RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 9 charted matches · 1985–1990

Miloslav Mecir

Archetype: Blocks returns short · Works the corners

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 60.1% ±3.1 raw 54.6% · tour 63.4% · 1,065 points
Return points won 40.9% ±3.2 raw 38.5% · tour 36.6% · 967 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 +0.09 ±0.15 better than 80% of ATP · raw +0.09
Shot selection −0.10 ±0.23 better than 40% of ATP · raw −0.10
Execution −0.41 ±0.63 better than 48% of ATP · raw −0.38
Points left on the table 2.41 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 72% 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 5,956 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Miloslav Mecir 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 forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 262 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 46.7%±6.9 46.6%
FH down the line 24% 51.1%±9.0 44.7%
FH through the middle 23% 44.7%±9.2 41.5%
FH down the line + approach 7% 71.4%±11.9 69.3%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 250 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 62% 39.7%±6.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 18% 51.2%±10.3 43.7%
BH down the line 14% 46.0%±11.1 46.4%
BH crosscourt + approach 4% 67.1%±13.9 69.0%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 220 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 63% 45.9%±6.5 48.0%
BH through the middle 17% 41.7%±10.7 43.8%
BH down the line 15% 42.9%±11.3 46.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 205 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 23% 42.4%±9.9 49.1%
BH through the middle 17% 61.8%±10.9 46.8%
FH down the line 15% 46.6%±11.6 51.5%
BH down the line 13% 50.3%±12.0 48.3%
FH crosscourt 12% 46.7%±12.4 52.7%
FH through the middle 8% 44.3%±13.4 47.0%
BH crosscourt + approach 7% 61.5%±13.5 67.7%
FH down the line + approach 5% 80.3%±11.9 70.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +11 How much less varied Miloslav Mecir's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 120 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 47% 60% / 73%
Body 21% 18% 62% / 63%
T 34% 35% 61% / 75%

513 normal · 17 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 61% 70% ▲ 60% / 73%
Body 13% 10% 59% / 63%
T 26% 20% 64% / 72%

403 normal · 103 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
Wide45% 55.6%±5.0 n=241 34% ▼
Body21% 58.7%±6.9 n=109 27% ▲
T34% 50.4%±5.7 n=180 39% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.12).
Optimal mix: ±0.0 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide63% 54.3%±4.4 n=318 50% ▼
Body12% 57.0%±8.5 n=62 12%
T25% 55.3%±6.5 n=126 38% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.84).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.15 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: +3.4±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. (442 repeats, 576 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 23 38% +0.9±11.0
1stAd courtT 92 31% +2.6±6.9
1stAd courtWide 98 27% −0.5±6.4
1stDeuce courtBody 38 38% +1.5±9.7
1stDeuce courtT 114 28% +3.1±6.2
1stDeuce courtWide 140 29% +1.7±5.7
2ndAd courtBody 98 43% −6.6±7.2
2ndAd courtT 21 54% +5.2±11.5
2ndAd courtWide 123 51% +2.9±6.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 95 48% −1.2±7.3
2ndDeuce courtT 60 50% +0.2±8.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 46 49% +1.2±9.4

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Miloslav Mecir'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 60% · +3.1±10.7 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 5.7% · won 57% · +1.0±9.4 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 3.0% · won 55% · −1.8±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 53% · −3.0±11.0 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.7% · won 53% · −3.1±10.8 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 5.0% · won 52% · +10.1±10.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 8.3% · won 49% · +7.0±9.3 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 5.2% · won 49% · +7.5±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 7.0% · won 45% · +3.2±9.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 4.1% · won 43% · +1.6±11.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → BH down the line used 2.8% · won 58% · +7.8±10.1 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.1% · won 57% · +7.3±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 4.8% · won 54% · +3.9±8.6 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 2.5% · won 54% · +4.1±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → BH down the line used 1.9% · won 53% · +2.8±11.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 57% · +8.2±11.2 vs own baseline · +16.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (6/10), Boris Becker (8/12)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line + approach used 0.5% · won 55% · +6.4±12.6 vs own baseline · −6.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (2/8)
  3. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 56% · +6.7±12.9 vs own baseline · +24.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Boris Becker (3/7), Ivan Lendl (7/8)
  4. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 53% · +4.3±11.1 vs own baseline · +11.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (5/10), Boris Becker (8/12)
  5. Wide serve → BH slice crosscourt return, mid → BH down the line used 0.7% · won 54% · +4.8±12.0 vs own baseline · +7.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (6/11), Boris Becker (5/7)
  6. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.6% · won 51% · +2.1±9.2 vs own baseline · −0.3 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 their backhand · serve +1+2.9218
BH to their backhand · return+1.5217
FH to their backhand · rally+0.9322
FH to the middle · rally+0.7159
BH to their backhand · return +1+0.2150

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · return−5.3136
BH slice to their backhand · return−4.8176
BH slice to the middle · return−4.7145
BH slice to the middle · rally−2.9232
BH slice to their backhand · rally−2.8337

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Tomas Machac, Andrey Rublev, Alexei Popyrin, Daniil Medvedev, Novak Djokovic

Tactical fingerprint

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

FH down the line39%
Wide serves · ad63%
Points at net21%
Avg rally length4.9
1st serve in67%
BH down the line24%
Wide serves · deuce45%
Serve & volley11%
Unforced errors / shot9.7%
Point-ending shots22.1%
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Backhand slice6%
Chipped returns2%
Through the middle19%
T serves · deuce34%
Deep returns15%
Run-around forehands2%
T serves · ad25%
Forehand share40%

Plays most like

  1. Andrei Chesnokov 1989–1995 plan v
  2. Jarkko Nieminen 2003–2014 plan v
  3. Valentin Vacherot 2024–2026 plan v
  4. Paul Henri Mathieu 2002–2016 plan v
  5. Alex Michelsen 2023–2026 plan v
  6. Andre Agassi 1988–2006 plan v
  7. Marcelo Rios 1995–2001 plan v
  8. Sergi Bruguera 1990–1997 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jarkko Nieminen 2003–2014
  2. Valentin Vacherot 2024–2026
  3. Paul Henri Mathieu 2002–2016

Charted matches