RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 90 charted matches · 2016–2026

Denis Shapovalov

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 65.6% ±2.4 raw 64.7% · tour 63.4% · 7,382 points
Return points won 38.0% ±2.5 raw 34.8% · tour 36.6% · 7,330 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 −0.12 ±0.06 better than 26% of ATP · raw −0.12
Shot selection +0.40 ±0.12 better than 87% of ATP · raw +0.40
Execution −0.72 ±0.35 better than 36% of ATP · raw −0.75
Tactical adaptability +0.09 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 89 matches
Adaptation speed +0.04 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.03 ±0.53 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 2,994 shots · better than 74% of ATP
Points left on the table 3.39 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 9% 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 34,266 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Denis Shapovalov 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 · 1,697 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 32% 46.0%±3.5 47.6%
BH through the middle 23% 46.9%±4.0 43.7%
BH down the line 14% 39.2%±5.1 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 7% 36.9%±7.0 35.1%
FH inside-out 6% 52.3%±7.3 51.8%
FH inside-in 6% 49.5%±7.5 54.7%
FH through the middle 4% 38.5%±8.4 45.2%
BH slice down the line 4% 29.6%±8.5 37.1%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 1,597 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 31% 47.4%±3.6 52.7%
FH through the middle 20% 43.6%±4.4 47.0%
FH down the line 17% 53.6%±4.8 51.5%
BH through the middle 10% 40.4%±6.0 46.8%
BH crosscourt 10% 47.9%±6.1 49.1%
BH down the line 4% 43.9%±9.2 48.3%
FH crosscourt + approach 3% 68.8%±9.8 69.9%
FH down the line + approach 2% 60.2%±11.4 70.5%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,262 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 47% 45.1%±3.3 46.6%
FH through the middle 20% 35.0%±4.8 41.5%
FH down the line 16% 48.2%±5.5 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 5% 34.8%±8.6 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 3% 35.8%±10.0 30.9%
BH inside-in 2% 41.1%±11.8 46.7%
BH inside-out 1% 43.5%±13.4 45.4%
FH down the line + approach 1% 73.1%±12.5 69.3%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,061 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 34% 46.8%±4.2 46.9%
BH through the middle 27% 43.0%±4.7 43.0%
BH down the line 11% 45.0%±7.1 44.2%
BH slice through the middle 9% 28.9%±6.9 32.6%
BH slice down the line 7% 25.7%±7.3 33.3%
FH inside-in 3% 49.5%±11.4 53.6%
FH inside-out 3% 52.6%±11.4 51.7%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 41.2%±11.6 40.9%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +5 How much less varied Denis Shapovalov's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 608 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 38% 40% 77% / 73%
Body 7% 2% 65% / 63%
T 55% 58% 72% / 75%

3,721 normal · 126 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 56% 54% 75% / 73%
Body 8% 6% 69% / 63%
T 35% 40% 79% / 72%

3,046 normal · 482 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
Wide38% 63.5%±2.1 n=1,454 51% ▲
Body7% 59.4%±4.8 n=257 0% ▼
T56% 63.7%±1.7 n=2,136 49% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.30).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide56% 66.8%±1.7 n=1,978 62% ▲
Body8% 63.0%±4.5 n=284 0% ▼
T36% 66.4%±2.2 n=1,266 38% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.37).
Optimal mix: +0.5 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: +2.7±1.7 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. (3,001 repeats, 4,196 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 228 34% −2.8±4.9
1stAd courtT 1,099 30% +1.9±2.2
1stAd courtWide 887 22% −4.7±2.3
1stDeuce courtBody 225 37% +0.2±5.0
1stDeuce courtT 933 23% −1.9±2.2
1stDeuce courtWide 1,330 29% +1.9±2.0
2ndAd courtBody 342 49% ±0.0±4.3
2ndAd courtT 655 49% +0.2±3.1
2ndAd courtWide 270 43% −5.5±4.7
2ndDeuce courtBody 410 44% −5.4±3.9
2ndDeuce courtT 267 50% +0.4±4.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 671 50% +2.2±3.1

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line + approach used 2.0% · won 74% · +3.6±5.6 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.5% · won 55% · −15.2±5.8 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 5.4% · won 60% · −10.7±4.0 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 2.2% · won 54% · −16.9±6.2 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.4% · won 56% · −14.3±5.1 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.8% · won 52% · +14.6±5.1 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.1% · won 51% · +14.2±5.6 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.2% · won 50% · +12.7±6.5 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.1% · won 46% · +9.4±5.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 3.3% · won 36% · −0.9±5.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.1% · won 59% · +12.6±8.4 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 58% · +11.2±8.5 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.1% · won 51% · +4.3±4.5 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → BH through the middle used 2.1% · won 51% · +4.8±6.7 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 50% · +3.8±6.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 66% · +17.0±10.5 vs own baseline · +8.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Stefanos Tsitsipas (4/6), Hubert Hurkacz (6/6)
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.4% · won 60% · +10.7±8.7 vs own baseline · +9.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andrey Rublev (3/8), Hubert Hurkacz (10/12)
  3. FH through the middle → FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 60% · +11.5±10.0 vs own baseline · +22.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH down the line → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 60% · +10.9±9.7 vs own baseline · +10.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Robin Haase (4/6)
  5. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.2% · won 54% · +5.2±5.9 vs own baseline · +1.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (3/9), Jannik Sinner (5/12)
  6. Wide serve → BH crosscourt return, short → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 62% · +13.3±11.6 vs own baseline · +5.8 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 their backhand · rally+5.4161
BH volley to their forehand · rally+5.1149
T 1st serve · ad court+2.71,266
FH to their forehand · return +1+2.5424
BH slice to their forehand · return+1.5171

Most exposed to

BH slice to their forehand · return−2.4125
BH slice to their forehand · rally−2.2168
BH to the middle · return−1.81,638
T 2nd serve · ad court−1.7655
BH slice to the middle · return−1.4374

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.57, Jack Draper +1.14, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.98, Pedro Martinez +0.83, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.79

Favourable matchups

Fabian Marozsan +0.94, Pedro Martinez +0.88, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.83, Alexander Shevchenko +0.78, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.73

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, Lorenzo Musetti, Stan Wawrinka, Stefanos Tsitsipas

Tactical fingerprint

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

Forehand share62%
T serves · deuce56%
Unforced errors / shot13.2%
Point-ending shots31.1%
Deep returns36%
Wide serves · ad56%
Chipped returns22%
Through the middle26%
Run-around forehands21%
Points at net12%
BH down the line20%
Drop shots / shot1.5%
Serve & volley5%
1st serve in60%
Backhand slice17%
T serves · ad36%
Avg rally length3.5
Wide serves · deuce38%
FH down the line26%

Plays most like

  1. Tim Van Rijthoven 2021–2023 plan v
  2. Pierre Hugues Herbert 2014–2025 plan v
  3. Alexei Popyrin 2019–2026 plan v
  4. Gabriel Diallo 2024–2025 plan v
  5. Vasek Pospisil 2013–2023 plan v
  6. Jiri Lehecka 2019–2026 plan v
  7. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v
  8. Philipp Kohlschreiber 2008–2019 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Marat Safin 1998–2009
  2. Nicolas Massu 2000–2009
  3. Andrei Pavel 1999–2006

Charted matches