RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 30 charted matches · 2021–2026

Jenson Brooksby

Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.3% ±2.8 raw 60.5% · tour 63.4% · 2,498 points
Return points won 40.6% ±2.9 raw 37.4% · tour 36.6% · 2,433 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 −0.07 ±0.11 better than 37% of ATP · raw −0.07
Shot selection −0.31 ±0.11 better than 21% of ATP · raw −0.31
Execution +0.53 ±0.33 better than 84% of ATP · raw +0.54
Tactical adaptability −0.04 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 30 matches
Adaptation speed +0.09 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution +0.05 ±0.49 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 2,786 shots · better than 79% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.27 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 86% 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 14,908 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Jenson Brooksby 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 · 1,044 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 60% 53.0%±3.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 19% 46.5%±5.5 43.7%
BH down the line 11% 43.4%±6.9 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 38.7%±11.0 42.5%
BH slice through the middle 3% 37.3%±11.1 35.1%
BH drop shot down the line 1% 48.2%±14.5 47.2%
FH inside-in 1% 56.4%±14.9 54.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 920 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH through the middle 18% 49.2%±6.0 47.0%
BH through the middle 17% 47.6%±6.2 46.8%
FH down the line 17% 48.1%±6.2 51.5%
BH crosscourt 16% 54.0%±6.3 49.1%
FH crosscourt 16% 53.3%±6.4 52.7%
BH down the line 9% 50.7%±8.2 48.3%
BH slice through the middle 2% 44.9%±12.9 44.8%
FH down the line + approach 1% 72.2%±13.0 70.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 784 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 55% 54.8%±3.9 48.0%
BH through the middle 20% 45.0%±6.2 43.8%
BH down the line 11% 58.2%±7.8 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 6% 46.1%±10.1 42.1%
BH slice through the middle 5% 36.2%±10.4 35.1%
BH drop shot down the line 2% 50.2%±13.5 47.8%
BH slice down the line 1% 30.5%±13.8 35.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 676 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH through the middle 18% 53.7%±6.8 46.8%
BH crosscourt 17% 46.3%±7.0 49.6%
FH crosscourt 16% 54.6%±7.2 52.7%
FH through the middle 16% 44.0%±7.3 47.4%
FH down the line 15% 56.6%±7.5 52.0%
BH down the line 8% 49.2%±9.6 49.5%
BH drop shot down the line 2% 46.7%±13.7 49.0%
BH slice through the middle 2% 38.6%±13.7 45.7%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +9 How much less varied Jenson Brooksby's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 229 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 47% 70% / 73%
Body 17% 6% ▼ 56% / 63%
T 39% 47% ▲ 65% / 75%

1,243 normal · 53 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 60% ▲ 71% / 73%
Body 14% 13% 62% / 63%
T 39% 28% ▼ 66% / 72%

1,024 normal · 176 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
Wide45% 64.6%±3.2 n=580 58% ▲
Body16% 55.6%±5.3 n=212 3% ▼
T39% 60.0%±3.5 n=504 39%

Off equilibrium (p = 0.024): serve wide more. Gap 3.3 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.9 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide49% 59.1%±3.3 n=583 49%
Body14% 57.7%±5.8 n=168 1% ▼
T37% 61.2%±3.7 n=449 50% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.59).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.67 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: −3.5±3.5 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. (739 repeats, 1,697 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 95 40% +3.1±7.2
1stAd courtT 329 34% +6.1±4.1
1stAd courtWide 295 25% −1.9±4.0
1stDeuce courtBody 111 33% −4.1±6.5
1stDeuce courtT 340 24% −1.4±3.6
1stDeuce courtWide 344 27% −0.1±3.8
2ndAd courtBody 202 56% +7.0±5.4
2ndAd courtT 97 48% −1.4±7.3
2ndAd courtWide 139 45% −3.1±6.3
2ndDeuce courtBody 223 53% +4.2±5.2
2ndDeuce courtT 172 50% +0.3±5.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 81 49% +1.0±7.8

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 63% · +0.9±8.2 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 62% · −0.3±8.4 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 60% · −2.0±9.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.1% · won 60% · −2.3±9.2 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 59% · −3.7±8.6 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.9% · won 49% · +9.2±9.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.3% · won 50% · +9.8±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.5% · won 48% · +7.6±8.6 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.5% · won 48% · +7.8±9.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.3% · won 47% · +7.0±9.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 9.4% · won 56% · +5.0±4.0 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 57% · +6.0±6.0 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 4.1% · won 57% · +5.9±5.9 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 1.4% · won 61% · +9.5±8.8 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 5.4% · won 55% · +4.2±5.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 64% · +13.0±8.1 vs own baseline · +16.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Novak Djokovic (4/8), Casper Ruud (12/16)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH slice through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 66% · +15.2±10.6 vs own baseline · +25.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH down the line used 0.5% · won 62% · +10.8±9.8 vs own baseline · +15.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Casper Ruud (10/14)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.4% · won 56% · +5.2±6.8 vs own baseline · +10.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Frances Tiafoe (2/6), Taylor Fritz (8/15)
  5. BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 58% · +7.1±9.2 vs own baseline · +14.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Marcos Giron (4/6), Roberto Bautista Agut (4/6)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 58% · +6.7±9.0 vs own baseline · +7.7 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

BH to the middle · serve +1+2.7264
FH to the middle · return +1+2.7138
FH to their forehand · return +1+2.3154
BH to their backhand · serve +1+2.3503
Wide 2nd serve · ad court+2.1175

Most exposed to

BH to the middle · return−3.4621
FH to their backhand · serve +1−3.0347
FH to their backhand · return−2.6181
FH to their forehand · serve +1−2.4334
BH to their backhand · serve +1−2.3292

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +2.57, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.50, Roberto Bautista Agut +2.28, Casper Ruud +2.25, Pedro Martinez +2.20

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +2.04, Pedro Martinez +1.89, Roberto Carballes Baena +1.82, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.82, Fabian Marozsan +1.80

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Juan Carlos Prado Angelo, Cameron Norrie, Daniil Medvedev, Dusan Lajovic, Ugo Humbert

Tactical fingerprint

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

Avg rally length5.0
1st serve in64%
Through the middle27%
Deep returns31%
FH down the line32%
Wide serves · deuce45%
Drop shots / shot1.6%
T serves · ad37%
Wide serves · ad49%
Serve & volley1%
Points at net8%
BH down the line16%
Backhand slice10%
Chipped returns6%
T serves · deuce39%
Point-ending shots17.2%
Unforced errors / shot7.1%
Run-around forehands5%
Forehand share45%

Plays most like

  1. Daniil Medvedev 2017–2026 plan v
  2. Novak Djokovic 2005–2026 plan v
  3. Alex De Minaur 2016–2026 plan v
  4. Miomir Kecmanovic 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Jaume Munar 2018–2026 plan v
  6. Alexandre Muller 2023–2025 plan v
  7. Pablo Carreno Busta 2015–2026 plan v
  8. Karen Khachanov 2015–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Guillermo Coria 2002–2005
  2. Jarkko Nieminen 2003–2014
  3. Nikolay Davydenko 2002–2014

Charted matches