RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 6 charted matches · 2019–2026

Kamil Majchrzak

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 65.7% ±3.4 raw 65.3% · tour 63.4% · 539 points
Return points won 41.8% ±3.6 raw 38.8% · tour 36.6% · 539 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 ±0.14 better than 55% of ATP · raw −0.01
Shot selection −0.06 ±0.20 better than 45% of ATP · raw −0.07
Execution +0.49 ±0.78 better than 84% of ATP · raw +0.46

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 2,627 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Kamil Majchrzak 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 · 132 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 50% 52.9%±8.9 47.6%
BH through the middle 20% 51.6%±12.1 43.7%
BH down the line 18% 50.6%±12.4 46.4%
BH slice down the line 8% 33.6%±14.0 37.1%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 97 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 25% 53.0%±12.4 51.5%
BH crosscourt 20% 48.3%±13.2 49.1%
FH through the middle 16% 48.3%±13.7 47.0%
FH crosscourt 14% 54.5%±14.0 52.7%
BH through the middle 13% 52.6%±14.3 46.8%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 91 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 52.1%±10.4 46.6%
FH through the middle 30% 45.3%±11.9 41.5%
FH down the line 24% 54.6%±12.6 44.7%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle

position worth 54% to the average player · 80 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 26% 57.8%±12.7 53.4%
BH crosscourt 18% 43.8%±14.0 49.5%
FH through the middle 16% 49.9%±14.3 47.3%

Serve under pressure

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 43% 50% 68% / 73%
Body 13% 0% ▼ 63% / 63%
T 45% 50% 74% / 75%

277 normal · 8 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 60% 69% ▲ 79% / 73%
Body 6% 0% 65% / 63%
T 34% 31% 63% / 72%

227 normal · 26 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
Wide43% 61.1%±6.5 n=122 42%
Body12% 61.7%±9.9 n=35 0% ▼
T45% 65.7%±6.2 n=128 58% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.60).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide61% 69.8%±5.6 n=154 74% ▲
Body5% 68.1%±11.7 n=13 0% ▼
T34% 63.8%±7.3 n=86 26% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.46).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.52 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: +4.1±9.5 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. (213 repeats, 313 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 13 42% +5.1±12.4
1stAd courtT 78 27% −0.8±7.0
1stAd courtWide 69 29% +2.2±7.5
1stDeuce courtBody 10 35% −1.7±12.4
1stDeuce courtT 71 21% −3.8±6.7
1stDeuce courtWide 96 26% −0.9±6.5
2ndAd courtBody 26 57% +7.4±10.9
2ndAd courtT 37 55% +5.6±10.0
2ndAd courtWide 31 58% +9.8±10.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 43 57% +8.1±9.5
2ndDeuce courtT 29 47% −2.4±10.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 36 49% +1.0±10.1

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 7.8% · won 76% · +0.3±9.6 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 7.2% · won 73% · −2.5±10.1 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 6.9% · won 70% · −5.0±10.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 9.8% · won 61% · +4.1±10.4 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 6.8% · won 58% · +1.2±11.6 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 12.8% · won 56% · −1.0±9.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Kamil Majchrzak 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 1.3% · won 61% · +6.6±12.4 vs own baseline · +18.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Matteo Berrettini (6/10)
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 58% · +4.0±11.6 vs own baseline · +13.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tallon Griekspoor (3/6), Jannik Sinner (4/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 1.3% · won 57% · +3.2±12.7 vs own baseline · +17.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 52% · −1.8±12.6 vs own baseline · +1.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (3/8)
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.7% · won 52% · −2.0±12.0 vs own baseline · +1.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (2/8), Jannik Sinner (3/7)
  6. BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 48% · −6.6±12.9 vs own baseline · −9.7 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

FH to their backhand · rally+1.8124
BH to their backhand · rally+1.1210
FH to their forehand · rally+0.3123
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.5122
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.7128

Most exposed to

Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.8125
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.7133
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.4138
BH to their backhand · rally+0.8133
FH to their forehand · rally+1.5143

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard, Reilly Opelka, Nicolas Jarry, Nick Kyrgios, Maxime Cressy

Charted matches