RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 31 charted matches · 2022–2026

Jakub Mensik

Archetype: Rallies through the middle · Crosscourt backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 66.1% ±2.9 raw 65.4% · tour 63.4% · 2,676 points
Return points won 37.5% ±3.0 raw 34.4% · tour 36.6% · 2,683 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 −0.17 ±0.05 better than 18% of ATP · raw −0.16
Shot selection +0.08 ±0.14 better than 63% of ATP · raw +0.09
Execution −0.62 ±0.61 better than 40% of ATP · raw −0.54
Tactical adaptability −0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 28 matches
Adaptation speed −0.14 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.72 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 38% 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 13,334 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Jakub Mensik 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 · 666 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 36% 46.5%±5.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 33% 45.0%±5.3 43.7%
BH down the line 12% 49.3%±8.2 46.4%
FH inside-out 6% 41.0%±10.7 51.8%
BH slice through the middle 5% 27.3%±9.9 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 46.1%±11.5 42.5%
BH slice down the line 2% 36.5%±13.6 37.1%
BH drop shot down the line 2% 43.3%±14.6 47.2%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 620 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 40% 43.8%±5.0 46.6%
FH through the middle 35% 42.3%±5.3 41.5%
FH down the line 16% 41.8%±7.3 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 7% 24.4%±9.1 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 34.9%±13.9 30.9%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 568 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 31% 50.2%±5.9 51.5%
FH through the middle 21% 43.8%±6.9 47.0%
FH crosscourt 17% 43.5%±7.6 52.7%
BH through the middle 12% 41.3%±8.6 46.8%
BH crosscourt 7% 48.0%±10.8 49.1%
BH down the line 4% 57.3%±12.4 48.3%
FH down the line + approach 3% 57.4%±13.7 70.5%
BH slice through the middle 3% 34.2%±13.2 44.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 453 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 32% 55.9%±6.4 48.0%
BH through the middle 30% 44.7%±6.6 43.8%
BH down the line 18% 44.4%±8.1 46.5%
BH slice through the middle 8% 42.1%±10.8 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 7% 38.9%±11.3 42.1%
FH inside-out 3% 65.2%±13.6 52.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +4 How much less varied Jakub Mensik's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 186 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 53% 54% 76% / 73%
Body 3% 2% 66% / 63%
T 44% 43% 74% / 75%

1,361 normal · 46 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 56% 56% 80% / 73%
Body 3% 2% 64% / 63%
T 41% 41% 78% / 72%

1,127 normal · 140 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
Wide53% 66.5%±2.8 n=751 66% ▲
Body3% 64.9%±9.3 n=42 0% ▼
T44% 63.8%±3.1 n=614 34% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.26).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide56% 67.0%±2.8 n=710 69% ▲
Body3% 64.8%±9.3 n=41 0% ▼
T41% 63.8%±3.4 n=516 31% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.20).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.40 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: +2.3±2.9 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. (1,332 repeats, 1,280 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 82 33% −3.9±7.3
1stAd courtT 359 28% +0.3±3.8
1stAd courtWide 352 26% −0.7±3.7
1stDeuce courtBody 78 35% −1.5±7.6
1stDeuce courtT 325 23% −2.4±3.7
1stDeuce courtWide 474 26% −1.0±3.2
2ndAd courtBody 206 48% −1.2±5.4
2ndAd courtT 111 41% −8.3±6.8
2ndAd courtWide 170 47% −1.6±5.8
2ndDeuce courtBody 228 49% −0.3±5.1
2ndDeuce courtT 193 47% −2.2±5.5
2ndDeuce courtWide 105 51% +3.3±7.1

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.0% · won 67% · −3.1±8.8 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 62% · −8.2±8.9 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.1% · won 55% · −15.1±9.2 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.9% · won 55% · −15.5±8.3 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 2.0% · won 51% · −18.9±9.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.2% · won 51% · +12.6±9.6 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.7% · won 46% · +8.3±9.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 4.7% · won 44% · +6.1±7.4 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 3.3% · won 45% · +7.1±8.4 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 5.6% · won 41% · +3.6±6.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH down the line used 2.0% · won 56% · +11.2±9.0 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 3.5% · won 52% · +6.7±7.4 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 51% · +6.0±8.0 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 52% · +6.8±8.9 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → BH through the middle used 2.7% · won 50% · +5.6±8.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Jakub Mensik 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 0.7% · won 60% · +14.5±9.7 vs own baseline · +15.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Hubert Hurkacz (4/7), Bruno Kuzuhara (4/6)
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.9% · won 57% · +11.5±8.8 vs own baseline · +17.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andy Murray (3/7), Hubert Hurkacz (5/10)
  3. BH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 56% · +11.0±9.9 vs own baseline · +16.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Bruno Kuzuhara (7/10)
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 51% · +5.7±9.4 vs own baseline · +5.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jannik Sinner (1/6)
  5. FH through the middle → FH through the middle → FH through the middle used 0.4% · won 54% · +8.4±11.7 vs own baseline · +15.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 52% · +6.8±10.6 vs own baseline · +5.8 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 the middle · serve +1+1.9167
FH to the middle · return+1.6632
T 1st serve · ad court+1.6516
Wide 1st serve · ad court+1.3710
BH to their backhand · serve +1+1.0214

Most exposed to

BH to their forehand · rally−1.5269
BH to the middle · rally−1.4417
FH to their backhand · return +1−1.0146
Body 2nd serve · deuce court−0.9228
BH to their backhand · rally−0.9581

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.48, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.24, Jack Draper +1.05, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.01, Pedro Martinez +0.99

Favourable matchups

Fabian Marozsan +0.73, Pedro Martinez +0.68, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.65, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.61, Roberto Carballes Baena +0.55

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Juncheng Shang, Pedro Martinez, Learner Tien, Miomir Kecmanovic, Nishesh Basavareddy

Tactical fingerprint

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

Through the middle32%
Wide serves · deuce53%
FH down the line36%
Deep returns33%
Wide serves · ad56%
Unforced errors / shot11.0%
Drop shots / shot2.0%
Forehand share55%
T serves · ad41%
BH down the line21%
Point-ending shots24.1%
Avg rally length3.9
Serve & volley5%
T serves · deuce44%
Backhand slice17%
1st serve in60%
Points at net9%
Chipped returns10%
Run-around forehands10%

Plays most like

  1. Gregoire Barrere 2016–2024 plan v
  2. Alexander Shevchenko 2023–2026 plan v
  3. Arthur Cazaux 2020–2025 plan v
  4. Rinky Hijikata 2023–2026 plan v
  5. Laslo Djere 2018–2026 plan v
  6. Alexandre Muller 2023–2025 plan v
  7. Karen Khachanov 2015–2026 plan v
  8. Holger Rune 2019–2025 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Ivan Ljubicic 2003–2011
  2. Paul Henri Mathieu 2002–2016
  3. Andrei Pavel 1999–2006

Charted matches