RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 174 charted matches · 2009–2026

Grigor Dimitrov

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 67.1% ±2.2 raw 65.2% · tour 63.4% · 13,684 points
Return points won 39.5% ±2.4 raw 35.7% · tour 36.6% · 13,847 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 −0.07 ±0.05 better than 38% of ATP · raw −0.07
Shot selection −0.42 ±0.09 better than 15% of ATP · raw −0.42
Execution −0.13 ±0.23 better than 61% of ATP · raw −0.16
Tactical adaptability −0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 170 matches
Adaptation speed ±0.00 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.04 ±0.36 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 9,545 shots · better than 73% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.78 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 32% 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 70,132 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Grigor Dimitrov 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 · 5,740 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 20% 46.8%±2.4 42.5%
BH crosscourt 18% 46.2%±2.6 47.6%
BH through the middle 17% 41.9%±2.6 43.7%
BH slice through the middle 12% 43.1%±3.1 35.1%
FH inside-out 10% 52.7%±3.4 51.8%
BH down the line 7% 45.1%±4.0 46.4%
BH slice down the line 6% 41.8%±4.2 37.1%
FH inside-in 6% 58.5%±4.3 54.7%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 3,795 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 27% 47.0%±2.5 42.1%
BH slice through the middle 15% 37.7%±3.3 35.1%
BH crosscourt 14% 47.3%±3.5 48.0%
BH through the middle 12% 39.4%±3.7 43.8%
BH slice down the line 9% 42.8%±4.2 35.8%
BH down the line 7% 42.5%±4.7 46.5%
FH inside-out 5% 50.7%±5.5 52.6%
FH inside-in 5% 53.8%±5.9 54.3%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 3,395 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 28% 54.3%±2.6 52.7%
FH down the line 24% 55.7%±2.9 51.5%
FH through the middle 17% 50.3%±3.3 47.0%
BH through the middle 9% 40.5%±4.6 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 5% 46.0%±5.9 44.8%
BH crosscourt 4% 47.4%±6.5 49.1%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 52.2%±6.5 47.0%
FH down the line + approach 3% 75.7%±6.6 70.5%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 2,619 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 41% 48.7%±2.5 46.6%
FH through the middle 25% 42.9%±3.1 41.5%
FH down the line 21% 48.0%±3.4 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 6% 22.6%±5.4 24.5%
FH down the line + approach 3% 71.3%±7.5 69.3%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 25.6%±8.3 30.9%
FH slice down the line 1% 23.9%±12.0 25.6%
FH crosscourt + approach 0% 72.8%±13.4 69.3%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −4 How much less varied Grigor Dimitrov's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 1033 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 42% 74% / 73%
Body 7% 9% 67% / 63%
T 47% 49% 79% / 75%

6,906 normal · 250 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 50% 51% 76% / 73%
Body 9% 12% 64% / 63%
T 41% 37% 72% / 72%

5,718 normal · 783 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
Wide46% 66.0%±1.3 n=3,313 40% ▼
Body7% 62.3%±3.4 n=508 0% ▼
T47% 67.0%±1.3 n=3,335 60% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.07).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 64.4%±1.4 n=3,269 63% ▲
Body10% 62.4%±3.1 n=624 0% ▼
T40% 64.2%±1.5 n=2,608 37% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.55).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.53 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±1.3 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. (4,759 repeats, 8,552 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 443 35% −2.1±3.6
1stAd courtT 1,573 28% +0.3±1.9
1stAd courtWide 2,082 26% −1.6±1.6
1stDeuce courtBody 556 36% −1.0±3.3
1stDeuce courtT 2,144 26% +0.9±1.5
1stDeuce courtWide 1,936 28% +0.4±1.7
2ndAd courtBody 672 50% +0.9±3.1
2ndAd courtT 359 54% +4.6±4.2
2ndAd courtWide 1,430 46% −2.4±2.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 890 51% +2.2±2.7
2ndDeuce courtT 1,254 50% +0.5±2.3
2ndDeuce courtWide 467 49% +0.9±3.7

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 63% · −5.2±3.6 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 60% · −8.4±4.4 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 59% · −9.7±4.6 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.1% · won 60% · −9.1±3.9 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.8% · won 59% · −9.6±3.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH slice through the middle, mid used 3.1% · won 46% · +8.1±4.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.5% · won 43% · +5.1±4.6 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.1% · won 43% · +5.1±5.0 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice crosscourt, mid used 2.6% · won 42% · +4.1±4.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 2.1% · won 27% · −11.4±4.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 57% · +9.4±4.7 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 54% · +5.8±3.9 vs own baseline
  3. BH slice crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 53% · +5.0±4.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 53% · +4.6±4.0 vs own baseline
  5. BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 53% · +4.7±4.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 70% · +20.2±7.5 vs own baseline · +5.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andy Murray (6/9), Daniil Medvedev (5/7)
  2. FH down the line + approach → BH lob through the middle → Smash crosscourt used 0.1% · won 75% · +25.5±8.7 vs own baseline · +1.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (6/7), Stefan Kozlov (6/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 69% · +19.4±8.3 vs own baseline · +4.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. Wide serve → BH crosscourt return, mid → FH inside-in used 0.2% · won 67% · +17.4±8.1 vs own baseline · +13.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. T serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 63% · +13.3±7.0 vs own baseline · +11.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (2/8), Rafael Nadal (3/6)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → FH inside-out used 0.2% · won 66% · +16.3±8.1 vs own baseline · +12.0 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 forehand · serve +1+1.92,378
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1+1.9413
Smash to their forehand · rally+1.8197
FH to their forehand · return +1+1.51,110
FH to the middle · return +1+1.4825

Most exposed to

BH slice to their backhand · return−1.1360
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.82,828
FH slice to the middle · return−0.7328
FH to their backhand · return−0.5968
FH volley to their backhand · rally−0.5207

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +0.09, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.02, Casper Ruud −0.15, Nishesh Basavareddy −0.16, Daniil Medvedev −0.18

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +1.38, Fabian Marozsan +1.25, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.21, Jenson Brooksby +1.10, Roberto Carballes Baena +1.08

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Andy Murray, Kei Nishikori, Richard Gasquet, Casper Ruud, Novak Djokovic

Tactical fingerprint

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

Chipped returns40%
Backhand slice49%
Run-around forehands33%
Forehand share56%
Wide serves · deuce46%
Deep returns30%
Through the middle26%
1st serve in63%
Avg rally length4.2
T serves · deuce47%
T serves · ad40%
Wide serves · ad50%
BH down the line19%
Unforced errors / shot9.3%
Point-ending shots22.1%
Points at net9%
Drop shots / shot1.1%
Serve & volley1%
FH down the line28%

Plays most like

  1. Roger Federer 1998–2021 plan v
  2. Dominic Thiem 2011–2024 plan v
  3. Christopher Oconnell 2015–2026 plan v
  4. Tim Van Rijthoven 2021–2023 plan v
  5. Casper Ruud 2017–2026 plan v
  6. Lorenzo Musetti 2019–2026 plan v
  7. Stan Wawrinka 2006–2026 plan v
  8. Marton Fucsovics 2018–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Sebastien Grosjean 1999–2005
  2. Carlos Moya 1997–2007
  3. Ivan Lendl 1979–1994

Charted matches