RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 18 charted matches · 2014–2024

Joao Sousa

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 61.7% ±2.9 raw 58.6% · tour 63.4% · 1,314 points
Return points won 37.8% ±3.0 raw 34.7% · tour 36.6% · 1,244 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 −0.08 ±0.08 better than 35% of ATP · raw −0.08
Shot selection +0.55 ±0.19 better than 95% of ATP · raw +0.55
Execution −1.26 ±0.49 better than 17% of ATP · raw −1.25
Tactical adaptability −0.01 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 18 matches
Adaptation speed +0.07 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.63 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 47% 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 6,487 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Joao Sousa 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 · 478 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH through the middle 22% 35.5%±7.0 43.7%
BH crosscourt 22% 46.0%±7.3 47.6%
FH inside-out 19% 51.2%±7.8 51.8%
FH inside-in 10% 57.5%±10.0 54.7%
BH down the line 9% 36.5%±10.1 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 5% 38.7%±12.1 35.1%
BH slice down the line 5% 33.5%±11.8 37.1%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 39.7%±12.9 42.5%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 300 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 37% 40.1%±7.1 46.6%
FH down the line 33% 46.1%±7.6 44.7%
FH through the middle 21% 37.4%±8.8 41.5%
FH slice through the middle 5% 20.3%±11.4 24.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 260 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 25% 46.6%±8.9 48.0%
BH through the middle 18% 40.6%±9.9 43.8%
FH inside-in 12% 49.7%±11.4 54.3%
FH inside-out 12% 45.1%±11.6 52.6%
BH slice crosscourt 10% 41.3%±11.8 42.1%
BH down the line 10% 36.2%±11.8 46.5%
BH slice through the middle 7% 36.9%±12.9 35.1%
BH slice down the line 7% 32.9%±12.7 35.8%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 232 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 34% 53.3%±8.2 51.5%
FH crosscourt 30% 39.5%±8.5 52.7%
FH through the middle 12% 45.5%±11.9 47.0%
BH through the middle 7% 52.3%±13.5 46.8%
FH down the line + approach 5% 68.1%±13.8 70.5%
BH crosscourt 4% 49.4%±15.0 49.1%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +6 How much less varied Joao Sousa's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 133 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 52% 35% ▼ 69% / 73%
Body 15% 11% 58% / 63%
T 33% 54% ▲ 74% / 75%

644 normal · 37 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 52% 63% ▲ 68% / 73%
Body 13% 16% 57% / 63%
T 35% 22% ▼ 76% / 72%

536 normal · 96 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
Wide52% 58.3%±4.2 n=351 65% ▲
Body15% 49.4%±7.2 n=100 2% ▼
T34% 57.0%±5.1 n=230 33%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.12).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide53% 62.4%±4.2 n=337 54%
Body13% 54.1%±7.7 n=84 0% ▼
T33% 61.9%±5.1 n=211 46% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.11).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.69 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: +5.4±5.4 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. (541 repeats, 736 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 62 33% −4.3±8.0
1stAd courtT 142 26% −1.6±5.5
1stAd courtWide 171 27% +0.2±5.2
1stDeuce courtBody 47 39% +2.3±9.1
1stDeuce courtT 199 20% −5.2±4.3
1stDeuce courtWide 147 31% +4.0±5.7
2ndAd courtBody 83 50% +0.9±7.7
2ndAd courtT 30 53% +3.7±10.6
2ndAd courtWide 105 42% −6.5±7.0
2ndDeuce courtBody 86 49% −0.1±7.6
2ndDeuce courtT 123 50% +0.6±6.6
2ndDeuce courtWide 48 44% −3.9±9.2

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Joao Sousa'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 2.5% · won 68% · +5.5±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 66% · +3.3±9.4 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.8% · won 65% · +2.1±10.2 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 62% · −0.9±9.4 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 57% · −5.6±11.1 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 4.5% · won 44% · +8.2±10.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 4.0% · won 41% · +5.0±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 4.5% · won 39% · +2.8±10.7 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 39% · +2.7±11.3 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 37% · +1.3±11.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH inside-in used 2.8% · won 57% · +11.2±10.6 vs own baseline
  2. FH inside-in → FH down the line used 3.0% · won 54% · +7.7±10.5 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 52% · +5.9±10.0 vs own baseline
  4. FH inside-out → FH inside-in used 2.7% · won 51% · +5.3±10.8 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 52% · +5.5±11.4 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.1% · won 57% · +11.6±10.5 vs own baseline · +12.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (3/6), Chun Hsin Tseng (5/7)
  2. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.9% · won 57% · +11.6±11.2 vs own baseline · +13.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → FH inside-in used 0.7% · won 56% · +10.4±11.9 vs own baseline · +13.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roberto Bautista Agut (5/6)
  4. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-in used 0.6% · won 55% · +8.7±12.5 vs own baseline · +7.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 53% · +7.2±11.9 vs own baseline · +6.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roberto Bautista Agut (5/6)
  6. FH inside-in → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 51% · +5.1±12.1 vs own baseline · +10.4 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

Body 2nd serve · ad court+1.1138
FH to their forehand · rally+0.7455
FH to the middle · rally+0.7156
FH to their backhand · rally+0.6603
FH to their forehand · return +1+0.5140

Most exposed to

BH to their forehand · rally−2.8162
FH to their forehand · return−2.7121
FH to their forehand · serve +1−2.2184
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.2240
FH to their backhand · rally−1.0439

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.92, Jack Draper +1.50, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.48, Nishesh Basavareddy +1.38, Pedro Martinez +1.32

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +0.91, Fabian Marozsan +0.85, Roberto Carballes Baena +0.76, Pedro Martinez +0.67, Arthur Rinderknech +0.61

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.

Forehand share69%
Run-around forehands42%
Wide serves · deuce52%
Deep returns36%
Wide serves · ad53%
Backhand slice24%
FH down the line31%
Avg rally length4.0
1st serve in61%
Unforced errors / shot9.4%
Point-ending shots21.9%
Serve & volley0%
Points at net9%
BH down the line17%
Chipped returns9%
Drop shots / shot0.6%
T serves · ad33%
Through the middle21%
T serves · deuce34%

Plays most like

  1. J J Wolf 2022–2024 plan v
  2. Thanasi Kokkinakis 2013–2024 plan v
  3. Radu Albot 2016–2024 plan v
  4. Casper Ruud 2017–2026 plan v
  5. Leonardo Mayer 2014–2019 plan v
  6. Tommy Robredo 2003–2022 plan v
  7. Felix Auger Aliassime 2017–2026 plan v
  8. Tommy Paul 2016–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Carlos Moya 1997–2007
  2. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  3. Jim Courier 1989–1999

Charted matches