RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 11 charted matches · 2002–2008

Mario Ancic

Archetype: Serve-and-volleyer · Net rusher

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.9% ±3.0 raw 63.0% · tour 63.4% · 895 points
Return points won 34.5% ±3.1 raw 27.9% · tour 36.6% · 850 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 −0.19 ±0.20 better than 15% of ATP · raw −0.19
Shot selection +0.43 ±0.22 better than 88% of ATP · raw +0.41
Execution −1.93 ±0.54 better than 4% of ATP · raw −2.20
Tactical adaptability −0.14 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 11 matches
Adaptation speed −0.15 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 3.42 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 9% 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 3,350 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Mario Ancic 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 · 139 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 45% 36.8%±8.7 47.6%
BH through the middle 23% 36.0%±11.0 43.7%
BH down the line 9% 47.7%±14.5 46.4%
FH inside-out 9% 48.0%±14.5 51.8%
BH slice crosscourt 8% 37.1%±14.3 42.5%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 126 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 42.7%±9.2 46.6%
FH down the line 35% 34.3%±9.8 44.7%
FH through the middle 19% 39.3%±12.1 41.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 95 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 26% 39.0%±12.0 52.7%
FH down the line 22% 42.2%±12.7 51.5%
BH through the middle 18% 49.6%±13.5 46.8%
BH crosscourt 18% 40.1%±13.3 49.1%
FH through the middle 16% 38.3%±13.5 47.0%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 82 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 56% 35.8%±9.7 48.0%
BH through the middle 12% 45.9%±15.0 43.8%
BH slice crosscourt 12% 41.4%±14.8 42.1%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +6 How much less varied Mario Ancic's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 84 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 48% 29% ▼ 75% / 73%
Body 10% 8% 71% / 63%
T 43% 63% ▲ 70% / 75%

402 normal · 24 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 40% 69% / 73%
Body 13% 10% 64% / 63%
T 42% 50% 74% / 72%

332 normal · 60 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
Wide47% 61.1%±5.3 n=199 60% ▲
Body10% 64.2%±9.4 n=41 0% ▼
T44% 60.0%±5.5 n=186 40% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.70).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide44% 58.5%±5.7 n=173 44%
Body13% 60.9%±9.0 n=49 0% ▼
T43% 61.1%±5.7 n=170 56% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.81).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.32 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: −0.8±5.4 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. (295 repeats, 501 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 13 37% +0.4±12.1
1stAd courtT 83 28% −0.2±6.9
1stAd courtWide 114 22% −4.9±5.7
1stDeuce courtBody 39 36% −0.5±9.5
1stDeuce courtT 99 18% −6.8±5.6
1stDeuce courtWide 106 18% −8.7±5.5
2ndAd courtBody 38 42% −7.0±9.9
2ndAd courtT 47 36% −13.2±9.0
2ndAd courtWide 71 42% −6.3±8.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 66 40% −8.7±8.2
2ndDeuce courtT 60 48% −2.0±8.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 29 40% −8.4±10.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Not enough data

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 7.4% · won 35% · +1.9±10.7 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 12.7% · won 34% · +0.6±9.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 6.5% · won 31% · −1.9±10.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.1% · won 39% · +3.9±11.5 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 6.1% · won 35% · −0.1±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 8.0% · won 33% · −2.1±10.4 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.7% · won 30% · −5.3±10.6 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 7.1% · won 29% · −5.9±10.4 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 41% · +1.3±12.0 vs own baseline · −5.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by David Nalbandian (5/8)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 42% · +1.4±12.7 vs own baseline · −5.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roger Federer (4/8)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 36% · −3.9±11.5 vs own baseline · −16.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roger Federer (3/11)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.7% · won 31% · −8.7±10.7 vs own baseline · −23.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Roger Federer (3/16), Frank Dancevic (1/6)

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 backhand · rally+1.5174
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.8178
T 1st serve · deuce court+0.1168
BH to their backhand · return+0.1125
T 1st serve · ad court−0.2149

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · rally−1.3143
FH to their forehand · rally−1.1194
BH to their backhand · rally−0.7150
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.2151
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.6164

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.

Points at net21%
Serve & volley36%
FH down the line34%
T serves · ad43%
Wide serves · deuce47%
Backhand slice26%
Forehand share55%
Point-ending shots25.5%
Run-around forehands22%
Unforced errors / shot10.5%
Through the middle24%
T serves · deuce44%
1st serve in60%
Drop shots / shot0.8%
Chipped returns9%
Avg rally length3.6
BH down the line15%
Wide serves · ad44%
Deep returns20%

Plays most like

  1. Nicolas Kiefer 1999–2008 plan v
  2. Brad Gilbert 1987–1994 plan v
  3. Andy Roddick 2001–2012 plan v
  4. Todd Martin 1992–2001 plan v
  5. Yevgeny Kafelnikov 1994–2002 plan v
  6. Tomas Berdych 2005–2019 plan v
  7. Jan Lennard Struff 2014–2025 plan v
  8. Cedric Pioline 1992–2000 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Tommy Paul 2016–2026
  2. Otto Virtanen 2022–2025
  3. Stefanos Tsitsipas 2016–2026

Charted matches