RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 12 charted matches · 2016–2023

Kyle Edmund

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.6% ±3.1 raw 61.2% · tour 63.4% · 891 points
Return points won 38.7% ±3.2 raw 36.5% · tour 36.6% · 892 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 +0.02 ±0.07 better than 63% of ATP · raw +0.02
Shot selection +0.30 ±0.21 better than 80% of ATP · raw +0.30
Execution −1.13 ±0.76 better than 21% of ATP · raw −1.21
Tactical adaptability +0.06 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 12 matches
Adaptation speed +0.09 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.31 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 83% 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 4,416 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Kyle Edmund 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 · 308 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 44% 44.2%±6.6 47.6%
BH through the middle 18% 31.7%±8.8 43.7%
BH down the line 12% 47.0%±10.8 46.4%
FH inside-out 11% 53.5%±11.3 51.8%
BH slice through the middle 5% 35.4%±13.5 35.1%
FH inside-in 5% 52.7%±14.1 54.7%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 31.8%±13.3 42.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 205 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 26% 46.7%±9.5 52.7%
FH down the line 26% 44.2%±9.6 51.5%
FH through the middle 16% 52.7%±11.4 47.0%
BH through the middle 12% 48.6%±12.4 46.8%
BH crosscourt 12% 49.6%±12.4 49.1%
BH down the line 6% 47.4%±14.3 48.3%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 165 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 48% 40.7%±8.1 46.6%
FH down the line 29% 47.0%±10.0 44.7%
FH through the middle 23% 35.0%±10.3 41.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 137 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 45% 41.0%±8.9 48.0%
BH down the line 17% 44.9%±12.5 46.5%
BH through the middle 16% 35.2%±12.1 43.8%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +5 How much less varied Kyle Edmund's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 77 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 44% 40% 71% / 73%
Body 6% 15% ▲ 56% / 63%
T 49% 45% 75% / 75%

451 normal · 20 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 53% 46% 73% / 73%
Body 9% 4% 55% / 63%
T 38% 51% ▲ 69% / 72%

363 normal · 57 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
Wide44% 60.4%±5.2 n=208 38% ▼
Body7% 62.1%±10.2 n=31 0% ▼
T49% 62.5%±4.9 n=232 62% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.87).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide52% 60.7%±5.1 n=218 47% ▼
Body8% 51.0%±10.2 n=35 0% ▼
T40% 64.0%±5.6 n=167 53% ▲

Off equilibrium (p = 0.047): serve T more. Gap 2.8 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.47 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: −5.8±5.9 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. (311 repeats, 556 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 24 43% +5.8±11.1
1stAd courtT 103 26% −2.2±6.2
1stAd courtWide 131 30% +2.7±5.9
1stDeuce courtBody 36 36% −0.3±9.7
1stDeuce courtT 132 25% −0.1±5.6
1stDeuce courtWide 111 24% −3.0±5.9
2ndAd courtBody 43 50% +1.1±9.6
2ndAd courtT 31 47% −2.1±10.5
2ndAd courtWide 91 44% −4.1±7.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 62 58% +9.4±8.5
2ndDeuce courtT 83 49% −0.2±7.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 44 48% −0.2±9.6

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 70% · +1.4±9.9 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 68% · −0.4±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.9% · won 63% · −5.4±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.4% · won 63% · −5.9±10.2 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 3.1% · won 60% · −8.6±11.3 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 7.5% · won 46% · +5.3±10.8 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 6.1% · won 47% · +5.9±11.5 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 6.4% · won 44% · +3.1±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 6.6% · won 43% · +2.3±11.1 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 5.5% · won 38% · −2.2±11.5 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 3.4% · won 47% · +5.3±11.4 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 46% · +4.3±11.5 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.9% · won 45% · +3.2±10.5 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 8.0% · won 44% · +1.9±8.9 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 6.6% · won 44% · +1.9±9.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Kyle Edmund 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 49% · +3.1±11.9 vs own baseline · +3.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 47% · +1.7±12.9 vs own baseline · +1.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jannik Sinner (4/9)
  3. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 47% · +1.3±11.4 vs own baseline · −0.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jannik Sinner (1/6)
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 46% · −0.2±9.8 vs own baseline · −2.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daniil Medvedev (1/12), Marton Fucsovics (3/6)
  5. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 45% · −0.3±12.2 vs own baseline · +0.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 45% · −0.3±12.2 vs own baseline · −8.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jannik Sinner (1/7)

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 the middle · return+1.0179
BH to the middle · rally+0.3122
FH to their backhand · rally+0.1302
FH to their forehand · rally±0.0255
FH to their forehand · serve +1−0.4144

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · rally−1.6228
BH to the middle · return−1.2184
FH to their forehand · serve +1−0.9127
FH to their forehand · rally−0.4235
BH to their backhand · rally−0.4234

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Adrian Andreev, Alex Molcan, Rafael Nadal, Hugo Gaston, Daniel Evans

Tactical fingerprint

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

Forehand share59%
Run-around forehands28%
T serves · deuce49%
Unforced errors / shot11.2%
Point-ending shots26.4%
FH down the line33%
Wide serves · ad52%
BH down the line22%
T serves · ad40%
Wide serves · deuce44%
Deep returns27%
Chipped returns14%
Avg rally length3.8
Serve & volley0%
Backhand slice14%
Through the middle22%
Points at net7%
1st serve in58%
Drop shots / shot0.5%

Plays most like

  1. Marin Cilic 2009–2026 plan v
  2. Aleksandar Vukic 2019–2025 plan v
  3. Andrey Rublev 2015–2026 plan v
  4. David Goffin 2013–2025 plan v
  5. Thanasi Kokkinakis 2013–2024 plan v
  6. Jo Wilfried Tsonga 2007–2022 plan v
  7. James Blake 2002–2011 plan v
  8. Robin Soderling 2004–2011 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Magnus Norman 2000–2001
  2. Sebastien Grosjean 1999–2005
  3. Jim Courier 1989–1999

Charted matches