ATP · Right-handed · 82 charted matches · 1998–2009
Marat Safin
Archetype: Ad-court T server · Two-fisted driver
Against an average opponent
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
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 44,061 shots.
Shot expected value
The share of points Marat Safin 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 · 2,435 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 52% | 48.3%±2.3 | 47.6% |
| BH through the middle | 19% | 44.7%±3.7 | 43.7% |
| BH down the line | 14% | 49.1%±4.4 | 46.4% |
| BH slice crosscourt | 5% | 30.9%±6.3 | 42.5% |
| BH slice through the middle | 3% | 26.8%±7.2 | 35.1% |
| BH slice down the line | 2% | 32.9%±9.8 | 37.1% |
| FH inside-out | 1% | 46.7%±11.6 | 51.8% |
| BH crosscourt + approach | 1% | 68.3%±11.0 | 69.0% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side
position worth 44% to the average player · 2,125 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 43% | 47.5%±2.7 | 46.6% |
| FH down the line | 24% | 44.5%±3.5 | 44.7% |
| FH through the middle | 23% | 36.3%±3.5 | 41.5% |
| FH slice through the middle | 3% | 26.3%±7.8 | 24.5% |
| FH down the line + approach | 3% | 66.9%±8.9 | 69.3% |
| FH slice down the line | 1% | 23.7%±10.2 | 25.6% |
| FH slice crosscourt | 1% | 31.4%±11.8 | 30.9% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle
position worth 51% to the average player · 1,906 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 24% | 49.9%±3.7 | 52.7% |
| BH crosscourt | 17% | 45.9%±4.5 | 49.1% |
| FH through the middle | 16% | 45.9%±4.5 | 47.0% |
| FH down the line | 14% | 43.6%±4.8 | 51.5% |
| BH through the middle | 12% | 44.3%±5.2 | 46.8% |
| BH down the line | 7% | 52.5%±6.8 | 48.3% |
| FH down the line + approach | 4% | 71.7%±7.6 | 70.5% |
| BH crosscourt + approach | 3% | 67.9%±9.2 | 67.7% |
Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side
position worth 46% to the average player · 1,456 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 46% | 45.8%±3.1 | 48.0% |
| BH through the middle | 18% | 45.9%±5.0 | 43.8% |
| BH down the line | 17% | 44.1%±5.0 | 46.5% |
| BH slice crosscourt | 8% | 40.4%±6.8 | 42.1% |
| BH slice through the middle | 5% | 29.1%±8.1 | 35.1% |
| BH slice down the line | 2% | 28.9%±10.0 | 35.8% |
| FH inside-out | 1% | 58.6%±13.7 | 52.6% |
| BH crosscourt + approach | 1% | 66.6%±13.1 | 66.6% |
Serve under pressure
Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Marat Safin's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 623 break-point first serves.
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 36% | 46% ▲ | 76% / 73% |
| Body | 7% | 5% | 67% / 63% |
| T | 57% | 49% ▼ | 77% / 75% |
4,265 normal · 147 break-point 1st serves
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 53% | 55% | 74% / 73% |
| Body | 6% | 6% | 73% / 63% |
| T | 41% | 39% | 75% / 72% |
3,567 normal · 476 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 serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 36% | 66.6%±1.9 n=1,599 | 49% ▲ |
| Body | 7% | 62.4%±4.4 n=305 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 57% | 65.8%±1.5 n=2,508 | 51% ▼ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.28).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 53% | 64.5%±1.7 n=2,134 | 46% ▼ |
| Body | 6% | 66.5%±4.6 n=256 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 41% | 63.5%±1.9 n=1,653 | 54% ▲ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.53).
Optimal mix: +0.1 per 100 first serves.
Exploitability 0.25 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: +0.7±1.7 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. (3,284 repeats, 5,007 switches.)
Return by serve direction
Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.
| Serve | Court | Direction | Points | Won | vs tour | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | Ad court | Body | 230 | 35% | −2.0±4.9 | |
| 1st | Ad court | T | 967 | 27% | −1.0±2.3 | |
| 1st | Ad court | Wide | 1,177 | 29% | +1.4±2.1 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Body | 293 | 36% | −0.5±4.4 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | T | 1,114 | 25% | +0.1±2.1 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Wide | 1,247 | 28% | +0.9±2.1 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Body | 408 | 45% | −4.0±3.9 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | T | 349 | 47% | −2.4±4.2 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Wide | 948 | 49% | +0.2±2.6 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Body | 627 | 48% | −1.4±3.2 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | T | 717 | 52% | +2.1±3.0 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Wide | 453 | 47% | −1.2±3.7 |
Signature patterns
Recurring sequences that win more than Marat Safin's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.
Serve → +1
- T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.8% · won 64% · −3.3±4.9 vs own baseline
- Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.4% · won 58% · −9.9±5.4 vs own baseline
- Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 56% · −12.0±5.2 vs own baseline
- T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 51% · −16.7±5.7 vs own baseline
- T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 54% · −13.2±4.0 vs own baseline
Return
- vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 6.4% · won 51% · +13.5±3.6 vs own baseline
- vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.6% · won 52% · +14.0±5.6 vs own baseline
- vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.3% · won 52% · +14.4±5.8 vs own baseline
- vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.6% · won 49% · +11.4±5.6 vs own baseline
- vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.8% · won 47% · +9.1±4.7 vs own baseline
Rally, consecutive own shots
- FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 54% · +6.8±4.6 vs own baseline
- BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.6% · won 51% · +4.5±3.4 vs own baseline
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 50% · +3.1±4.3 vs own baseline
- BH down the line → FH down the line used 1.6% · won 51% · +4.3±6.1 vs own baseline
- BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 4.8% · won 49% · +2.5±3.7 vs own baseline
Discovered sequences
Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Marat Safin wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.
- FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 68% · +19.7±9.5 vs own baseline · +7.2 vs tour on the same sequence
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line + approach used 0.3% · won 63% · +15.0±8.4 vs own baseline · −1.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Lleyton Hewitt (3/7), Roger Federer (5/8)
- FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → BH crosscourt + approach used 0.2% · won 63% · +15.5±10.0 vs own baseline · +3.6 vs tour on the same sequence
- FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 54% · +6.2±5.6 vs own baseline · +6.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tommy Haas (3/8), Lleyton Hewitt (12/27)
- FH crosscourt + approach → FH crosscourt → FH volley down the line used 0.2% · won 62% · +13.6±9.9 vs own baseline · +6.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Felix Mantilla (6/8)
- FH down the line → BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 60% · +12.0±9.6 vs own baseline · +15.9 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
| T 2nd serve · deuce court | +1.6 | 828 |
| Body 1st serve · deuce court | +1.5 | 305 |
| Body 2nd serve · ad court | +1.5 | 542 |
| Body 2nd serve · deuce court | +1.2 | 714 |
| Wide 2nd serve · deuce court | +1.2 | 344 |
Most exposed to
| BH volley to their forehand · rally | −3.5 | 142 |
| FH volley to their forehand · rally | −2.8 | 147 |
| BH slice to their backhand · serve +1 | −2.2 | 169 |
| BH slice to the middle · rally | −1.7 | 498 |
| Body 1st serve · deuce court | −1.7 | 375 |
Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Rafael Nadal, Casper Ruud, Carlos Alcaraz, Alex De Minaur, Dominic Thiem
Tactical fingerprint
Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the ATP average, in standard deviations.
| T serves · deuce | 57% | |
| Wide serves · ad | 53% | |
| Points at net | 14% | |
| T serves · ad | 41% | |
| Unforced errors / shot | 10.3% | |
| Avg rally length | 4.0 | |
| Point-ending shots | 24.2% | |
| Deep returns | 27% | |
| FH down the line | 30% | |
| Serve & volley | 4% | |
| BH down the line | 19% | |
| Drop shots / shot | 1.1% | |
| Through the middle | 22% | |
| Chipped returns | 9% | |
| Backhand slice | 12% | |
| Forehand share | 49% | |
| Run-around forehands | 8% | |
| Wide serves · deuce | 36% | |
| 1st serve in | 56% |
Plays most like
- Nicolas Almagro 2006–2019 plan v
- Sebastian Korda 2021–2026 plan v
- David Nalbandian 2002–2012 plan v
- Borna Coric 2015–2025 plan v
- David Goffin 2013–2025 plan v
- Marcos Baghdatis 2004–2019 plan v
- Viktor Troicki 2009–2021 plan v
- Janko Tipsarevic 2007–2019 plan v
Closest from another era
- Sebastian Korda 2021–2026
- Borna Coric 2015–2025
- David Goffin 2013–2025
Charted matches
- Marat Safin v Juan Martin Del Potro L Paris Masters R32 · Hard · 10 Nov 2009
- Marat Safin v Fernando Gonzalez W Beijing R32 · Hard · 8 Oct 2009
- Roger Federer v Marat Safin L Australian Open R32 · Hard · 23 Jan 2009
- Marat Safin v Nikolay Davydenko W Moscow QF · Hard · 31 Oct 2008
- Roger Federer v Marat Safin L Wimbledon SF · Grass · 4 Jul 2008
- Stan Wawrinka v Marat Safin W Wimbledon R16 · Grass · 30 Jun 2008
- Novak Djokovic v Marat Safin W Wimbledon R64 · Grass · 27 Jun 2008
- Marat Safin v Nikolay Davydenko L Roland Garros R64 · Clay · 29 May 2008
- Marat Safin v Marcos Baghdatis L Australian Open R64 · Hard · 17 Jan 2008
- Roger Federer v Marat Safin L Wimbledon R32 · Grass · 29 Jun 2007
- Aisam Ul Haq Qureshi v Marat Safin W Wimbledon R64 · Grass · 28 Jun 2007
- Nicolas Massu v Marat Safin W Hamburg Masters R64 · Clay · 17 May 2007