RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 8 charted matches · 2024–2026

Guy Den Ouden

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.7% ±3.6 raw 61.0% · tour 63.4% · 564 points
Return points won 35.7% ±3.6 raw 36.8% · tour 36.6% · 506 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 −0.15 ±0.07 better than 20% of ATP · raw −0.14
Shot selection +0.13 ±0.31 better than 68% of ATP · raw +0.15
Execution −1.89 ±0.66 better than 4% of ATP · raw −1.52

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 2,698 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Guy Den Ouden 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 · 136 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 40% 43.4%±9.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 24% 51.4%±11.4 43.7%
FH inside-out 15% 55.9%±12.9 51.8%
BH down the line 9% 47.7%±14.5 46.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 127 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 32% 54.6%±10.5 51.5%
FH crosscourt 30% 54.4%±10.8 52.7%
BH crosscourt 14% 49.5%±13.3 49.1%
FH through the middle 13% 38.9%±13.2 47.0%
BH through the middle 10% 34.4%±13.6 46.8%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 107 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH through the middle 37% 40.5%±10.4 41.5%
FH crosscourt 27% 49.6%±11.7 46.6%
FH down the line 21% 53.4%±12.5 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 9% 36.4%±14.4 24.5%

Serve +1: deep return to your middle

position worth 47% to the average player · 72 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 36% 53.5%±12.1 47.9%
FH through the middle 28% 54.4%±13.0 43.8%
FH crosscourt 24% 52.0%±13.5 51.2%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +1 How much less varied Guy Den Ouden's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 57 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 40% 45% 75% / 73%
Body 21% 27% 59% / 63%
T 39% 27% ▼ 71% / 75%

280 normal · 11 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 48% 72% / 73%
Body 21% 20% 62% / 63%
T 32% 33% 70% / 72%

226 normal · 46 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
Wide40% 66.7%±6.4 n=116 53% ▲
Body22% 54.4%±8.5 n=63 9% ▼
T38% 59.0%±6.8 n=112 38%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.06).
Optimal mix: +0.9 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide47% 62.1%±6.4 n=127 47%
Body21% 54.9%±8.8 n=57 8% ▼
T32% 64.1%±7.3 n=88 45% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.24).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.86 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: −1.0±9.3 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. (178 repeats, 369 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 17 41% +3.6±11.8
1stAd courtT 51 30% +2.1±8.4
1stAd courtWide 88 31% +4.3±7.0
1stDeuce courtBody 27 33% −3.4±10.3
1stDeuce courtT 67 27% +2.3±7.4
1stDeuce courtWide 74 21% −5.9±6.6
2ndAd courtBody 27 47% −2.3±10.9
2ndAd courtT 16 45% −4.1±12.1
2ndAd courtWide 44 49% +1.0±9.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 36 56% +6.6±10.1
2ndDeuce courtT 38 51% +1.6±10.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 21 48% −0.2±11.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 6.6% · won 57% · −14.4±11.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 13.3% · won 52% · −1.4±11.0 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 10.7% · won 45% · −8.1±11.6 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Guy Den Ouden 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 used 1.2% · won 54% · +3.3±13.0 vs own baseline · +13.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 48% · −2.9±12.9 vs own baseline · −4.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 1.5% · won 43% · −8.5±12.3 vs own baseline · −13.0 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 · rally−0.1129
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.5127
BH to their backhand · rally−1.5152
FH to their backhand · rally−2.6153

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · rally−1.4133
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.1132
BH to their backhand · rally+0.9121
FH to their forehand · rally+2.4143

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Adrian Andreev, Alex Molcan, Rafael Nadal, Hugo Gaston, Daniel Evans

Tactical fingerprint

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

Run-around forehands36%
Deep returns39%
Forehand share61%
Drop shots / shot2.7%
Unforced errors / shot11.3%
Point-ending shots26.7%
Through the middle25%
1st serve in62%
FH down the line30%
Avg rally length3.9
Points at net9%
Serve & volley1%
Wide serves · ad47%
Chipped returns10%
Wide serves · deuce40%
Backhand slice12%
T serves · ad32%
T serves · deuce38%
BH down the line13%

Plays most like

  1. Francisco Cerundolo 2020–2025 plan v
  2. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v
  3. Juan Ignacio Londero 2019–2022 plan v
  4. J J Wolf 2022–2024 plan v
  5. Radu Albot 2016–2024 plan v
  6. Carlos Alcaraz 2019–2026 plan v
  7. Philipp Kohlschreiber 2008–2019 plan v
  8. Ben Shelton 2021–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. James Blake 2002–2011
  2. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  3. Robin Soderling 2004–2011

Charted matches