RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 82 charted matches · 1998–2009

Marat Safin

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 67.0% ±2.2 raw 65.2% · tour 63.4% · 8,693 points
Return points won 39.3% ±2.4 raw 36.1% · tour 36.6% · 8,709 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 +0.12 ±0.04 better than 84% of ATP · raw +0.12
Shot selection −0.07 ±0.10 better than 44% of ATP · raw −0.07
Execution −0.19 ±0.22 better than 58% of ATP · raw −0.21
Tactical adaptability +0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 82 matches
Adaptation speed +0.06 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution +0.27 ±0.46 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 5,143 shots · better than 93% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.39 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 74% 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 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

OptionUsedWin %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

OptionUsedWin %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

OptionUsedWin %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

OptionUsedWin %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 serveUsageBreak ptWon 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 serveUsageBreak ptWon 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 serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide36% 66.6%±1.9 n=1,599 49% ▲
Body7% 62.4%±4.4 n=305 0% ▼
T57% 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 serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide53% 64.5%±1.7 n=2,134 46% ▼
Body6% 66.5%±4.6 n=256 0% ▼
T41% 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.

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 230 35% −2.0±4.9
1stAd courtT 967 27% −1.0±2.3
1stAd courtWide 1,177 29% +1.4±2.1
1stDeuce courtBody 293 36% −0.5±4.4
1stDeuce courtT 1,114 25% +0.1±2.1
1stDeuce courtWide 1,247 28% +0.9±2.1
2ndAd courtBody 408 45% −4.0±3.9
2ndAd courtT 349 47% −2.4±4.2
2ndAd courtWide 948 49% +0.2±2.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 627 48% −1.4±3.2
2ndDeuce courtT 717 52% +2.1±3.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 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

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.8% · won 64% · −3.3±4.9 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.4% · won 58% · −9.9±5.4 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 56% · −12.0±5.2 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 51% · −16.7±5.7 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 54% · −13.2±4.0 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 6.4% · won 51% · +13.5±3.6 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.6% · won 52% · +14.0±5.6 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.3% · won 52% · +14.4±5.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.6% · won 49% · +11.4±5.6 vs own baseline
  5. 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

  1. FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 54% · +6.8±4.6 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.6% · won 51% · +4.5±3.4 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 50% · +3.1±4.3 vs own baseline
  4. BH down the line → FH down the line used 1.6% · won 51% · +4.3±6.1 vs own baseline
  5. 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.

  1. 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
  2. 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)
  3. 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
  4. 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)
  5. 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)
  6. 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+1.6828
Body 1st serve · deuce court+1.5305
Body 2nd serve · ad court+1.5542
Body 2nd serve · deuce court+1.2714
Wide 2nd serve · deuce court+1.2344

Most exposed to

BH volley to their forehand · rally−3.5142
FH volley to their forehand · rally−2.8147
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1−2.2169
BH slice to the middle · rally−1.7498
Body 1st serve · deuce court−1.7375

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 · deuce57%
Wide serves · ad53%
Points at net14%
T serves · ad41%
Unforced errors / shot10.3%
Avg rally length4.0
Point-ending shots24.2%
Deep returns27%
FH down the line30%
Serve & volley4%
BH down the line19%
Drop shots / shot1.1%
Through the middle22%
Chipped returns9%
Backhand slice12%
Forehand share49%
Run-around forehands8%
Wide serves · deuce36%
1st serve in56%

Plays most like

  1. Nicolas Almagro 2006–2019 plan v
  2. Sebastian Korda 2021–2026 plan v
  3. David Nalbandian 2002–2012 plan v
  4. Borna Coric 2015–2025 plan v
  5. David Goffin 2013–2025 plan v
  6. Marcos Baghdatis 2004–2019 plan v
  7. Viktor Troicki 2009–2021 plan v
  8. Janko Tipsarevic 2007–2019 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Sebastian Korda 2021–2026
  2. Borna Coric 2015–2025
  3. David Goffin 2013–2025

Charted matches