RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 21 charted matches · 1995–2003

Mark Philippoussis

Archetype: Serve-and-volleyer · Net rusher

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 68.8% ±2.7 raw 68.7% · tour 63.4% · 2,353 points
Return points won 35.1% ±2.9 raw 30.0% · tour 36.6% · 2,269 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 +0.07 ±0.14 better than 74% of ATP · raw +0.07
Shot selection +0.32 ±0.21 better than 82% of ATP · raw +0.32
Execution −1.40 ±0.61 better than 12% of ATP · raw −1.42
Tactical adaptability −0.07 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 21 matches
Adaptation speed +0.08 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 3.53 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 8% 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 8,444 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Mark Philippoussis 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 · 375 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 34% 40.1%±6.7 47.6%
BH slice crosscourt 17% 40.9%±8.9 42.5%
BH through the middle 16% 40.4%±9.0 43.7%
BH down the line 10% 36.7%±10.4 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 7% 35.5%±11.4 35.1%
FH inside-out 7% 46.5%±12.1 51.8%
BH slice down the line 5% 31.0%±12.0 37.1%
FH inside-in 4% 55.7%±14.0 54.7%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 241 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 35% 36.0%±7.7 46.9%
BH slice crosscourt 24% 33.1%±8.7 40.9%
BH through the middle 15% 45.7%±11.0 43.0%
BH slice through the middle 12% 33.0%±10.9 32.6%
BH down the line 7% 44.3%±13.3 44.2%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 184 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 28% 40.3%±9.6 48.0%
BH slice crosscourt 23% 38.8%±10.1 42.1%
BH through the middle 13% 41.3%±12.4 43.8%
BH slice through the middle 13% 53.5%±12.5 35.1%
BH down the line 8% 50.9%±14.1 46.5%
BH slice down the line 6% 29.5%±13.5 35.8%
FH inside-in 5% 56.2%±14.9 54.3%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 164 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 30% 47.2%±9.9 52.7%
FH down the line 27% 52.0%±10.3 51.5%
BH crosscourt 12% 45.7%±13.1 49.1%
FH through the middle 11% 45.8%±13.3 47.0%
BH through the middle 7% 41.8%±14.3 46.8%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +17 How much less varied Mark Philippoussis's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 148 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 55% ▲ 81% / 73%
Body 7% 7% 66% / 63%
T 47% 38% ▼ 80% / 75%

1,133 normal · 29 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 49% 59% ▲ 79% / 73%
Body 5% 0% 63% / 63%
T 46% 41% 79% / 72%

943 normal · 119 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
Wide46% 69.5%±3.2 n=530 59% ▲
Body7% 64.4%±7.3 n=86 0% ▼
T47% 67.1%±3.2 n=546 41% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.40).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 67.6%±3.2 n=531 41% ▼
Body4% 64.0%±9.1 n=45 0% ▼
T46% 68.1%±3.4 n=486 59% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.99).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.46 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: +2.3±3.4 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. (997 repeats, 1,185 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 47 36% −0.5±9.0
1stAd courtT 252 23% −5.2±4.1
1stAd courtWide 332 22% −4.8±3.6
1stDeuce courtBody 82 35% −1.9±7.4
1stDeuce courtT 324 17% −8.0±3.3
1stDeuce courtWide 282 21% −6.0±3.8
2ndAd courtBody 83 40% −9.7±7.6
2ndAd courtT 70 50% +0.5±8.2
2ndAd courtWide 253 44% −4.0±4.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 157 46% −3.2±6.0
2ndDeuce courtT 195 44% −5.7±5.4
2ndDeuce courtWide 94 43% −5.0±7.3

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH volley crosscourt used 2.4% · won 75% · −0.5±8.4 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH volley crosscourt used 2.3% · won 74% · −2.3±8.7 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → BH volley down the line used 3.0% · won 68% · −8.3±8.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice through the middle, mid used 2.5% · won 42% · +13.8±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.7% · won 37% · +8.9±9.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice crosscourt, mid used 3.8% · won 36% · +7.4±8.7 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.4% · won 36% · +8.0±10.0 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.0% · won 35% · +7.3±9.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 52% · +8.8±11.4 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 50% · +6.9±10.6 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 47% · +4.2±11.1 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 2.7% · won 47% · +3.9±11.5 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 45% · +2.7±9.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Mark Philippoussis 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 down the line used 1.1% · won 54% · +8.9±10.8 vs own baseline · +13.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 52% · +6.7±12.5 vs own baseline · +16.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 47% · +1.9±12.8 vs own baseline · +3.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 0.6% · won 45% · ±0.0±12.2 vs own baseline · −2.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andre Agassi (6/9)
  5. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.5% · won 43% · −1.9±12.9 vs own baseline · −4.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 43% · −2.2±12.1 vs own baseline · −13.1 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 1st serve · ad court+2.6473
BH slice to their backhand · return+2.6256
Wide 1st serve · ad court+2.5520
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+2.3516
BH slice to their backhand · rally+1.3122

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−1.5269
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.1540
BH to their backhand · serve +1−0.9210
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.8207
T 1st serve · ad court−0.8404

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.

Serve & volley46%
Chipped returns35%
Point-ending shots33.1%
Points at net20%
T serves · ad46%
FH down the line35%
Backhand slice34%
Unforced errors / shot11.9%
Wide serves · deuce46%
T serves · deuce47%
BH down the line21%
Run-around forehands19%
Wide serves · ad50%
1st serve in60%
Deep returns22%
Drop shots / shot0.5%
Through the middle21%
Forehand share48%
Avg rally length2.9

Plays most like

  1. Pete Sampras 1990–2002 plan v
  2. Todd Martin 1992–2001 plan v
  3. Tim Henman 1995–2006 plan v
  4. Boris Becker 1985–1999 plan v
  5. Brad Gilbert 1987–1994 plan v
  6. Malivai Washington 1992–1996 plan v
  7. Gilles Muller 2005–2017 plan v
  8. Mario Ancic 2002–2008 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jo Wilfried Tsonga 2007–2022
  2. Pierre Hugues Herbert 2014–2025
  3. Sergiy Stakhovsky 2010–2022

Charted matches