RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 19 charted matches · 2014–2022

Jack Sock

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 66.0% ±3.1 raw 63.9% · tour 63.4% · 1,327 points
Return points won 37.1% ±3.2 raw 33.3% · tour 36.6% · 1,378 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 −0.26 ±0.13 better than 7% of ATP · raw −0.26
Shot selection +0.27 ±0.23 better than 78% of ATP · raw +0.27
Execution −0.80 ±0.54 better than 33% of ATP · raw −0.82
Tactical adaptability +0.14 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 17 matches
Adaptation speed +0.11 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.94 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 23% 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 6,034 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Jack Sock 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 · 333 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH through the middle 18% 35.5%±8.7 43.7%
BH crosscourt 17% 45.4%±9.4 47.6%
BH down the line 16% 35.5%±9.2 46.4%
FH inside-out 16% 57.5%±9.6 51.8%
BH slice crosscourt 11% 44.5%±11.0 42.5%
FH inside-in 9% 57.0%±11.6 54.7%
BH slice through the middle 6% 32.6%±12.2 35.1%
FH through the middle 6% 41.1%±13.0 45.2%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 230 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 35% 58.3%±8.1 51.5%
FH crosscourt 24% 43.4%±9.4 52.7%
FH through the middle 19% 54.6%±10.3 47.0%
BH through the middle 7% 45.5%±13.7 46.8%
BH crosscourt 6% 43.6%±14.0 49.1%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 203 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 17% 38.5%±10.8 40.9%
BH through the middle 17% 41.9%±11.0 43.0%
BH crosscourt 16% 45.0%±11.3 46.9%
BH down the line 14% 41.3%±11.7 44.2%
BH slice through the middle 13% 31.5%±11.3 32.6%
FH inside-out 11% 48.4%±12.7 51.7%
BH slice down the line 6% 30.2%±13.4 33.3%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 199 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 33% 41.1%±8.7 46.6%
FH through the middle 30% 31.6%±8.6 41.5%
FH down the line 24% 42.6%±9.9 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 8% 22.0%±11.4 24.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +8 How much less varied Jack Sock's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 117 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 39% 20% ▼ 70% / 73%
Body 16% 4% ▼ 71% / 63%
T 45% 76% ▲ 74% / 75%

667 normal · 25 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 48% 71% / 73%
Body 19% 20% 60% / 63%
T 36% 33% 73% / 72%

540 normal · 92 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
Wide38% 63.3%±4.6 n=264 39%
Body15% 67.5%±6.6 n=107 2% ▼
T46% 64.3%±4.2 n=321 59% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.62).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide45% 64.4%±4.4 n=286 45%
Body19% 59.2%±6.6 n=121 6% ▼
T36% 63.9%±4.9 n=225 49% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.44).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.57 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±3.6 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. (549 repeats, 737 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 50 31% −5.6±8.5
1stAd courtT 158 24% −3.9±5.1
1stAd courtWide 213 27% ±0.0±4.7
1stDeuce courtBody 62 36% −0.8±8.2
1stDeuce courtT 185 24% −0.6±4.8
1stDeuce courtWide 230 28% +0.6±4.6
2ndAd courtBody 57 47% −2.5±8.8
2ndAd courtT 45 38% −10.9±9.2
2ndAd courtWide 134 52% +3.2±6.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 90 41% −8.4±7.4
2ndDeuce courtT 97 45% −4.9±7.3
2ndDeuce courtWide 54 56% +8.4±8.9

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 3.5% · won 73% · −0.9±9.3 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 71% · −2.6±10.1 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.3% · won 67% · −6.9±10.0 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.2% · won 64% · −9.5±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.7% · won 66% · −7.9±9.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 4.1% · won 53% · +14.1±11.0 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.5% · won 47% · +8.6±11.4 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.1% · won 46% · +7.0±11.0 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 3.5% · won 44% · +4.7±11.4 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 6.0% · won 42% · +3.3±9.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH inside-out used 4.7% · won 48% · +3.5±11.1 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.8% · won 45% · +0.4±10.4 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 43% · −1.7±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.5% · won 34% · −9.9±10.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Jack Sock 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 through the middle → FH down the line used 0.9% · won 62% · +16.2±11.4 vs own baseline · +26.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.6% · won 54% · +7.5±12.7 vs own baseline · +9.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Grigor Dimitrov (5/7)
  3. Body serve → BH through the middle return, deep → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 50% · +3.9±12.9 vs own baseline · +7.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.9% · won 48% · +1.9±11.7 vs own baseline · −2.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → FH inside-in used 0.6% · won 45% · −0.9±12.8 vs own baseline · −11.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH inside-out → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 45% · −0.9±12.8 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 forehand · serve +1+2.1160
T 1st serve · ad court+1.2225
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+1.1264
BH to the middle · return+0.5297
FH to their backhand · rally+0.2348

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · serve +1−2.3200
FH to their backhand · serve +1−1.8266
T 1st serve · ad court−1.8240
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.5327
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.2307

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Luciano Darderi, Brandon Nakashima, Milos Raonic, Francisco Cerundolo, Rinky Hijikata

Tactical fingerprint

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

Forehand share66%
Run-around forehands42%
BH down the line29%
Unforced errors / shot13.3%
Point-ending shots30.1%
Backhand slice35%
FH down the line34%
Drop shots / shot2.3%
Deep returns29%
Through the middle26%
T serves · deuce46%
1st serve in61%
Points at net11%
Serve & volley5%
Chipped returns12%
T serves · ad36%
Wide serves · ad45%
Wide serves · deuce38%
Avg rally length3.4

Plays most like

  1. Jeremy Chardy 2013–2023 plan v
  2. Juan Ignacio Londero 2019–2022 plan v
  3. Milos Raonic 2011–2024 plan v
  4. Alexei Popyrin 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Aleksandar Vukic 2019–2025 plan v
  6. Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard 2024–2026 plan v
  7. Jo Wilfried Tsonga 2007–2022 plan v
  8. Joao Fonseca 2024–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Marc Rosset 1991–2000
  2. Carlos Moya 1997–2007
  3. Jim Courier 1989–1999

Charted matches