RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 11 charted matches · 2018–2025

Dominik Koepfer

Archetype: Avoids the wide serve · Ad-court slider

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.4% ±3.0 raw 63.6% · tour 63.4% · 1,020 points
Return points won 37.5% ±3.1 raw 33.2% · tour 36.6% · 978 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 −0.23 ±0.20 better than 10% of ATP · raw −0.23
Shot selection −0.11 ±0.20 better than 38% of ATP · raw −0.11
Execution −0.13 ±0.61 better than 61% of ATP · raw −0.07
Tactical adaptability −0.03 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 11 matches
Adaptation speed −0.02 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 3.06 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 17% 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 5,055 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Dominik Koepfer 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 · 284 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 34% 38.9%±7.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 31% 37.7%±7.7 43.7%
BH down the line 11% 44.8%±11.3 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 9% 37.8%±11.9 35.1%
FH through the middle 4% 45.3%±14.7 45.2%
FH inside-in 4% 54.6%±14.7 54.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 234 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 25% 42.5%±9.1 52.7%
FH through the middle 24% 47.3%±9.4 47.0%
BH through the middle 21% 52.7%±9.9 46.8%
BH crosscourt 13% 50.6%±11.5 49.1%
FH down the line 12% 41.1%±11.8 51.5%
BH down the line 5% 50.5%±14.8 48.3%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 227 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 40% 44.8%±7.8 46.6%
FH through the middle 21% 50.4%±10.0 41.5%
FH down the line 17% 43.0%±10.7 44.7%
BH inside-in 9% 42.3%±12.7 46.7%
BH through the middle 7% 41.8%±13.7 43.1%
FH slice through the middle 4% 29.7%±13.7 24.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 157 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 37% 59.7%±9.1 48.0%
BH through the middle 27% 31.9%±9.7 43.8%
BH down the line 13% 43.2%±12.9 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 8% 45.1%±14.5 42.1%
FH inside-in 6% 56.2%±14.9 54.3%
BH slice through the middle 6% 36.7%±14.5 35.1%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Dominik Koepfer's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 80 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 30% 27% 72% / 73%
Body 25% 27% 62% / 63%
T 45% 47% 67% / 75%

509 normal · 15 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 48% 52% 75% / 73%
Body 22% 22% 66% / 63%
T 30% 26% 75% / 72%

419 normal · 65 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
Wide30% 60.8%±5.9 n=157 43% ▲
Body25% 61.2%±6.3 n=132 12% ▼
T45% 61.6%±4.9 n=235 45%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.98).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide48% 69.6%±4.7 n=234 61% ▲
Body22% 61.6%±6.9 n=106 9% ▼
T30% 64.4%±6.0 n=144 30%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.15).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.60 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: −3.8±4.8 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. (339 repeats, 647 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 22 44% +7.4±11.3
1stAd courtT 157 26% −1.6±5.3
1stAd courtWide 114 29% +2.1±6.2
1stDeuce courtBody 24 35% −1.5±10.7
1stDeuce courtT 124 19% −6.5±5.1
1stDeuce courtWide 182 25% −2.6±4.9
2ndAd courtBody 53 48% −1.4±9.0
2ndAd courtT 65 47% −2.1±8.4
2ndAd courtWide 49 53% +4.2±9.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 46 52% +3.2±9.4
2ndDeuce courtT 41 45% −4.8±9.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 92 44% −4.3±7.4

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 68% · +0.6±9.5 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.9% · won 63% · −4.2±11.1 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 3.6% · won 61% · −6.3±10.7 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 60% · −7.4±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.9% · won 59% · −8.2±11.3 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 8.9% · won 46% · +8.9±9.8 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 7.5% · won 42% · +5.2±10.2 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, short used 5.2% · won 37% · −0.2±11.1 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 8.7% · won 36% · −0.9±9.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 5.4% · won 32% · −4.6±10.7 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 55% · +11.6±10.4 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 48% · +4.9±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 47% · +3.5±10.4 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 4.6% · won 47% · +3.5±10.4 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → BH through the middle used 3.3% · won 47% · +3.9±11.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 56% · +7.4±12.2 vs own baseline · +19.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Reilly Opelka (5/7)
  2. BH through the middle return, mid → FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 51% · +3.1±12.9 vs own baseline · +10.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH crosscourt → FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 50% · +1.9±13.0 vs own baseline · +5.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.9% · won 48% · −0.4±12.4 vs own baseline · +4.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Hubert Hurkacz (1/6)
  5. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 0.9% · won 47% · −1.5±12.3 vs own baseline · −3.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH down the line → FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 46% · −2.2±11.6 vs own baseline · −4.6 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 · serve +1+1.6139
BH to their forehand · rally+1.2278
BH to the middle · return+1.0231
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.9234
FH to the middle · return+0.6145

Most exposed to

T 1st serve · ad court−2.6214
FH to their backhand · rally−1.9380
FH to their backhand · return +1−1.0151
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.7209
BH to their forehand · rally−0.6182

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.81, Jack Draper +1.26, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.13, Daniel Evans +1.09, Pedro Martinez +1.03

Favourable matchups

Pedro Martinez +1.74, Adrian Mannarino +1.61, Alexander Shevchenko +1.58, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.51, Cameron Norrie +1.49

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Reilly Opelka, Milos Raonic, Nick Kyrgios, Nicolas Jarry, Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard

Tactical fingerprint

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

Through the middle31%
1st serve in64%
Chipped returns21%
Avg rally length4.1
Unforced errors / shot10.2%
T serves · deuce45%
Points at net11%
Deep returns26%
Point-ending shots23.1%
Run-around forehands17%
Wide serves · ad48%
Backhand slice17%
Serve & volley3%
Drop shots / shot0.9%
Forehand share50%
BH down the line15%
FH down the line25%
T serves · ad30%
Wide serves · deuce30%

Plays most like

  1. Yoshihito Nishioka 2015–2025 plan v
  2. Federico Delbonis 2013–2023 plan v
  3. Ilya Ivashka 2018–2023 plan v
  4. Gael Monfils 2005–2026 plan v
  5. Jiri Lehecka 2019–2026 plan v
  6. Luca Nardi 2022–2025 plan v
  7. Paolo Lorenzi 2014–2019 plan v
  8. Jannik Sinner 2013–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Andrei Pavel 1999–2006
  2. Tommy Haas 1996–2017
  3. Marat Safin 1998–2009

Charted matches