RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 31 charted matches · 2010–2025

Bernard Tomic

Archetype: Blocks returns short · Works the corners

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 65.7% ±2.7 raw 63.7% · tour 63.4% · 2,600 points
Return points won 36.3% ±2.8 raw 32.8% · tour 36.6% · 2,457 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 ±0.07 better than 47% of ATP · raw −0.03
Shot selection −0.84 ±0.21 better than 4% of ATP · raw −0.83
Execution +0.36 ±0.52 better than 81% of ATP · raw +0.53
Tactical adaptability +0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 29 matches
Adaptation speed +0.18 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.40 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 72% 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 12,544 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Bernard Tomic 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 · 828 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 30% 49.4%±5.0 47.6%
BH slice crosscourt 17% 47.8%±6.5 42.5%
BH through the middle 16% 45.8%±6.7 43.7%
BH down the line 15% 51.2%±6.8 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 13% 35.2%±6.9 35.1%
BH slice down the line 5% 41.3%±10.1 37.1%
FH inside-out 2% 51.0%±13.3 51.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 515 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 29% 50.1%±6.3 48.0%
BH slice crosscourt 19% 47.9%±7.5 42.1%
BH down the line 16% 46.9%±8.1 46.5%
BH through the middle 15% 43.6%±8.2 43.8%
BH slice through the middle 11% 36.0%±9.1 35.1%
BH slice down the line 7% 37.1%±10.5 35.8%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 509 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 28% 47.8%±6.5 52.7%
FH down the line 19% 50.3%±7.6 51.5%
FH through the middle 13% 56.4%±8.9 47.0%
BH through the middle 11% 41.8%±9.4 46.8%
BH down the line 9% 48.0%±10.1 48.3%
BH slice through the middle 7% 48.1%±11.0 44.8%
BH crosscourt 6% 55.7%±11.6 49.1%
BH slice down the line 4% 52.7%±12.7 45.6%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 495 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 39% 43.5%±5.6 46.6%
FH down the line 28% 41.6%±6.5 44.7%
FH through the middle 25% 41.1%±6.8 41.5%
FH slice through the middle 4% 23.4%±11.3 24.5%
FH slice down the line 3% 26.1%±12.2 25.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +8 How much less varied Bernard Tomic's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 225 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 52% 53% 70% / 73%
Body 7% 12% 68% / 63%
T 41% 35% 74% / 75%

1,302 normal · 43 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 59% 63% 73% / 73%
Body 10% 5% 55% / 63%
T 31% 32% 72% / 72%

1,053 normal · 182 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% 64.8%±2.9 n=698 65% ▲
Body7% 66.2%±7.0 n=95 0% ▼
T41% 63.6%±3.3 n=552 35% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.79).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide60% 63.4%±2.9 n=736 56% ▼
Body9% 55.2%±6.9 n=112 0% ▼
T31% 64.7%±3.8 n=387 44% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.06).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.49 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±3.4 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. (1,200 repeats, 1,318 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 91 34% −3.0±7.1
1stAd courtT 298 26% −2.3±4.0
1stAd courtWide 298 22% −5.5±3.7
1stDeuce courtBody 117 30% −6.8±6.2
1stDeuce courtT 366 23% −1.7±3.5
1stDeuce courtWide 332 25% −1.7±3.8
2ndAd courtBody 180 43% −6.6±5.6
2ndAd courtT 82 52% +2.3±7.8
2ndAd courtWide 219 44% −4.8±5.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 196 46% −2.7±5.5
2ndDeuce courtT 214 48% −1.8±5.3
2ndDeuce courtWide 59 49% +0.7±8.7

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.9% · won 66% · −1.2±7.2 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 65% · −2.6±7.1 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.6% · won 60% · −7.9±8.6 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 58% · −9.1±9.4 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 59% · −8.6±8.6 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.9% · won 50% · +13.4±9.6 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.8% · won 49% · +11.9±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.7% · won 45% · +8.3±9.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.1% · won 45% · +8.3±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, short used 2.5% · won 44% · +7.3±10.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 3.7% · won 58% · +9.3±7.0 vs own baseline
  2. BH slice crosscourt → BH down the line used 2.1% · won 59% · +10.8±8.6 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.4% · won 55% · +7.0±7.3 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt used 2.0% · won 54% · +5.2±8.9 vs own baseline
  5. BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 53% · +4.7±9.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH down the line → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 63% · +15.2±11.3 vs own baseline · +16.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 57% · +8.9±9.1 vs own baseline · +6.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tomas Berdych (3/7), Alexis Galarneau (4/6)
  3. BH slice crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH slice down the line used 0.4% · won 60% · +11.9±11.4 vs own baseline · +29.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Kevin Anderson (6/6)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 56% · +7.5±9.1 vs own baseline · +10.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roger Federer (1/6), Marin Cilic (4/7)
  5. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, deep → FH down the line used 0.3% · won 60% · +11.9±12.0 vs own baseline · +24.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH slice through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 58% · +9.6±11.3 vs own baseline · +21.7 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 to their forehand · return+5.0122
FH to their backhand · return+3.9184
T 1st serve · ad court+2.9387
BH to their forehand · return+2.7125
T 1st serve · deuce court+2.5552

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · return−5.6269
FH to their backhand · return−5.3167
FH to their forehand · return−3.9157
BH slice to the middle · return−3.1227
FH to the middle · return−2.9354

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +2.17, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.14, Nishesh Basavareddy +2.02, Casper Ruud +1.97, Pedro Martinez +1.89

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +1.45, Fabian Marozsan +1.33, Pedro Martinez +1.25, Roberto Carballes Baena +1.22, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.22

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Ugo Humbert, Miomir Kecmanovic, Casper Ruud, Zhizhen Zhang, Joao Fonseca

Tactical fingerprint

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

Backhand slice42%
FH down the line37%
1st serve in67%
Wide serves · ad60%
Wide serves · deuce52%
BH down the line28%
Deep returns35%
Chipped returns22%
Unforced errors / shot10.2%
Avg rally length4.0
Drop shots / shot1.2%
Point-ending shots22.2%
Run-around forehands15%
Serve & volley1%
Forehand share51%
T serves · deuce41%
Through the middle22%
Points at net6%
T serves · ad31%

Plays most like

  1. Laslo Djere 2018–2026 plan v
  2. Mikhail Kukushkin 2014–2022 plan v
  3. Karen Khachanov 2015–2026 plan v
  4. Alex Michelsen 2023–2026 plan v
  5. Joao Fonseca 2024–2026 plan v
  6. Hubert Hurkacz 2018–2026 plan v
  7. Learner Tien 2022–2026 plan v
  8. Dominic Thiem 2011–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Andre Agassi 1988–2006
  2. Marcelo Rios 1995–2001
  3. Magnus Norman 2000–2001

Charted matches