RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 9 charted matches · 2021–2025

Juan Pablo Varillas

Archetype: Ad-court T server · Two-fisted driver

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.5% ±3.2 raw 60.6% · tour 63.4% · 856 points
Return points won 37.4% ±3.4 raw 36.1% · tour 36.6% · 809 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 −0.06 ±0.13 better than 43% of ATP · raw −0.06
Shot selection +0.37 ±0.13 better than 84% of ATP · raw +0.36
Execution −0.07 ±0.85 better than 65% of ATP · raw −0.09
Points left on the table 2.44 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 69% 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 4,499 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Juan Pablo Varillas 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 · 346 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 44.3%±6.7 47.6%
BH through the middle 26% 33.1%±7.4 43.7%
BH down the line 13% 43.3%±10.3 46.4%
FH inside-out 9% 52.6%±11.4 51.8%
FH inside-in 5% 53.9%±13.5 54.7%
FH through the middle 4% 51.6%±14.3 45.2%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 260 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 30% 52.3%±8.3 51.5%
FH crosscourt 27% 56.8%±8.6 52.7%
BH through the middle 16% 39.9%±10.3 46.8%
FH through the middle 13% 43.3%±11.1 47.0%
BH crosscourt 8% 45.9%±12.8 49.1%
BH down the line 7% 45.0%±13.5 48.3%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 223 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 38% 44.4%±8.1 46.6%
FH down the line 33% 49.9%±8.6 44.7%
FH through the middle 23% 36.1%±9.4 41.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 165 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 35% 45.6%±9.3 48.0%
BH through the middle 22% 41.7%±10.7 43.8%
BH down the line 20% 42.1%±11.2 46.5%
FH inside-out 7% 51.6%±14.5 52.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −5 How much less varied Juan Pablo Varillas's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 84 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 41% 72% / 73%
Body 8% 9% 54% / 63%
T 51% 50% 68% / 75%

422 normal · 22 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 52% 40% ▼ 66% / 73%
Body 7% 10% 66% / 63%
T 41% 50% ▲ 73% / 72%

350 normal · 62 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% 62.3%±5.5 n=180 54% ▲
Body8% 52.2%±10.0 n=37 0% ▼
T51% 60.0%±5.0 n=227 46% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.15).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 58.1%±5.3 n=208 44% ▼
Body7% 63.6%±10.3 n=29 0% ▼
T42% 64.6%±5.5 n=175 56% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.27).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.53 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: −1.1±5.1 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. (340 repeats, 498 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 18 36% −1.4±11.4
1stAd courtT 113 25% −3.3±5.9
1stAd courtWide 110 28% +0.7±6.2
1stDeuce courtBody 28 33% −3.9±10.1
1stDeuce courtT 116 24% −0.7±5.8
1stDeuce courtWide 122 22% −4.7±5.6
2ndAd courtBody 36 54% +4.9±10.1
2ndAd courtT 10 47% −2.3±13.0
2ndAd courtWide 99 54% +5.5±7.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 39 58% +8.5±9.8
2ndDeuce courtT 92 51% +1.0±7.4
2ndDeuce courtWide 26 51% +2.7±11.0

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 64% · −1.1±10.5 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.8% · won 64% · −1.2±10.8 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 3.5% · won 61% · −4.5±11.2 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 59% · −6.1±11.5 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 4.0% · won 59% · −6.0±10.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 6.9% · won 56% · +15.4±10.6 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 11.4% · won 47% · +5.5±9.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 5.9% · won 44% · +3.2±11.0 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 6.6% · won 44% · +2.6±10.7 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 5.5% · won 38% · −2.7±11.1 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 62% · +15.5±10.1 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → FH inside-out used 2.5% · won 58% · +12.1±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 53% · +7.2±11.0 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.9% · won 51% · +4.9±8.8 vs own baseline
  5. BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 53% · +7.3±11.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 57% · +9.1±11.4 vs own baseline · +16.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Dominic Thiem (5/9), Hubert Hurkacz (8/12)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 58% · +10.4±12.4 vs own baseline · +20.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Hubert Hurkacz (5/6)
  3. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.0% · won 56% · +8.3±11.6 vs own baseline · +11.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Juan Carlos Prado Angelo (5/9)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 53% · +5.9±12.8 vs own baseline · +7.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.9% · won 52% · +4.3±11.9 vs own baseline · +3.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alexander Zverev (4/8), Juan Carlos Prado Angelo (6/9)
  6. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.7% · won 52% · +4.6±12.7 vs own baseline · +4.8 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 their forehand · serve +1+2.0151
BH to their backhand · return+1.6125
FH to their backhand · rally+1.2385
BH to their backhand · rally+1.2261
FH to their backhand · serve +1+0.9205

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−2.6304
BH to the middle · rally−2.1142
FH to their forehand · serve +1−1.7134
BH to their backhand · return−1.3146
FH to their backhand · rally−1.2257

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 share60%
Avg rally length4.8
Run-around forehands31%
FH down the line36%
T serves · deuce51%
T serves · ad42%
Deep returns28%
Wide serves · ad50%
Through the middle25%
1st serve in61%
BH down the line19%
Unforced errors / shot9.3%
Drop shots / shot1.1%
Wide serves · deuce41%
Serve & volley0%
Point-ending shots20.0%
Backhand slice11%
Points at net7%
Chipped returns4%

Plays most like

  1. Andrey Rublev 2015–2026 plan v
  2. Borna Coric 2015–2025 plan v
  3. Aleksandar Vukic 2019–2025 plan v
  4. David Goffin 2013–2025 plan v
  5. Nicolas Almagro 2006–2019 plan v
  6. Kyle Edmund 2016–2023 plan v
  7. J J Wolf 2022–2024 plan v
  8. Jack Draper 2022–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Nikolay Davydenko 2002–2014
  2. Juan Carlos Ferrero 2000–2009
  3. Magnus Norman 2000–2001

Charted matches