RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 102 charted matches · 2017–2026

Felix Auger Aliassime

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 67.3% ±2.2 raw 65.8% · tour 63.4% · 7,928 points
Return points won 38.2% ±2.4 raw 34.5% · tour 36.6% · 8,170 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 ±0.05 better than 60% of ATP · raw +0.01
Shot selection +0.50 ±0.08 better than 93% of ATP · raw +0.50
Execution −0.79 ±0.31 better than 33% of ATP · raw −0.80
Tactical adaptability +0.07 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 101 matches
Adaptation speed +0.05 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.35 ±0.50 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 4,095 shots · better than 30% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.50 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 60% 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 38,629 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Felix Auger Aliassime 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 · 2,780 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 39.9%±2.5 47.6%
BH through the middle 18% 39.6%±3.5 43.7%
FH inside-out 12% 46.2%±4.4 51.8%
BH down the line 8% 43.7%±5.2 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 7% 44.0%±5.4 42.5%
FH inside-in 6% 49.4%±6.1 54.7%
BH slice through the middle 3% 31.8%±7.3 35.1%
FH through the middle 3% 40.0%±7.9 45.2%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 1,731 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 25% 47.0%±3.8 51.5%
FH crosscourt 25% 47.2%±3.9 52.7%
FH through the middle 22% 39.7%±4.0 47.0%
BH crosscourt 9% 42.5%±6.0 49.1%
BH through the middle 8% 44.5%±6.4 46.8%
FH down the line + approach 3% 77.5%±7.9 70.5%
BH down the line 1% 35.6%±11.9 48.3%
BH slice crosscourt 1% 40.0%±12.6 47.0%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 1,535 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 41% 36.9%±3.1 48.0%
BH through the middle 19% 39.5%±4.6 43.8%
FH inside-out 9% 51.3%±6.6 52.6%
BH down the line 8% 37.9%±6.6 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 8% 40.9%±6.9 42.1%
FH inside-in 6% 47.1%±7.9 54.3%
BH slice through the middle 4% 31.7%±8.5 35.1%
FH through the middle 3% 48.7%±10.8 46.1%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,464 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 39.9%±3.4 46.9%
BH through the middle 20% 39.6%±4.6 43.0%
BH slice crosscourt 11% 35.3%±5.9 40.9%
BH down the line 9% 38.1%±6.5 44.2%
FH inside-out 7% 46.8%±7.7 51.7%
BH slice through the middle 6% 16.8%±6.0 32.6%
FH inside-in 3% 60.2%±9.9 53.6%
BH slice down the line 3% 31.3%±9.4 33.3%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −3 How much less varied Felix Auger Aliassime's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 592 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 49% 55% 78% / 73%
Body 8% 11% 66% / 63%
T 42% 35% 78% / 75%

4,006 normal · 161 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 44% 75% / 73%
Body 6% 8% 63% / 63%
T 47% 48% 76% / 72%

3,323 normal · 431 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
Wide50% 66.6%±1.7 n=2,066 45% ▼
Body8% 63.9%±4.1 n=348 0% ▼
T42% 66.9%±1.8 n=1,753 55% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.48).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide46% 64.5%±1.9 n=1,737 40% ▼
Body7% 60.5%±4.9 n=244 0% ▼
T47% 66.3%±1.8 n=1,773 60% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.11).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.51 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: +0.9±2.0 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. (3,495 repeats, 4,222 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 190 35% −2.4±5.3
1stAd courtT 1,033 26% −1.7±2.2
1stAd courtWide 1,209 28% +1.2±2.1
1stDeuce courtBody 275 36% −0.6±4.5
1stDeuce courtT 1,257 26% +1.2±2.0
1stDeuce courtWide 1,249 25% −2.2±2.0
2ndAd courtBody 406 47% −2.2±3.9
2ndAd courtT 255 49% −0.6±4.9
2ndAd courtWide 796 48% −0.4±2.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 501 47% −2.2±3.6
2ndDeuce courtT 699 47% −2.5±3.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 294 46% −2.3±4.6

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 61% · −8.6±5.0 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 59% · −11.1±5.3 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.9% · won 58% · −11.9±5.2 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.5% · won 57% · −13.2±5.6 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 54% · −16.3±6.0 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.0% · won 52% · +16.1±6.3 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.3% · won 50% · +14.0±6.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.1% · won 48% · +11.9±6.3 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 3.8% · won 45% · +8.7±4.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.8% · won 46% · +9.4±5.5 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.8% · won 54% · +11.6±6.4 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.9% · won 52% · +9.6±6.1 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.7% · won 49% · +6.4±4.6 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 2.2% · won 49% · +6.3±5.9 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.9% · won 47% · +5.2±6.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 71% · +25.5±9.9 vs own baseline · +17.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.4% · won 57% · +11.9±8.0 vs own baseline · +9.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (3/6), Hubert Hurkacz (4/7)
  3. T serve → BH through the middle return, short → FH down the line used 0.2% · won 63% · +17.3±10.4 vs own baseline · +16.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH through the middle → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.3% · won 59% · +13.3±9.4 vs own baseline · +15.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.9% · won 52% · +7.0±6.0 vs own baseline · +0.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (2/7), Lorenzo Musetti (2/7)
  6. FH down the line → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 62% · +16.4±10.9 vs own baseline · +12.9 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 their forehand · serve +1+2.5152
BH to their forehand · return+2.2327
T 1st serve · deuce court+1.91,753
T 1st serve · ad court+1.61,773
Wide 1st serve · ad court+1.21,737

Most exposed to

FH volley to their forehand · rally−4.6150
Wide 2nd serve · deuce court−1.2294
BH slice to their backhand · return +1−0.9136
T 1st serve · ad court−0.81,593
BH to their backhand · rally−0.82,479

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.44, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.42, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.16, Nishesh Basavareddy +1.13, Pedro Martinez +1.10

Favourable matchups

Fabian Marozsan +0.82, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.72, Pedro Martinez +0.64, Roberto Carballes Baena +0.60, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.50

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Stefanos Tsitsipas, Alex De Minaur, Andy Murray, Carlos Alcaraz, Jannik Sinner

Tactical fingerprint

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

Run-around forehands37%
T serves · ad47%
Forehand share59%
Wide serves · deuce50%
Deep returns33%
Unforced errors / shot11.6%
1st serve in64%
Point-ending shots26.1%
FH down the line31%
Through the middle24%
Backhand slice19%
Points at net10%
Drop shots / shot1.1%
Serve & volley2%
Avg rally length3.7
T serves · deuce42%
Wide serves · ad46%
Chipped returns9%
BH down the line14%

Plays most like

  1. J J Wolf 2022–2024 plan v
  2. Stefanos Tsitsipas 2016–2026 plan v
  3. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v
  4. Lloyd Harris 2019–2024 plan v
  5. Thanasi Kokkinakis 2013–2024 plan v
  6. Arthur Fils 2023–2026 plan v
  7. Casper Ruud 2017–2026 plan v
  8. Leonardo Mayer 2014–2019 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Andy Roddick 2001–2012
  2. James Blake 2002–2011
  3. Jim Courier 1989–1999

Charted matches