RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 22 charted matches · 2019–2026

Corentin Moutet

Archetype: Avoids the wide serve · Ad-court slider

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 62.8% ±2.8 raw 59.5% · tour 63.4% · 1,918 points
Return points won 37.0% ±2.8 raw 34.6% · tour 36.6% · 1,886 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 −0.08 ±0.13 better than 37% of ATP · raw −0.08
Shot selection −1.02 ±0.20 better than 2% of ATP · raw −1.02
Execution −0.24 ±0.41 better than 56% of ATP · raw −0.21
Tactical adaptability −0.12 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 21 matches
Adaptation speed −0.10 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 3.10 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 16% 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 10,266 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Corentin Moutet 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 · 590 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 17% 42.8%±7.5 47.6%
BH through the middle 16% 50.2%±7.7 43.7%
BH slice through the middle 13% 35.1%±8.0 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 12% 45.7%±8.5 42.5%
FH inside-out 9% 42.6%±9.3 51.8%
BH slice down the line 9% 48.5%±9.8 37.1%
BH down the line 9% 46.9%±9.7 46.4%
FH inside-in 7% 54.9%±10.6 54.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 492 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 54% 42.0%±4.8 46.6%
FH down the line 16% 40.5%±8.0 44.7%
FH through the middle 13% 38.2%±8.8 41.5%
FH slice crosscourt 8% 52.0%±10.8 30.9%
FH slice through the middle 6% 31.2%±10.7 24.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 395 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 32% 53.5%±6.8 52.7%
FH down the line 22% 52.6%±7.9 51.5%
FH through the middle 14% 49.2%±9.6 47.0%
BH through the middle 7% 46.6%±11.8 46.8%
BH crosscourt 7% 58.3%±12.0 49.1%
BH slice down the line 4% 48.9%±13.9 45.6%
BH down the line 4% 54.9%±14.0 48.3%
BH slice through the middle 3% 35.3%±14.1 44.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 339 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 20% 34.6%±8.3 42.1%
BH crosscourt 16% 49.5%±9.6 48.0%
BH slice through the middle 16% 31.1%±8.9 35.1%
BH through the middle 15% 40.5%±9.6 43.8%
BH slice down the line 12% 34.2%±10.2 35.8%
BH down the line 6% 43.6%±12.6 46.5%
FH inside-in 6% 43.6%±12.7 54.3%
FH inside-out 4% 47.2%±13.9 52.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +7 How much less varied Corentin Moutet's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 191 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 25% 33% 70% / 73%
Body 20% 7% ▼ 56% / 63%
T 55% 61% 67% / 75%

948 normal · 46 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 51% 57% 64% / 73%
Body 24% 24% 66% / 63%
T 25% 19% 73% / 72%

778 normal · 145 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
Wide26% 60.6%±4.8 n=255 39% ▲
Body20% 56.0%±5.5 n=194 6% ▼
T55% 61.0%±3.3 n=545 55%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.35).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide52% 58.2%±3.6 n=477 46% ▼
Body24% 61.3%±5.0 n=225 17% ▼
T24% 58.4%±5.1 n=221 37% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.62).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.41 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: +1.9±3.7 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. (710 repeats, 1,163 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 74 38% +0.6±7.8
1stAd courtT 254 26% −2.2±4.3
1stAd courtWide 214 30% +2.3±4.8
1stDeuce courtBody 97 34% −2.8±6.9
1stDeuce courtT 207 29% +3.8±4.8
1stDeuce courtWide 343 25% −2.2±3.7
2ndAd courtBody 91 47% −2.4±7.5
2ndAd courtT 136 50% +0.6±6.4
2ndAd courtWide 130 42% −6.8±6.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 89 48% −1.4±7.5
2ndDeuce courtT 76 45% −4.5±8.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 172 47% −1.3±5.8

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Corentin Moutet'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 4.1% · won 61% · −2.1±8.3 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.8% · won 59% · −3.3±9.5 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 2.0% · won 57% · −5.7±10.4 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.5% · won 51% · −11.5±9.9 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 5.0% · won 54% · −8.6±7.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.9% · won 46% · +11.3±9.4 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → FH slice through the middle, mid used 2.5% · won 46% · +11.8±10.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.0% · won 40% · +5.8±11.1 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH down the line, deep used 2.0% · won 40% · +5.8±11.1 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → FH slice crosscourt, mid used 2.2% · won 39% · +4.3±10.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.2% · won 52% · +7.4±7.2 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 7.9% · won 49% · +4.0±6.5 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.9% · won 51% · +6.6±9.6 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 51% · +6.9±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 50% · +5.2±10.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. T serve → BH through the middle return, deep → FH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 55% · +8.5±11.3 vs own baseline · +11.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. Wide serve → BH crosscourt return, short → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 57% · +10.1±12.9 vs own baseline · +19.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.4% · won 54% · +7.2±12.4 vs own baseline · +19.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 51% · +4.3±9.4 vs own baseline · +0.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Adrian Andreev (3/7), Lorenzo Musetti (3/6)
  5. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.0% · won 50% · +3.7±10.0 vs own baseline · −1.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Adrian Andreev (2/6), Jannik Sinner (4/6)
  6. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.5% · won 49% · +2.1±7.1 vs own baseline · +0.7 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

BH to their forehand · rally+2.9223
FH to their backhand · rally+1.9742
T 2nd serve · deuce court+1.5133
BH to the middle · rally+1.5220
BH to the middle · return+1.3332

Most exposed to

BH to the middle · return−2.7562
BH to their forehand · return +1−2.4180
BH to their forehand · rally−2.0374
BH to the middle · return +1−1.7135
BH to their backhand · return−1.0174

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.77, Jack Draper +1.41, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.33, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.09, Nishesh Basavareddy +1.04

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +1.29, Fabian Marozsan +1.25, Adrian Mannarino +1.19, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.15, Nick Kyrgios +1.14

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.

Drop shots / shot5.4%
Chipped returns37%
Backhand slice47%
Forehand share61%
T serves · deuce55%
1st serve in65%
Avg rally length4.4
Deep returns32%
BH down the line23%
Run-around forehands22%
Wide serves · ad52%
Points at net11%
Serve & volley6%
FH down the line29%
Point-ending shots21.4%
Through the middle22%
Unforced errors / shot8.6%
T serves · ad24%
Wide serves · deuce26%

Plays most like

  1. Lorenzo Musetti 2019–2026 plan v
  2. Pedro Martinez 2019–2026 plan v
  3. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005 plan v
  4. Marco Cecchinato 2018–2022 plan v
  5. Philipp Kohlschreiber 2008–2019 plan v
  6. Guillermo Garcia Lopez 2015–2019 plan v
  7. Daniel Evans 2016–2024 plan v
  8. Gijs Brouwer 2019–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005
  2. Tommy Haas 1996–2017
  3. Fernando Gonzalez 2000–2010

Charted matches