RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 286 charted matches · 2017–2026

Daniil Medvedev

Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 66.7% ±2.2 raw 66.1% · tour 63.4% · 22,398 points
Return points won 41.2% ±2.4 raw 39.4% · tour 36.6% · 23,086 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 +0.01 ±0.04 better than 58% of ATP · raw +0.01
Shot selection −0.06 ±0.04 better than 46% of ATP · raw −0.06
Execution +1.24 ±0.16 better than 98% of ATP · raw +1.23
Tactical adaptability +0.21 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 279 matches
Adaptation speed +0.30 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.09 ±0.24 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 24,395 shots · better than 63% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.31 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 84% 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 129,543 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Daniil Medvedev 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 · 7,391 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 59% 54.3%±1.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 23% 47.3%±2.0 43.7%
BH down the line 10% 51.4%±2.9 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 2% 21.4%±5.1 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 2% 33.4%±6.4 42.5%
BH drop shot down the line 1% 45.9%±9.5 47.2%
BH slice down the line 1% 23.6%±8.9 37.1%
FH inside-out 1% 49.8%±10.5 51.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 6,628 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 58% 52.2%±1.3 48.0%
BH through the middle 22% 47.9%±2.1 43.8%
BH down the line 11% 52.2%±3.0 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 31.4%±5.1 42.1%
BH slice through the middle 3% 27.5%±5.2 35.1%
BH slice down the line 1% 30.9%±8.8 35.8%
BH drop shot down the line 1% 53.5%±9.5 47.8%
FH inside-out 0% 58.7%±11.2 52.6%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 6,405 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 24% 57.0%±2.1 49.1%
BH through the middle 18% 55.5%±2.4 46.8%
FH crosscourt 15% 56.4%±2.6 52.7%
FH down the line 15% 54.4%±2.6 51.5%
FH through the middle 15% 51.0%±2.7 47.0%
BH down the line 8% 53.5%±3.5 48.3%
BH drop shot down the line 1% 48.0%±9.1 49.4%
BH crosscourt + approach 1% 68.2%±8.7 67.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 5,736 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 44% 52.7%±1.6 46.6%
FH through the middle 26% 47.9%±2.1 41.5%
FH down the line 22% 52.0%±2.3 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 4% 27.3%±4.5 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 30.7%±7.3 30.9%
FH slice down the line 1% 34.3%±8.5 25.6%
FH down the line + approach 0% 81.0%±9.3 69.3%
FH lob through the middle 0% 20.6%±11.8 23.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +4 How much less varied Daniil Medvedev's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 1578 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 49% 54% 74% / 73%
Body 4% 2% 63% / 63%
T 46% 43% 78% / 75%

11,288 normal · 373 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 48% 55% 78% / 73%
Body 5% 4% 60% / 63%
T 47% 41% 74% / 72%

9,469 normal · 1,205 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
Wide49% 67.3%±1.0 n=5,764 52% ▲
Body4% 61.5%±3.5 n=498 0% ▼
T46% 67.3%±1.0 n=5,399 48% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.60).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide49% 65.2%±1.1 n=5,196 40% ▼
Body5% 56.3%±3.6 n=482 0% ▼
T47% 65.9%±1.1 n=4,996 60% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.87).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.38 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: +0.8±1.1 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. (10,588 repeats, 11,179 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 567 42% +4.9±3.3
1stAd courtT 3,079 30% +2.1±1.4
1stAd courtWide 3,185 31% +3.6±1.3
1stDeuce courtBody 648 42% +5.0±3.1
1stDeuce courtT 3,044 29% +4.4±1.4
1stDeuce courtWide 4,161 31% +3.9±1.2
2ndAd courtBody 1,577 53% +3.2±2.0
2ndAd courtT 709 51% +1.8±3.0
2ndAd courtWide 1,895 54% +5.7±1.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 1,612 53% +3.5±2.0
2ndDeuce courtT 1,410 56% +6.2±2.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 1,146 53% +4.8±2.4

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Daniil Medvedev'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 2.5% · won 59% · −10.7±3.4 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.9% · won 60% · −10.2±3.2 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.1% · won 59% · −11.6±3.1 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.2% · won 56% · −13.6±3.6 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.5% · won 57% · −13.2±3.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 3.5% · won 54% · +12.8±3.0 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.3% · won 53% · +11.3±3.1 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.0% · won 54% · +12.6±3.9 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.2% · won 53% · +11.7±3.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.2% · won 48% · +6.6±3.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 8.7% · won 56% · +4.2±1.4 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.4% · won 56% · +4.2±1.8 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 56% · +4.0±2.0 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 56% · +4.0±2.3 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 55% · +3.8±2.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Daniil Medvedev 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 → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 60% · +7.7±3.3 vs own baseline · +7.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andy Murray (3/8), Andrey Rublev (8/20)
  2. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, short → FH crosscourt used 0.1% · won 74% · +21.6±8.1 vs own baseline · +18.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jannik Sinner (5/7)
  3. Wide serve → FH through the middle return → BH crosscourt used 0.1% · won 74% · +21.8±8.4 vs own baseline · +27.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jannik Sinner (5/6), Nick Kyrgios (7/8)
  4. BH through the middle → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 64% · +11.3±5.8 vs own baseline · +12.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (2/7), Novak Djokovic (13/23)
  5. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 57% · +4.7±2.6 vs own baseline · +5.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Miomir Kecmanovic (2/8), Jannik Sinner (6/17)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 62% · +10.0±5.3 vs own baseline · +8.9 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

FH volley to the middle · rally+3.6219
BH to the middle · return+2.95,551
FH drop shot to their backhand · rally+2.8142
FH to their forehand · return+2.72,012
BH to their forehand · return+2.41,329

Most exposed to

FH volley to the middle · serve +1−9.9158
FH volley to their backhand · serve +1−7.5359
BH volley to the middle · rally−6.4308
BH volley to their backhand · serve +1−4.5283
FH volley to the middle · rally−2.6283

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +2.19, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.15, Pedro Martinez +1.95, Casper Ruud +1.90, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.87

Favourable matchups

Pedro Martinez +2.36, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.33, Fabian Marozsan +2.23, Roberto Carballes Baena +2.21, Alexander Shevchenko +2.17

Tactical fingerprint

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

Avg rally length4.8
T serves · ad47%
Wide serves · deuce49%
Deep returns30%
1st serve in63%
Through the middle26%
Drop shots / shot1.8%
T serves · deuce46%
FH down the line31%
Wide serves · ad49%
Serve & volley1%
Chipped returns10%
Points at net7%
BH down the line16%
Backhand slice7%
Forehand share47%
Run-around forehands6%
Point-ending shots16.9%
Unforced errors / shot6.7%

Plays most like

  1. Jenson Brooksby 2021–2026 plan v
  2. Novak Djokovic 2005–2026 plan v
  3. Andy Murray 2005–2024 plan v
  4. Richard Gasquet 2002–2025 plan v
  5. Alexander Zverev 2014–2026 plan v
  6. Taylor Fritz 2016–2026 plan v
  7. Karen Khachanov 2015–2026 plan v
  8. John Millman 2014–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Guillermo Coria 2002–2005
  2. Michael Chang 1989–1998
  3. Juan Carlos Ferrero 2000–2009

Charted matches