Martin Jaite

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.

Shot expected value

The share of points Martin Jaite 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.

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −3 How much less varied Martin Jaite's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 45 break-point first 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.

Repeating the previous direction to the same court: +2.2±8.3 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. (124 repeats, 188 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

Signature patterns

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

Discovered sequences

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

1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.8% · won 50% · +4.1±12.3 vs own baseline · +4.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Mats Wilander (5/11), Ivan Lendl (6/9)
2. BH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 48% · +2.0±12.0 vs own baseline · +3.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (6/13), Mats Wilander (5/9)
3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 1.6% · won 47% · +1.8±12.6 vs own baseline · +4.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (7/13)
4. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 41% · −4.6±12.9 vs own baseline · −15.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (5/11)
5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 39% · −6.7±10.8 vs own baseline · −15.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (5/21), Mats Wilander (5/9)

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.

Charted matches

• Martin Jaite v Ivan Lendl L Monte Carlo Masters F · Clay · 24 May 1988
• Mats Wilander v Martin Jaite L Rome Masters F · Clay · 24 May 1987
• Ivan Lendl v Martin Jaite L Roland Garros QF · Clay · 27 May 1985