RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 9 charted matches · 2019–2022

Juan Ignacio Londero

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.4% ±3.5 raw 59.6% · tour 63.4% · 686 points
Return points won 38.4% ±3.6 raw 38.9% · tour 36.6% · 676 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 +0.01 ±0.07 better than 60% of ATP · raw +0.02
Shot selection +0.41 ±0.17 better than 87% of ATP · raw +0.43
Execution −1.08 ±1.01 better than 23% of ATP · raw −0.81
Points left on the table 2.58 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 51% 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 3,118 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Juan Ignacio Londero 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 · 218 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 46% 45.1%±7.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 17% 35.3%±10.5 43.7%
BH down the line 12% 44.1%±12.0 46.4%
FH inside-out 11% 63.0%±11.8 51.8%
FH inside-in 8% 55.1%±13.3 54.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 156 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 39% 53.5%±9.1 51.5%
FH crosscourt 24% 55.3%±10.8 52.7%
FH through the middle 16% 47.6%±12.2 47.0%
BH through the middle 9% 48.1%±14.1 46.8%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 120 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 42% 44.7%±9.8 46.6%
FH through the middle 28% 42.1%±11.2 41.5%
FH down the line 27% 38.4%±11.1 44.7%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 111 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 36% 47.3%±10.6 46.9%
BH through the middle 21% 47.9%±12.5 43.0%
BH down the line 15% 48.2%±13.5 44.2%
BH slice through the middle 9% 25.0%±13.0 32.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −5 How much less varied Juan Ignacio Londero's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 80 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 16% ▼ 69% / 73%
Body 15% 16% 62% / 63%
T 43% 68% ▲ 72% / 75%

337 normal · 19 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 51% 51% 68% / 73%
Body 6% 13% 62% / 63%
T 43% 36% 70% / 72%

268 normal · 61 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
Wide41% 59.3%±6.1 n=146 41%
Body15% 62.6%±8.7 n=53 2% ▼
T44% 59.1%±5.9 n=157 57% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.68).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide51% 61.4%±5.7 n=169 60% ▲
Body7% 58.9%±11.1 n=23 0% ▼
T42% 56.8%±6.3 n=137 40% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.58).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.48 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: +2.9±6.7 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. (262 repeats, 405 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 29 34% −2.9±10.1
1stAd courtT 73 30% +1.5±7.4
1stAd courtWide 98 30% +2.6±6.7
1stDeuce courtBody 40 30% −6.7±9.0
1stDeuce courtT 105 25% −0.2±6.1
1stDeuce courtWide 89 31% +4.0±7.0
2ndAd courtBody 23 51% +1.2±11.3
2ndAd courtT 23 49% −0.6±11.3
2ndAd courtWide 78 54% +5.8±7.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 45 53% +3.9±9.5
2ndDeuce courtT 56 59% +9.5±8.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 17 50% +1.8±12.0

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 5.5% · won 69% · +4.5±10.4 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 8.0% · won 61% · −4.2±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 5.5% · won 55% · −10.3±11.1 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 7.1% · won 37% · +0.4±11.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 8.7% · won 49% · +4.9±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 44% · +0.5±11.7 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 7.9% · won 41% · −2.6±10.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 38% · −5.5±11.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Juan Ignacio Londero 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 crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.2% · won 56% · +7.4±12.5 vs own baseline · +14.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.2% · won 52% · +2.8±12.6 vs own baseline · +2.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 51% · +1.6±12.7 vs own baseline · +6.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Hugo Dellien (5/9)
  4. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.0% · won 51% · +1.7±13.0 vs own baseline · +0.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 49% · −0.3±11.2 vs own baseline · −0.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Felix Auger Aliassime (3/6)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.0% · won 48% · −0.8±13.0 vs own baseline · −0.1 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 · rally+1.2176
FH to their backhand · serve +1+0.3160
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.2156
FH to the middle · return−0.4125
FH to their backhand · rally−0.8233

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−3.2147
FH to their backhand · rally−1.8132
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.2150
BH to the middle · return−0.8163
T 1st serve · deuce court+0.2158

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Roberto Carballes Baena, Roberto Bautista Agut, Miomir Kecmanovic, Pedro Martinez, Camilo Ugo Carabelli

Tactical fingerprint

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

Forehand share64%
Run-around forehands33%
FH down the line36%
Deep returns36%
Unforced errors / shot12.3%
Point-ending shots28.8%
Drop shots / shot2.6%
T serves · ad42%
Wide serves · ad51%
Avg rally length4.0
BH down the line20%
T serves · deuce44%
Wide serves · deuce41%
Serve & volley0%
1st serve in59%
Backhand slice13%
Points at net8%
Through the middle22%
Chipped returns8%

Plays most like

  1. Aleksandar Vukic 2019–2025 plan v
  2. J J Wolf 2022–2024 plan v
  3. Guy Den Ouden 2024–2026 plan v
  4. Kyle Edmund 2016–2023 plan v
  5. Marin Cilic 2009–2026 plan v
  6. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v
  7. Thiago Seyboth Wild 2019–2026 plan v
  8. Thanasi Kokkinakis 2013–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  2. Fernando Gonzalez 2000–2010
  3. Sebastien Grosjean 1999–2005

Charted matches