RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 9 charted matches · 2019–2024

Bernabe Zapata Miralles

Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.6% ±3.3 raw 60.0% · tour 63.4% · 820 points
Return points won 37.5% ±3.4 raw 36.8% · tour 36.6% · 744 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 −0.10 ±0.16 better than 30% of ATP · raw −0.10
Shot selection −0.08 ±0.20 better than 42% of ATP · raw −0.08
Execution −0.37 ±0.54 better than 50% of ATP · raw −0.36
Points left on the table 2.54 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 56% 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 4,441 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Bernabe Zapata Miralles 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 · 322 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 48% 49.2%±6.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 26% 51.2%±8.0 43.7%
BH down the line 7% 47.2%±12.5 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 7% 43.0%±12.4 42.5%
FH inside-out 4% 51.1%±14.1 51.8%
FH inside-in 4% 57.4%±14.2 54.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 254 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 31% 50.8%±8.3 51.5%
FH crosscourt 22% 56.0%±9.4 52.7%
BH crosscourt 15% 57.6%±10.8 49.1%
FH through the middle 13% 46.0%±11.3 47.0%
BH through the middle 13% 42.2%±11.2 46.8%
BH down the line 4% 44.0%±14.7 48.3%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 210 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 55.6%±8.2 48.0%
BH through the middle 24% 45.4%±9.8 43.8%
BH slice crosscourt 13% 36.3%±11.4 42.1%
BH down the line 8% 33.2%±12.7 46.5%
FH inside-out 7% 57.4%±13.9 52.6%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 167 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 45% 44.5%±8.4 46.6%
FH down the line 37% 39.4%±8.9 44.7%
FH through the middle 19% 33.9%±10.9 41.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +16 How much less varied Bernabe Zapata Miralles's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 88 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 53% 62% ▲ 66% / 73%
Body 11% 0% ▼ 64% / 63%
T 36% 38% 68% / 75%

407 normal · 21 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 49% 61% ▲ 65% / 73%
Body 12% 7% 64% / 63%
T 39% 31% 62% / 72%

325 normal · 67 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
Wide53% 62.1%±5.0 n=227 66% ▲
Body11% 56.5%±9.4 n=46 0% ▼
T36% 61.9%±5.9 n=155 34% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.47).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide51% 61.5%±5.3 n=201 64% ▲
Body11% 60.7%±9.4 n=43 0% ▼
T38% 54.2%±6.1 n=148 36% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.19).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.40 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: −6.4±4.0 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. (334 repeats, 468 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 18 40% +2.8±11.6
1stAd courtT 76 29% +0.7±7.2
1stAd courtWide 124 29% +2.1±6.0
1stDeuce courtBody 18 40% +2.9±11.6
1stDeuce courtT 123 23% −1.9±5.6
1stDeuce courtWide 108 30% +2.6±6.4
2ndAd courtBody 36 50% +0.3±10.1
2ndAd courtT 26 51% +2.1±11.0
2ndAd courtWide 71 53% +4.6±8.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 44 46% −3.5±9.5
2ndDeuce courtT 71 50% +0.7±8.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 28 44% −4.2±10.7

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 61% · −1.4±10.6 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 60% · −2.1±11.3 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.1% · won 58% · −3.9±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 58% · −4.4±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 4.1% · won 57% · −5.7±10.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 8.0% · won 53% · +7.5±11.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 6.7% · won 49% · +3.7±11.8 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 7.7% · won 48% · +2.8±11.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.2% · won 58% · +7.7±9.4 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 58% · +7.4±11.3 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 56% · +5.7±10.0 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 2.6% · won 56% · +5.5±11.4 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 55% · +4.3±10.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 55% · +5.0±8.6 vs own baseline · +8.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (6/13), Francisco Cerundolo (10/19)
  2. BH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 57% · +7.3±11.0 vs own baseline · +16.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Nick Hardt (3/7), Tommy Robredo (6/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.0% · won 55% · +5.0±11.6 vs own baseline · +7.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Nick Hardt (4/8)
  4. FH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 55% · +4.9±12.8 vs own baseline · +16.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 52% · +2.1±12.0 vs own baseline · +1.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Botic Van De Zandschulp (3/7)
  6. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 52% · +1.7±10.7 vs own baseline · +8.0 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 to the middle · return+2.2154
BH to their backhand · rally+1.7312
FH to their forehand · serve +1+0.7136
FH to their forehand · rally+0.5327
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.1201

Most exposed to

BH to the middle · return−3.2161
FH to the middle · return−1.6170
FH to the middle · rally−1.5174
BH to their backhand · return−1.0126
FH to their backhand · rally−0.3235

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Juan Carlos Prado Angelo, Cameron Norrie, Daniil Medvedev, Dusan Lajovic, Ugo Humbert

Tactical fingerprint

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

1st serve in71%
Wide serves · deuce53%
FH down the line37%
Avg rally length4.7
Through the middle26%
Drop shots / shot1.9%
Deep returns29%
Forehand share54%
Wide serves · ad51%
Run-around forehands20%
Chipped returns16%
T serves · ad38%
Serve & volley0%
Points at net8%
Backhand slice13%
Point-ending shots20.4%
BH down the line16%
Unforced errors / shot8.1%
T serves · deuce36%

Plays most like

  1. Pablo Carreno Busta 2015–2026 plan v
  2. Karen Khachanov 2015–2026 plan v
  3. Jaume Munar 2018–2026 plan v
  4. Guillermo Coria 2002–2005 plan v
  5. Roberto Bautista Agut 2013–2026 plan v
  6. Novak Djokovic 2005–2026 plan v
  7. Mikhail Kukushkin 2014–2022 plan v
  8. Brandon Nakashima 2020–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Guillermo Coria 2002–2005
  2. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  3. Jiri Novak 1996–2004

Charted matches