RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 27 charted matches · 2018–2025

Cristian Garin

Archetype: Avoids the wide serve · Ad-court slider

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 61.8% ±2.7 raw 58.5% · tour 63.4% · 2,141 points
Return points won 39.4% ±2.7 raw 36.6% · tour 36.6% · 2,141 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 −0.02 ±0.12 better than 51% of ATP · raw −0.02
Shot selection +0.48 ±0.19 better than 90% of ATP · raw +0.48
Execution −0.81 ±0.50 better than 32% of ATP · raw −0.72
Tactical adaptability −0.04 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 26 matches
Adaptation speed +0.08 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 73% 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 11,304 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Cristian Garin 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 · 664 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 51% 47.3%±4.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 22% 38.9%±6.3 43.7%
BH down the line 8% 44.8%±9.6 46.4%
FH inside-out 5% 63.6%±10.8 51.8%
FH inside-in 4% 46.5%±12.2 54.7%
BH slice crosscourt 2% 43.1%±13.6 42.5%
BH slice through the middle 2% 37.2%±13.4 35.1%
BH crosscourt + approach 2% 72.1%±12.8 69.0%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 653 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 21% 53.2%±6.5 52.7%
FH through the middle 19% 51.3%±6.8 47.0%
FH down the line 18% 47.4%±6.9 51.5%
BH through the middle 16% 49.5%±7.4 46.8%
BH crosscourt 15% 49.0%±7.6 49.1%
BH down the line 4% 48.0%±12.5 48.3%
FH down the line + approach 2% 80.8%±10.8 70.5%
BH crosscourt + approach 2% 68.5%±14.0 67.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 487 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 43% 44.7%±5.4 46.6%
FH through the middle 30% 41.4%±6.3 41.5%
FH down the line 18% 47.2%±7.9 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 3% 24.0%±12.2 24.5%
FH down the line + approach 2% 74.6%±12.7 69.3%
FH slice down the line 2% 28.5%±13.1 25.6%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 440 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 55% 47.9%±5.1 48.0%
BH through the middle 21% 39.1%±7.6 43.8%
BH down the line 6% 46.4%±11.8 46.5%
FH inside-out 5% 47.7%±12.5 52.6%
FH inside-in 3% 49.6%±14.1 54.3%
BH slice through the middle 3% 27.3%±12.8 35.1%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +14 How much less varied Cristian Garin's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 228 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 37% 31% 66% / 73%
Body 11% 3% 56% / 63%
T 52% 66% ▲ 75% / 75%

1,054 normal · 58 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 61% 69% ▲ 65% / 73%
Body 9% 6% 62% / 63%
T 30% 25% 69% / 72%

858 normal · 170 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
Wide37% 58.5%±3.9 n=409 34% ▼
Body11% 55.8%±6.7 n=117 0% ▼
T53% 61.0%±3.2 n=586 66% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.38).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide62% 56.4%±3.2 n=637 49% ▼
Body9% 60.1%±7.3 n=92 9%
T29% 58.8%±4.5 n=299 42% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.56).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.44 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: +2.8±4.2 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. (877 repeats, 1,209 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 42 39% +2.0±9.5
1stAd courtT 230 29% +1.0±4.6
1stAd courtWide 321 26% −1.5±3.8
1stDeuce courtBody 55 36% −0.2±8.6
1stDeuce courtT 343 26% +1.3±3.8
1stDeuce courtWide 314 30% +2.8±4.1
2ndAd courtBody 73 47% −2.0±8.1
2ndAd courtT 37 46% −3.3±10.0
2ndAd courtWide 318 54% +5.2±4.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 132 45% −4.1±6.4
2ndDeuce courtT 187 47% −2.3±5.6
2ndDeuce courtWide 85 50% +1.9±7.7

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.1% · won 67% · +4.9±8.3 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 63% · +0.9±8.2 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.9% · won 60% · −2.1±8.9 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 55% · −6.8±9.9 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 2.5% · won 55% · −7.2±9.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 3.8% · won 56% · +15.0±8.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.2% · won 51% · +10.5±10.5 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 4.0% · won 48% · +7.3±8.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.0% · won 49% · +8.3±9.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 5.3% · won 45% · +4.8±7.9 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.5% · won 56% · +9.9±7.7 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 3.0% · won 52% · +5.6±8.2 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.8% · won 50% · +3.9±6.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → FH down the line used 1.3% · won 52% · +6.0±10.7 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → FH through the middle used 1.2% · won 52% · +6.1±10.9 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Cristian Garin 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 → BH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 57% · +9.1±12.6 vs own baseline · +21.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.2% · won 58% · +9.5±12.9 vs own baseline · +18.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH through the middle → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.2% · won 58% · +9.5±12.9 vs own baseline · +23.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 55% · +6.5±11.0 vs own baseline · +7.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (4/6)
  5. FH through the middle → BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 55% · +7.3±11.9 vs own baseline · +15.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH through the middle → BH through the middle → BH through the middle used 0.4% · won 55% · +7.3±11.9 vs own baseline · +16.9 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 +1+1.5138
BH to the middle · return+1.1534
FH to the middle · return+1.1397
FH to the middle · rally+1.0481
FH to their forehand · return +1+0.8173

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · return−2.9226
BH to the middle · return−2.8480
BH to the middle · return +1−1.9196
FH to their forehand · rally−1.8625
BH to their backhand · return +1−1.7186

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 +2.08, Casper Ruud +1.86, Nishesh Basavareddy +1.85, Pedro Martinez +1.75

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +1.06, Fabian Marozsan +1.04, Pedro Martinez +1.00, Roberto Carballes Baena +0.92, Alexander Shevchenko +0.85

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

Tactical fingerprint

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

Wide serves · ad62%
T serves · deuce53%
Deep returns34%
Avg rally length4.3
Through the middle26%
Forehand share55%
Unforced errors / shot10.6%
Run-around forehands21%
Drop shots / shot1.7%
Points at net10%
Point-ending shots22.6%
1st serve in60%
Serve & volley0%
Backhand slice9%
Wide serves · deuce37%
Chipped returns4%
FH down the line26%
T serves · ad29%
BH down the line11%

Plays most like

  1. Cameron Norrie 2015–2026 plan v
  2. Pablo Cuevas 2015–2021 plan v
  3. Daniel Elahi Galan 2020–2025 plan v
  4. Jannik Sinner 2013–2026 plan v
  5. Thiago Monteiro 2019–2026 plan v
  6. Juncheng Shang 2024–2026 plan v
  7. Gael Monfils 2005–2026 plan v
  8. Federico Delbonis 2013–2023 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Nicolas Massu 2000–2009
  2. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005
  3. Juan Carlos Ferrero 2000–2009

Charted matches