RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 8 charted matches · 2001–2007

Guillermo Canas

Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.6% ±3.5 raw 60.3% · tour 63.4% · 551 points
Return points won 37.2% ±3.5 raw 31.7% · tour 36.6% · 625 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 −0.13 ±0.13 better than 23% of ATP · raw −0.14
Shot selection −0.02 ±0.24 better than 50% of ATP · raw −0.03
Execution +0.01 ±0.49 better than 68% of ATP · raw −0.15
Points left on the table 2.57 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 53% 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 3,094 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Guillermo Canas 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 · 244 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 31% 43.7%±8.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 27% 44.4%±8.9 43.7%
FH inside-out 13% 52.6%±11.4 51.8%
BH slice crosscourt 9% 45.3%±12.5 42.5%
BH slice through the middle 8% 30.1%±11.9 35.1%
BH down the line 6% 40.8%±13.7 46.4%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 145 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH through the middle 34% 31.5%±9.2 43.8%
BH crosscourt 30% 47.0%±10.3 48.0%
FH inside-out 13% 44.9%±13.1 52.6%
BH down the line 7% 54.3%±15.0 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 7% 38.1%±14.6 42.1%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 144 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 44% 41.3%±8.9 46.6%
FH through the middle 31% 39.5%±10.1 41.5%
FH down the line 22% 37.2%±11.1 44.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 135 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 28% 50.5%±10.8 51.5%
FH through the middle 24% 46.0%±11.3 47.0%
FH crosscourt 24% 47.2%±11.4 52.7%
BH through the middle 13% 44.2%±13.4 46.8%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +3 How much less varied Guillermo Canas's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 60 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 44% 41% 66% / 73%
Body 13% 6% 56% / 63%
T 42% 53% ▲ 77% / 75%

254 normal · 17 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 40% 33% 69% / 73%
Body 7% 9% 67% / 63%
T 53% 58% 68% / 72%

208 normal · 43 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
Wide44% 58.6%±6.6 n=120 44%
Body13% 54.7%±10.2 n=35 0% ▼
T43% 64.1%±6.5 n=116 56% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.21).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide39% 56.4%±7.2 n=97 52% ▲
Body8% 61.2%±11.4 n=19 0% ▼
T54% 57.0%±6.3 n=135 48% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.64).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.48 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: −3.1±4.2 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. (176 repeats, 330 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 15 29% −7.9±11.1
1stAd courtT 67 27% −0.8±7.4
1stAd courtWide 93 29% +1.4±6.7
1stDeuce courtBody 15 36% −1.1±11.7
1stDeuce courtT 71 21% −3.8±6.7
1stDeuce courtWide 85 24% −3.6±6.5
2ndAd courtBody 20 44% −5.8±11.5
2ndAd courtT 13 55% +6.0±12.5
2ndAd courtWide 77 41% −7.7±7.8
2ndDeuce courtBody 53 48% −1.2±9.0
2ndDeuce courtT 69 52% +2.7±8.3
2ndDeuce courtWide 19 38% −10.5±11.4

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 6.5% · won 51% · −14.2±11.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 11.6% · won 44% · +4.3±10.5 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 12.0% · won 43% · +3.6±10.4 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 13.9% · won 41% · +1.8±9.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 8.8% · won 40% · +0.6±11.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH through the middle → FH through the middle used 4.5% · won 49% · +4.3±11.5 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 6.4% · won 46% · +2.0±10.5 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → BH through the middle used 4.3% · won 46% · +1.3±11.6 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.8% · won 45% · +1.0±10.8 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.4% · won 45% · +0.8±11.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 52% · +6.6±12.9 vs own baseline · +13.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andy Roddick (4/6)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 49% · +3.1±12.1 vs own baseline · +3.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Marat Safin (5/8)
  3. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.9% · won 48% · +2.9±13.0 vs own baseline · +13.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Novak Djokovic (3/8)
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 46% · +0.6±12.7 vs own baseline · −1.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Gustavo Kuerten (5/7)
  5. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 45% · −0.7±12.8 vs own baseline · −5.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 44% · −1.6±11.4 vs own baseline · −2.6 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

FH to their forehand · rally+1.4217
BH to the middle · rally+0.7157
FH to the middle · rally+0.6131
FH to their backhand · rally+0.5231
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.2126

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · rally−2.0236
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.8136
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.3156
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.4151
FH to their forehand · rally+0.6222

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Richard Gasquet, Nishesh Basavareddy, Arthur Cazaux, Jaume Munar, Daniel Evans

Tactical fingerprint

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

T serves · ad54%
Forehand share59%
Run-around forehands30%
Through the middle29%
Avg rally length4.6
Wide serves · deuce44%
Backhand slice23%
Points at net10%
FH down the line29%
T serves · deuce43%
Serve & volley1%
Chipped returns8%
Deep returns21%
1st serve in57%
Drop shots / shot0.2%
Unforced errors / shot7.1%
Point-ending shots16.8%
Wide serves · ad39%
BH down the line9%

Plays most like

  1. David Ferrer 2003–2019 plan v
  2. Tomas Martin Etcheverry 2022–2026 plan v
  3. Andreas Seppi 2008–2021 plan v
  4. Aaron Krickstein 1989–1995 plan v
  5. Botic Van De Zandschulp 2019–2026 plan v
  6. Andy Roddick 2001–2012 plan v
  7. Miomir Kecmanovic 2019–2026 plan v
  8. Sebastien Grosjean 1999–2005 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Tomas Martin Etcheverry 2022–2026
  2. Botic Van De Zandschulp 2019–2026
  3. Miomir Kecmanovic 2019–2026

Charted matches