RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 11 charted matches · 2024–2026

Juncheng Shang

Archetype: Avoids the wide serve · Ad-court slider

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.1% ±3.2 raw 61.2% · tour 63.4% · 887 points
Return points won 37.6% ±3.3 raw 36.5% · tour 36.6% · 853 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 −0.21 ±0.13 better than 13% of ATP · raw −0.21
Shot selection +0.51 ±0.30 better than 94% of ATP · raw +0.52
Execution −0.47 ±0.59 better than 46% of ATP · raw −0.31
Tactical adaptability −0.03 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 11 matches
Adaptation speed −0.10 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 3.00 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 19% 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 4,900 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Juncheng Shang 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 forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 274 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 32% 53.1%±7.9 46.6%
FH through the middle 15% 46.4%±10.5 41.5%
FH down the line 14% 44.0%±10.6 44.7%
BH inside-in 13% 54.2%±11.0 46.7%
BH through the middle 13% 42.9%±11.0 43.1%
BH inside-out 6% 58.6%±13.5 45.4%
FH slice through the middle 4% 25.5%±12.9 24.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 256 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 26% 47.5%±8.8 51.5%
FH crosscourt 24% 54.3%±9.0 52.7%
FH through the middle 19% 53.5%±9.9 47.0%
BH through the middle 13% 48.8%±11.2 46.8%
BH crosscourt 10% 46.3%±12.2 49.1%
BH down the line 8% 54.1%±13.0 48.3%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 251 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 24% 58.7%±9.0 47.6%
BH through the middle 22% 43.1%±9.3 43.7%
BH down the line 16% 45.5%±10.6 46.4%
FH inside-in 14% 51.7%±11.0 54.7%
FH inside-out 10% 54.2%±12.2 51.8%
FH through the middle 7% 52.7%±13.3 45.2%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 173 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 25% 45.4%±10.3 48.0%
BH through the middle 21% 45.2%±10.8 43.8%
FH inside-in 17% 61.7%±11.3 54.3%
BH down the line 17% 53.7%±11.7 46.5%
FH through the middle 10% 57.3%±13.4 46.1%
FH inside-out 10% 55.5%±13.4 52.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +3 How much less varied Juncheng Shang's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 86 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 35% 32% 74% / 73%
Body 13% 21% ▲ 60% / 63%
T 52% 47% 67% / 75%

445 normal · 19 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 54% 61% 65% / 73%
Body 16% 16% 68% / 63%
T 30% 22% 72% / 72%

353 normal · 67 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
Wide35% 64.2%±5.7 n=161 48% ▲
Body13% 58.3%±8.5 n=62 0% ▼
T52% 59.6%±4.9 n=241 52%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.43).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide55% 59.2%±5.0 n=231 55%
Body16% 65.2%±7.9 n=69 3% ▼
T29% 62.8%±6.5 n=120 42% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.41).
Optimal mix: +0.4 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: −0.4±4.3 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. (312 repeats, 550 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 48 37% +0.3±9.0
1stAd courtT 96 27% −1.5±6.5
1stAd courtWide 108 31% +4.0±6.5
1stDeuce courtBody 28 35% −2.2±10.3
1stDeuce courtT 134 22% −2.8±5.3
1stDeuce courtWide 145 30% +2.6±5.7
2ndAd courtBody 32 50% +0.3±10.4
2ndAd courtT 68 51% +1.5±8.3
2ndAd courtWide 55 50% +1.6±8.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 35 50% +1.3±10.2
2ndDeuce courtT 23 56% +6.7±11.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 81 48% +0.1±7.8

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 71% · +5.3±10.3 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 5.9% · won 63% · −3.3±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.4% · won 62% · −3.9±10.7 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 4.0% · won 61% · −5.3±10.9 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 7.9% · won 62% · −4.0±8.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 5.7% · won 57% · +12.6±11.3 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 5.2% · won 54% · +9.0±11.6 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 6.0% · won 53% · +7.8±11.2 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 6.0% · won 53% · +7.8±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 5.0% · won 49% · +4.0±11.7 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 4.5% · won 59% · +4.2±9.9 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.2% · won 58% · +3.5±9.4 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → FH through the middle used 2.7% · won 58% · +3.8±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.7% · won 56% · +1.8±10.4 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → BH through the middle used 3.6% · won 56% · +1.0±10.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH down the line → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 58% · +6.0±12.1 vs own baseline · +10.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.1% · won 56% · +4.2±11.6 vs own baseline · +6.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roberto Carballes Baena (5/7)
  3. FH through the middle → FH down the line → BH inside-in used 0.7% · won 56% · +4.3±12.8 vs own baseline · +9.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tomas Machac (3/6), Roberto Carballes Baena (5/7)
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 54% · +3.0±11.2 vs own baseline · +8.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Nishesh Basavareddy (4/8), Frances Tiafoe (6/9)
  5. BH down the line → BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 53% · +1.4±12.0 vs own baseline · +7.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Frances Tiafoe (3/7), Mackenzie Mcdonald (3/6)
  6. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH through the middle used 0.8% · won 51% · −0.6±12.6 vs own baseline · +3.0 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 their forehand · rally+4.6221
BH to the middle · rally+1.9220
FH to the middle · return+1.6185
FH to their backhand · rally+1.0439
BH to the middle · return+0.7183

Most exposed to

BH to the middle · return−3.7219
T 1st serve · deuce court−2.3203
BH to the middle · rally−2.2159
BH to their forehand · rally−1.9183
FH to the middle · rally−1.8182

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.

Run-around forehands41%
Forehand share61%
T serves · deuce52%
Deep returns34%
Avg rally length4.6
Through the middle28%
Wide serves · ad55%
Drop shots / shot2.1%
1st serve in62%
Point-ending shots22.9%
BH down the line18%
Serve & volley1%
Unforced errors / shot9.0%
Chipped returns8%
Points at net7%
Backhand slice10%
FH down the line25%
Wide serves · deuce35%
T serves · ad29%

Plays most like

  1. Daniel Elahi Galan 2020–2025 plan v
  2. Pablo Cuevas 2015–2021 plan v
  3. Thiago Monteiro 2019–2026 plan v
  4. Cristian Garin 2018–2025 plan v
  5. Luciano Darderi 2022–2026 plan v
  6. Cameron Norrie 2015–2026 plan v
  7. Nicolas Massu 2000–2009 plan v
  8. Federico Delbonis 2013–2023 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Nicolas Massu 2000–2009
  2. Juan Carlos Ferrero 2000–2009
  3. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005

Charted matches