RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 10 charted matches · 2023–2026

Hamad Medjedovic

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.5% ±3.2 raw 63.2% · tour 63.4% · 959 points
Return points won 33.5% ±3.3 raw 28.7% · tour 36.6% · 864 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 +0.03 ±0.10 better than 65% of ATP · raw +0.04
Shot selection −0.06 ±0.26 better than 46% of ATP · raw −0.05
Execution −1.65 ±0.69 better than 7% of ATP · raw −1.50
Points left on the table 2.40 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 73% 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 3,932 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Hamad Medjedovic 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 · 175 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 47% 46.6%±8.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 21% 40.6%±10.8 43.7%
BH slice crosscourt 9% 31.9%±12.8 42.5%
BH down the line 9% 43.6%±13.8 46.4%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 128 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 33% 42.4%±10.3 46.6%
FH through the middle 28% 38.0%±10.7 41.5%
FH down the line 23% 38.7%±11.4 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 10% 24.0%±12.2 24.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 126 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 22% 42.8%±11.7 52.7%
FH down the line 19% 43.9%±12.3 51.5%
FH through the middle 17% 37.6%±12.4 47.0%
BH through the middle 17% 39.9%±12.6 46.8%
BH crosscourt 14% 57.4%±13.2 49.1%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 93 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 55% 35.8%±9.4 46.9%
BH through the middle 17% 35.0%±13.1 43.0%
BH down the line 17% 44.0%±13.6 44.2%
BH slice crosscourt 11% 43.9%±14.9 40.9%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +4 How much less varied Hamad Medjedovic's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 85 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 20% ▼ 73% / 73%
Body 8% 20% ▲ 68% / 63%
T 47% 60% ▲ 79% / 75%

485 normal · 15 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 33% 34% 73% / 73%
Body 7% 4% 62% / 63%
T 60% 61% 71% / 72%

389 normal · 70 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% 60.0%±5.1 n=221 40% ▼
Body9% 65.2%±9.2 n=43 0% ▼
T47% 71.5%±4.6 n=236 60% ▲

Off equilibrium (p = 0.012): serve T more. Gap 5.6 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.9 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide33% 58.2%±6.0 n=152 26% ▼
Body6% 57.2%±10.6 n=29 0% ▼
T61% 62.2%±4.5 n=278 74% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.48).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.56 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: −5.3±3.2 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. (465 repeats, 474 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 24 32% −5.3±10.4
1stAd courtT 109 22% −6.2±5.8
1stAd courtWide 133 25% −2.6±5.6
1stDeuce courtBody 22 27% −9.8±10.1
1stDeuce courtT 138 18% −6.9±4.9
1stDeuce courtWide 124 20% −7.0±5.3
2ndAd courtBody 55 37% −12.0±8.6
2ndAd courtT 29 50% +1.2±10.7
2ndAd courtWide 59 44% −4.0±8.7
2ndDeuce courtBody 74 52% +2.6±8.1
2ndDeuce courtT 77 47% −3.1±7.9
2ndDeuce courtWide 20 45% −3.2±11.6

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 66% · −9.6±10.6 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.0% · won 62% · −13.3±10.8 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 62% · −14.2±10.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 7.9% · won 46% · +6.7±11.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 7.2% · won 40% · +0.8±11.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 7.2% · won 50% · +7.0±11.0 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 13.8% · won 45% · +2.1±8.8 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.1% · won 42% · −0.8±11.4 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 6.9% · won 41% · −1.2±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 Hamad Medjedovic wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.7% · won 45% · +3.4±11.1 vs own baseline · −0.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Felix Auger Aliassime (4/6)
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 43% · +1.1±12.4 vs own baseline · −4.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (5/7)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 43% · +0.7±12.7 vs own baseline · −8.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 0.9% · won 41% · −0.7±12.8 vs own baseline · −6.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 38% · −4.2±12.5 vs own baseline · −17.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Elmer Moller (2/7)

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

T 1st serve · deuce court+3.5236
Wide 1st serve · ad court+1.0152
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.7221
T 1st serve · ad court+0.4278
BH to the middle · return+0.2161

Most exposed to

T 1st serve · deuce court−2.8228
Wide 1st serve · ad court−2.2201
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.3192
T 1st serve · ad court−1.2178
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.3129

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Nick Kyrgios, Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard, Milos Raonic, Reilly Opelka, Nicolas Jarry

Tactical fingerprint

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

Drop shots / shot5.8%
T serves · ad61%
Unforced errors / shot15.2%
Deep returns39%
Point-ending shots31.1%
FH down the line33%
1st serve in63%
T serves · deuce47%
BH down the line22%
Run-around forehands20%
Wide serves · deuce44%
Serve & volley3%
Forehand share52%
Backhand slice16%
Points at net9%
Through the middle22%
Chipped returns6%
Avg rally length3.2
Wide serves · ad33%

Plays most like

  1. Jerzy Janowicz 2012–2020 plan v
  2. Nick Kyrgios 2013–2025 plan v
  3. Quentin Halys 2017–2026 plan v
  4. Frances Tiafoe 2016–2026 plan v
  5. Martin Klizan 2014–2019 plan v
  6. Otto Virtanen 2022–2025 plan v
  7. Matteo Arnaldi 2022–2025 plan v
  8. Zhizhen Zhang 2019–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Robin Soderling 2004–2011
  2. Thomas Enqvist 1993–2001
  3. Andy Roddick 2001–2012

Charted matches