RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 10 charted matches · 1992–1996

Malivai Washington

Archetype: Serve-and-volleyer · Net rusher

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 62.6% ±3.3 raw 61.9% · tour 63.4% · 901 points
Return points won 37.2% ±3.4 raw 32.0% · tour 36.6% · 872 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 −0.10 ±0.18 better than 32% of ATP · raw −0.10
Shot selection −0.64 ±0.23 better than 7% of ATP · raw −0.64
Execution +0.25 ±0.81 better than 78% of ATP · raw +0.29
Points left on the table 3.71 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 6% 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 3,546 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Malivai Washington 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 · 140 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 34% 39.0%±9.7 47.6%
BH slice crosscourt 26% 43.0%±10.8 42.5%
BH through the middle 20% 39.1%±11.6 43.7%
BH slice through the middle 15% 26.9%±11.4 35.1%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 85 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 53% 43.6%±10.1 46.6%
FH down the line 28% 38.5%±12.1 44.7%
FH through the middle 19% 36.9%±13.2 41.5%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 64 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 41% 44.8%±12.1 48.0%
BH slice crosscourt 23% 41.2%±13.7 42.1%
BH down the line 16% 44.3%±14.9 46.5%

Return +1: volley to your backhand side, opponent at net

position worth 33% to the average player · 61 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH down the line 38% 34.5%±11.9 39.2%
BH crosscourt 25% 44.8%±13.8 43.4%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +7 How much less varied Malivai Washington's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 78 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 39% 40% 74% / 73%
Body 10% 20% ▲ 57% / 63%
T 51% 40% ▼ 72% / 75%

430 normal · 25 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 38% 73% / 73%
Body 11% 4% 58% / 63%
T 47% 58% ▲ 64% / 72%

358 normal · 53 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
Wide39% 66.7%±5.4 n=178 52% ▲
Body10% 59.6%±9.3 n=46 0% ▼
T51% 63.1%±4.9 n=231 48% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.36).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide42% 65.0%±5.5 n=172 55% ▲
Body10% 54.1%±9.7 n=41 0% ▼
T48% 53.3%±5.4 n=198 45% ▼

Off equilibrium (p = 0.014): serve wide more. Gap 6.7 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.68 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: −3.2±8.9 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. (276 repeats, 570 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 30 30% −6.8±9.7
1stAd courtT 98 22% −5.8±6.0
1stAd courtWide 116 22% −5.2±5.6
1stDeuce courtBody 57 32% −4.5±8.2
1stDeuce courtT 96 23% −1.6±6.2
1stDeuce courtWide 101 25% −2.6±6.2
2ndAd courtBody 54 51% +1.6±9.0
2ndAd courtT 27 49% −0.5±10.9
2ndAd courtWide 79 51% +2.6±7.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 87 44% −4.8±7.6
2ndDeuce courtT 48 47% −2.4±9.3
2ndDeuce courtWide 46 44% −4.1±9.4

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 5.0% · won 63% · −13.2±10.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 5.6% · won 37% · +5.5±11.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. Not enough data

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

T 1st serve · deuce court±0.0231
Wide 2nd serve · ad court−0.1128
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.4178
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.0172
BH to the middle · return−1.8173

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−2.3143
FH to their backhand · rally−2.2130
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.6180
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.0172
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.3187

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.

Points at net21%
Serve & volley34%
T serves · ad48%
Point-ending shots30.6%
Backhand slice38%
Unforced errors / shot12.2%
T serves · deuce51%
BH down the line24%
FH down the line31%
Through the middle23%
Wide serves · deuce39%
Chipped returns8%
Run-around forehands10%
1st serve in58%
Drop shots / shot0.2%
Wide serves · ad42%
Avg rally length3.1
Deep returns14%
Forehand share43%

Plays most like

  1. Todd Martin 1992–2001 plan v
  2. Guy Forget 1991–1996 plan v
  3. Michael Stich 1990–1997 plan v
  4. Jonas Bjorkman 1997–2006 plan v
  5. Boris Becker 1985–1999 plan v
  6. Pete Sampras 1990–2002 plan v
  7. Mark Philippoussis 1995–2003 plan v
  8. Mario Ancic 2002–2008 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Mischa Zverev 2013–2020
  2. Radek Stepanek 2004–2014
  3. Jan Lennard Struff 2014–2025

Charted matches