RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 14 charted matches · 2014–2019

Martin Klizan

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 65.3% ±3.2 raw 63.1% · tour 63.4% · 899 points
Return points won 37.9% ±3.3 raw 37.5% · tour 36.6% · 895 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 +0.06 ±0.10 better than 71% of ATP · raw +0.06
Shot selection +0.45 ±0.19 better than 90% of ATP · raw +0.46
Execution −1.20 ±0.94 better than 19% of ATP · raw −1.06
Tactical adaptability −0.11 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 12 matches
Adaptation speed −0.14 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.82 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 30% 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 4,176 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Martin Klizan 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 · 253 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 46% 46.0%±7.0 47.6%
BH down the line 21% 51.7%±9.6 46.4%
BH through the middle 18% 32.9%±9.5 43.7%
FH inside-in 6% 65.5%±13.2 54.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 224 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 35% 47.5%±8.3 52.7%
FH through the middle 15% 51.7%±11.3 47.0%
BH crosscourt 14% 45.8%±11.4 49.1%
FH down the line 14% 52.5%±11.4 51.5%
BH through the middle 10% 40.4%±12.3 46.8%
BH down the line 8% 50.4%±13.5 48.3%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 177 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 58% 50.7%±7.4 46.6%
FH down the line 17% 41.9%±11.5 44.7%
FH through the middle 16% 59.8%±11.5 41.5%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle

position worth 54% to the average player · 139 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 35% 53.9%±9.9 56.0%
FH down the line 27% 60.8%±10.6 53.4%
FH through the middle 14% 48.7%±13.0 47.3%
BH crosscourt 10% 52.6%±14.1 49.5%
BH down the line 9% 51.9%±14.3 50.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −2 How much less varied Martin Klizan's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 85 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 37% 52% ▲ 76% / 73%
Body 14% 5% ▼ 59% / 63%
T 49% 43% 68% / 75%

450 normal · 21 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 44% 72% / 73%
Body 9% 14% 64% / 63%
T 47% 42% 79% / 72%

360 normal · 64 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
Wide38% 67.8%±5.3 n=177 51% ▲
Body14% 53.6%±8.5 n=64 1% ▼
T49% 61.3%±5.0 n=230 48%

Off equilibrium (p = 0.018): serve wide more. Gap 5.1 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +1.1 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide45% 64.1%±5.3 n=189 41% ▼
Body9% 61.7%±9.6 n=40 0% ▼
T46% 65.0%±5.2 n=195 59% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.80).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.80 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: −2.4±6.3 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. (341 repeats, 528 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 17 41% +3.6±11.8
1stAd courtT 132 29% +0.6±5.8
1stAd courtWide 115 26% −0.9±6.0
1stDeuce courtBody 12 36% −1.0±12.2
1stDeuce courtT 120 30% +4.6±6.1
1stDeuce courtWide 143 31% +4.1±5.8
2ndAd courtBody 28 41% −8.3±10.6
2ndAd courtT 83 48% −0.8±7.7
2ndAd courtWide 55 52% +4.0±8.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 38 48% −0.9±10.0
2ndDeuce courtT 35 54% +4.0±10.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 117 48% −0.2±6.8

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 64% · −7.2±10.9 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.6% · won 65% · −6.9±10.3 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 63% · −8.6±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 6.0% · won 64% · −7.2±9.6 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 63% · −8.0±10.3 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 7.9% · won 45% · +3.5±10.4 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 8.7% · won 44% · +3.0±10.1 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 8.4% · won 44% · +2.1±10.2 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt, short used 5.3% · won 42% · +0.6±11.5 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 58% · +8.3±11.6 vs own baseline
  2. BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 5.7% · won 54% · +4.6±10.7 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 4.5% · won 54% · +5.0±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.6% · won 53% · +3.5±10.2 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 6.6% · won 50% · +0.4±10.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.0% · won 56% · +7.0±12.2 vs own baseline · +11.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Gael Monfils (4/6)
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → BH down the line used 2.1% · won 53% · +4.3±10.1 vs own baseline · +8.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Pablo Cuevas (5/6)
  3. BH down the line → BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.6% · won 53% · +4.1±11.1 vs own baseline · +9.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 54% · +4.6±12.0 vs own baseline · +10.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.8% · won 50% · +1.3±10.6 vs own baseline · +3.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Marton Fucsovics (2/6), Nicolas Almagro (4/7)
  6. BH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 48% · −0.7±12.1 vs own baseline · −5.6 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

BH to the middle · return+1.6156
BH to their backhand · rally+0.9145
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.2178
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.1166
T 1st serve · ad court−0.2185

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · serve +1−3.3127
BH to their backhand · rally−2.4129
BH to the middle · return−2.4216
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.4216
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.8201

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Luciano Darderi, Brandon Nakashima, Milos Raonic, Francisco Cerundolo, Rinky Hijikata

Tactical fingerprint

Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the ATP average, in standard deviations.

Drop shots / shot3.3%
BH down the line29%
Unforced errors / shot12.6%
T serves · ad46%
Point-ending shots27.0%
T serves · deuce49%
Deep returns28%
1st serve in62%
Forehand share53%
Serve & volley6%
Avg rally length3.8
Points at net8%
Run-around forehands13%
Chipped returns9%
Wide serves · ad45%
Backhand slice9%
Wide serves · deuce38%
Through the middle20%
FH down the line26%

Plays most like

  1. Jiri Vesely 2015–2023 plan v
  2. Otto Virtanen 2022–2025 plan v
  3. Lucas Pouille 2015–2024 plan v
  4. Nick Kyrgios 2013–2025 plan v
  5. Joao Fonseca 2024–2026 plan v
  6. Ugo Humbert 2019–2026 plan v
  7. Sam Querrey 2010–2022 plan v
  8. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Yevgeny Kafelnikov 1994–2002
  2. Thomas Enqvist 1993–2001
  3. Marcelo Rios 1995–2001

Charted matches