ATP · Right-handed · 57 charted matches · 2008–2022
Gilles Simon
Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server
Against an average opponent
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
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 31,569 shots.
Shot expected value
The share of points Gilles Simon 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 · 2,287 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 48% | 51.1%±2.5 | 47.6% |
| BH through the middle | 32% | 46.8%±3.0 | 43.7% |
| BH down the line | 12% | 45.6%±4.8 | 46.4% |
| FH inside-out | 3% | 51.4%±8.3 | 51.8% |
| FH inside-in | 1% | 51.9%±11.9 | 54.7% |
| BH slice crosscourt | 1% | 31.1%±12.5 | 42.5% |
| BH slice through the middle | 1% | 30.6%±12.6 | 35.1% |
| BH down the line + approach | 1% | 63.6%±13.4 | 66.2% |
Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side
position worth 46% to the average player · 2,237 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 54% | 50.5%±2.4 | 48.0% |
| BH through the middle | 27% | 46.2%±3.3 | 43.8% |
| BH down the line | 13% | 49.8%±4.7 | 46.5% |
| FH inside-out | 2% | 58.6%±10.1 | 52.6% |
| BH slice crosscourt | 1% | 40.1%±11.3 | 42.1% |
| FH inside-in | 1% | 56.7%±13.8 | 54.3% |
| BH slice through the middle | 1% | 28.6%±12.6 | 35.1% |
| BH crosscourt + approach | 0% | 65.5%±14.0 | 66.6% |
Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side
position worth 44% to the average player · 1,991 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 49% | 53.7%±2.6 | 46.9% |
| FH through the middle | 24% | 45.6%±3.7 | 41.4% |
| FH down the line | 15% | 52.3%±4.6 | 44.8% |
| FH slice through the middle | 5% | 37.8%±7.5 | 25.4% |
| FH slice down the line | 3% | 37.9%±8.6 | 27.8% |
| FH slice crosscourt | 3% | 37.5%±9.5 | 31.2% |
| FH down the line + approach | 1% | 71.2%±13.2 | 68.9% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side
position worth 44% to the average player · 1,781 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 48% | 50.8%±2.8 | 46.6% |
| FH through the middle | 27% | 50.0%±3.7 | 41.5% |
| FH down the line | 15% | 48.9%±4.8 | 44.7% |
| FH slice through the middle | 3% | 26.1%±8.1 | 24.5% |
| FH slice crosscourt | 3% | 43.5%±9.5 | 30.9% |
| FH slice down the line | 3% | 35.9%±9.4 | 25.6% |
Serve under pressure
Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Gilles Simon's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 495 break-point first serves.
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 52% | 64% ▲ | 66% / 73% |
| Body | 7% | 5% | 57% / 63% |
| T | 41% | 31% ▼ | 72% / 75% |
2,368 normal · 128 break-point 1st serves
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 38% | 46% | 67% / 73% |
| Body | 9% | 8% | 64% / 63% |
| T | 53% | 45% | 65% / 72% |
1,913 normal · 367 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 serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 53% | 60.5%±2.2 n=1,318 | 66% ▲ |
| Body | 7% | 58.5%±5.8 n=167 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 41% | 60.0%±2.5 n=1,011 | 34% ▼ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.82).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 40% | 58.7%±2.7 n=904 | 39% |
| Body | 9% | 65.1%±5.2 n=197 | 22% ▲ |
| T | 52% | 57.9%±2.3 n=1,179 | 39% ▼ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.08).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.
Exploitability 0.22 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: +1.2±2.5 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. (1,911 repeats, 2,751 switches.)
Return by serve direction
Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.
| Serve | Court | Direction | Points | Won | vs tour | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | Ad court | Body | 107 | 38% | +1.0±6.8 | |
| 1st | Ad court | T | 593 | 31% | +2.5±3.0 | |
| 1st | Ad court | Wide | 703 | 30% | +2.9±2.8 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Body | 162 | 45% | +8.1±5.9 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | T | 598 | 24% | −0.6±2.8 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Wide | 780 | 28% | +0.9±2.6 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Body | 312 | 53% | +3.2±4.4 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | T | 126 | 47% | −2.0±6.6 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Wide | 444 | 51% | +3.0±3.8 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Body | 366 | 54% | +5.0±4.1 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | T | 365 | 51% | +1.4±4.1 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Wide | 229 | 50% | +1.5±5.1 |
Signature patterns
Recurring sequences that win more than Gilles Simon's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.
Serve → +1
- Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.6% · won 61% · −0.8±5.2 vs own baseline
- T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 58% · −3.7±6.6 vs own baseline
- T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 57% · −4.4±7.1 vs own baseline
- Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 58% · −4.3±7.0 vs own baseline
- Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 56% · −6.2±6.6 vs own baseline
Return
- vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 3.4% · won 53% · +10.9±6.4 vs own baseline
- vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.5% · won 54% · +12.5±7.3 vs own baseline
- vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.4% · won 54% · +12.6±7.5 vs own baseline
- vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.2% · won 54% · +12.0±7.7 vs own baseline
- vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.1% · won 49% · +7.4±6.7 vs own baseline
Rally, consecutive own shots
- BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.4% · won 55% · +3.7±3.4 vs own baseline
- BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 56% · +4.9±4.7 vs own baseline
- BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.8% · won 56% · +5.2±5.6 vs own baseline
- FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 3.1% · won 55% · +3.6±4.4 vs own baseline
- FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 53% · +1.9±4.0 vs own baseline
Discovered sequences
Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Gilles Simon wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.
- BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 58% · +7.3±5.7 vs own baseline · +12.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Gael Monfils (2/6), Andy Murray (7/17)
- BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 57% · +6.3±5.9 vs own baseline · +5.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (3/8), Taylor Fritz (4/9)
- FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 58% · +6.7±6.9 vs own baseline · +7.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Dominic Thiem (5/12), Milos Raonic (3/7)
- BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 58% · +7.1±7.6 vs own baseline · +8.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roger Federer (6/17), Andy Murray (3/6)
- FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.3% · won 58% · +7.2±8.6 vs own baseline · +8.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (3/7), Gael Monfils (4/8)
- BH crosscourt → BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 56% · +4.7±6.2 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 to their backhand · return +1 | +3.2 | 290 |
| FH slice to their backhand · rally | +2.9 | 205 |
| BH to the middle · return | +2.7 | 947 |
| BH to their backhand · return | +2.6 | 760 |
| FH slice to the middle · rally | +2.5 | 209 |
Most exposed to
| FH to the middle · return | −3.7 | 894 |
| FH to their forehand · return | −3.5 | 479 |
| BH slice to the middle · return | −3.5 | 289 |
| BH slice to their forehand · rally | −3.1 | 245 |
| T 2nd serve · ad court | −2.9 | 126 |
Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Roman Safiullin, Tomas Machac, Miomir Kecmanovic, Roberto Bautista Agut, Tommy Paul
Tactical fingerprint
Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the ATP average, in standard deviations.
| Avg rally length | 5.6 | |
| T serves · ad | 52% | |
| Wide serves · deuce | 53% | |
| Through the middle | 28% | |
| Deep returns | 29% | |
| 1st serve in | 60% | |
| Serve & volley | 1% | |
| Points at net | 9% | |
| Forehand share | 50% | |
| Chipped returns | 9% | |
| BH down the line | 17% | |
| T serves · deuce | 41% | |
| Run-around forehands | 10% | |
| FH down the line | 26% | |
| Drop shots / shot | 0.3% | |
| Backhand slice | 3% | |
| Wide serves · ad | 40% | |
| Unforced errors / shot | 6.2% | |
| Point-ending shots | 14.3% |
Plays most like
- Diego Schwartzman 2015–2025 plan v
- John Millman 2014–2024 plan v
- Daniil Medvedev 2017–2026 plan v
- Hyeon Chung 2015–2019 plan v
- Tomas Martin Etcheverry 2022–2026 plan v
- Miomir Kecmanovic 2019–2026 plan v
- Jenson Brooksby 2021–2026 plan v
- Alex De Minaur 2016–2026 plan v
Closest from another era
- Aaron Krickstein 1989–1995
- Bjorn Borg 1974–1991
- Michael Chang 1989–1998
Charted matches
- Felix Auger Aliassime v Gilles Simon L Paris Masters R16 · Hard · 3 Nov 2022
- Taylor Fritz v Gilles Simon Paris Masters R32 · Hard · 2 Nov 2022
- Andy Murray v Gilles Simon W Paris Masters R64 · Hard · 31 Oct 2022
- Laurent Lokoli v Gilles Simon W Brest CH R32 · Hard · 25 Oct 2022
- David Goffin v Gilles Simon W Metz R32 · Hard · 20 Sep 2022
- Dominic Thiem v Gilles Simon L Rennes CH R32 · Hard · 13 Sep 2022
- Gilles Simon v Daniil Medvedev L s Hertogenbosch R16 · Grass · 9 Jun 2022
- Marin Cilic v Gilles Simon Roland Garros R32 · Clay · 28 May 2022
- Gilles Simon v Steve Johnson W Roland Garros R64 · Clay · 26 May 2022
- Pablo Carreno Busta v Gilles Simon W Roland Garros R128 · Clay · 24 May 2022
- Gilles Simon v Aslan Karatsev L Moscow QF · Hard · 22 Oct 2021
- Mackenzie Mcdonald v Gilles Simon W Moscow R16 · Hard · 21 Oct 2021