vs own baseline · +14.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 0.4% · won 49% · +5.6±11.5 vs own baseline · +5.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → BH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 49% · +6.5±12.4 vs own baseline · +6.6 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+2.9226
BH to their backhand · return+2.7515
BH to their forehand · serve +1+2.6273
BH to their backhand · serve +1+1.8426
FH to their backhand · return+1.5339

Most exposed to

BH to their forehand · return−4.4193
FH to their forehand · return +1−2.5276
BH to their backhand · return +1−2.3186
BH to their forehand · serve +1−2.3173
FH to their backhand · return−2.1180

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Ugo Humbert, Karen Khachanov, Andy Murray, Joao Fonseca, Yoshihito Nishioka

Tactical fingerprint

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

Drop shots / shot4.9%
Wide serves · ad65%
Unforced errors / shot14.5%
Wide serves · deuce52%
Point-ending shots30.6%
Through the middle28%
BH down the line24%
Deep returns31%
Points at net13%
Serve & volley10%
FH down the line29%
T serves · deuce43%
Forehand share51%
Chipped returns9%
Backhand slice10%
Avg rally length3.4
T serves · ad29%
Run-around forehands2%
1st serve in51%

Plays most like

  1. Hugo Gaston 2021–2026 plan v
  2. Gustavo Kuerten 1997–2007 plan v
  3. Aslan Karatsev 2020–2023 plan v
  4. Ernests Gulbis 2008–2020 plan v
  5. Nikoloz Basilashvili 2017–2025 plan v
  6. Pierre Hugues Herbert 2014–2025 plan v
  7. Jakub Mensik 2022–2026 plan v
  8. Gregoire Barrere 2016–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Gustavo Kuerten 1997–2007
  2. Marcelo Rios 1995–2001
  3. Thomas Johansson 1996–2005

Charted matches