RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 9 charted matches · 2024–2025

Karue Sell

Archetype: Grinder · Ad-court T server

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.1% ±3.7 raw 63.1% · tour 63.4% · 526 points
Return points won 39.3% ±3.7 raw 42.3% · tour 36.6% · 549 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 +0.13 ±0.07 better than 87% of ATP · raw +0.14
Shot selection +0.64 ±0.22 better than 97% of ATP · raw +0.66
Execution −1.33 ±0.41 better than 15% of ATP · raw −0.88
Points left on the table 2.20 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 93% 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 3,156 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Karue Sell 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 · 207 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 50% 55.3%±7.3 47.6%
BH through the middle 22% 42.7%±10.1 43.7%
BH down the line 14% 49.5%±11.7 46.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 169 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 31% 50.1%±9.6 52.7%
FH down the line 26% 64.5%±9.8 51.5%
BH crosscourt 11% 53.4%±13.1 49.1%
FH through the middle 11% 51.1%±13.3 47.0%
BH through the middle 8% 46.6%±14.3 46.8%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 163 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 44% 44.3%±8.6 46.6%
FH through the middle 29% 40.1%±9.8 41.5%
FH down the line 18% 33.9%±11.0 44.7%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 122 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 52% 53.1%±9.0 48.0%
BH through the middle 30% 43.5%±10.8 43.8%
BH down the line 11% 45.0%±14.0 46.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +14 How much less varied Karue Sell's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 45 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 58% 56% 69% / 73%
Body 11% 6% 62% / 63%
T 32% 38% 79% / 75%

263 normal · 16 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 62% ▲ 74% / 73%
Body 18% 7% ▼ 63% / 63%
T 42% 31% ▼ 68% / 72%

216 normal · 29 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
Wide58% 61.6%±5.8 n=161 55% ▼
Body10% 60.8%±10.5 n=29 0% ▼
T32% 68.8%±7.0 n=89 45% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.23).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide43% 60.2%±6.9 n=106 44%
Body16% 65.1%±9.4 n=40 3% ▼
T40% 62.4%±7.0 n=99 53% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.67).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.62 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: −3.0±8.8 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. (163 repeats, 343 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 22 35% −2.2±10.9
1stAd courtT 68 38% +10.1±8.1
1stAd courtWide 62 35% +7.7±8.2
1stDeuce courtBody 48 44% +6.9±9.2
1stDeuce courtT 45 23% −1.7±8.0
1stDeuce courtWide 84 28% +1.0±6.9
2ndAd courtBody 47 52% +2.3±9.4
2ndAd courtT 5 54% +4.4±13.9
2ndAd courtWide 56 49% +1.1±8.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 68 53% +3.7±8.3
2ndDeuce courtT 31 46% −3.9±10.5
2ndDeuce courtWide 13 52% +4.1±12.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 7.1% · won 63% · −5.1±11.3 vs own baseline

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.8% · won 59% · +6.0±10.1 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 59% · +5.2±10.7 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 4.2% · won 58% · +4.8±11.0 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 3.4% · won 58% · +4.6±11.6 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.1% · won 56% · +2.6±10.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 58% · +7.0±9.6 vs own baseline · +13.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jesper De Jong (0/6), Camilo Ugo Carabelli (6/10)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 61% · +9.2±11.9 vs own baseline · +22.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 56% · +4.8±12.0 vs own baseline · +13.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Camilo Ugo Carabelli (4/7)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 54% · +2.2±10.1 vs own baseline · +6.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Nishesh Basavareddy (1/9), Evan Zhu (7/13)
  5. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 54% · +2.8±12.4 vs own baseline · +3.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 53% · +1.8±12.5 vs own baseline · +8.9 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+0.3251
BH to their backhand · rally±0.0244
FH to their backhand · rally−1.2251
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−2.0161

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · rally−1.6193
FH to their backhand · rally−0.5180
BH to the middle · return−0.4121
BH to the middle · rally−0.1150
FH to their forehand · rally+0.2247

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Richard Gasquet, Nishesh Basavareddy, Arthur Cazaux, Jaume Munar, Daniel Evans

Tactical fingerprint

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

Wide serves · deuce58%
Avg rally length4.7
Deep returns31%
Forehand share56%
FH down the line33%
Points at net14%
T serves · ad40%
Drop shots / shot1.3%
Serve & volley4%
BH down the line19%
Point-ending shots21.5%
Run-around forehands14%
Unforced errors / shot8.2%
Backhand slice10%
1st serve in58%
Chipped returns6%
Wide serves · ad43%
Through the middle20%
T serves · deuce32%

Plays most like

  1. Nishesh Basavareddy 2024–2025 plan v
  2. Tommy Paul 2016–2026 plan v
  3. Magnus Norman 2000–2001 plan v
  4. Jaume Munar 2018–2026 plan v
  5. Roman Safiullin 2017–2025 plan v
  6. Tomas Berdych 2005–2019 plan v
  7. Arnaud Clement 1999–2006 plan v
  8. Frances Tiafoe 2016–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  2. Arnaud Clement 1999–2006
  3. Thomas Johansson 1996–2005

Charted matches