RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 118 charted matches · 2013–2025

Nick Kyrgios

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 69.8% ±2.1 raw 69.7% · tour 63.4% · 10,120 points
Return points won 34.9% ±2.3 raw 31.6% · tour 36.6% · 9,904 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 −0.04 ±0.06 better than 46% of ATP · raw −0.04
Shot selection −0.09 ±0.06 better than 41% of ATP · raw −0.08
Execution +0.99 ±0.32 better than 95% of ATP · raw +1.02
Tactical adaptability +0.14 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 116 matches
Adaptation speed +0.07 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.46 ±0.51 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 3,551 shots · better than 16% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.66 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 44% 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 42,305 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Nick Kyrgios 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 · 1,977 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 43% 42.3%±2.8 47.6%
BH through the middle 21% 42.3%±3.9 43.7%
BH down the line 14% 48.1%±4.7 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 6% 24.6%±6.2 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 43.7%±8.0 42.5%
FH inside-in 4% 59.5%±7.9 54.7%
FH inside-out 4% 54.5%±8.4 51.8%
FH through the middle 2% 39.0%±10.9 45.2%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 1,870 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH through the middle 20% 47.2%±4.1 47.0%
FH down the line 20% 46.1%±4.2 51.5%
FH crosscourt 19% 48.0%±4.3 52.7%
BH through the middle 14% 47.7%±4.8 46.8%
BH crosscourt 12% 41.1%±5.1 49.1%
BH down the line 7% 41.1%±6.6 48.3%
FH drop shot down the line 1% 60.2%±11.7 56.5%
FH slice through the middle 1% 27.2%±11.6 34.4%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,404 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 37% 44.6%±3.5 46.6%
FH down the line 25% 46.3%±4.3 44.7%
FH through the middle 23% 38.9%±4.3 41.5%
FH slice through the middle 9% 26.6%±6.2 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 24.9%±10.2 30.9%
FH slice down the line 2% 18.1%±9.4 25.6%
FH drop shot down the line 2% 53.3%±12.5 49.6%
FH drop shot through the middle 1% 43.1%±14.9 44.6%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,325 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 43% 40.8%±3.3 46.9%
BH through the middle 26% 42.4%±4.3 43.0%
BH down the line 13% 43.7%±5.9 44.2%
BH slice through the middle 7% 22.1%±6.5 32.6%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 38.0%±8.8 40.9%
FH inside-out 2% 45.2%±12.2 51.7%
BH slice down the line 2% 22.5%±10.5 33.3%
FH inside-in 2% 56.5%±12.6 53.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +1 How much less varied Nick Kyrgios's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 552 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 38% 43% 77% / 73%
Body 3% 3% 62% / 63%
T 59% 54% 83% / 75%

5,185 normal · 119 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 44% 60% ▲ 79% / 73%
Body 5% 5% 59% / 63%
T 51% 35% ▼ 75% / 72%

4,359 normal · 433 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% 70.9%±1.6 n=2,024 28% ▼
Body3% 64.5%±5.6 n=171 0% ▼
T59% 72.0%±1.3 n=3,109 72% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.61).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide46% 68.8%±1.6 n=2,198 57% ▲
Body5% 61.3%±5.0 n=224 0% ▼
T49% 68.3%±1.6 n=2,370 43% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.37).
Optimal mix: +0.5 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: +0.4±1.4 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. (5,178 repeats, 4,682 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 399 30% −7.1±3.6
1stAd courtT 1,298 26% −2.0±2.0
1stAd courtWide 1,184 20% −7.4±1.9
1stDeuce courtBody 394 35% −1.6±3.8
1stDeuce courtT 1,478 22% −2.9±1.8
1stDeuce courtWide 1,401 19% −8.5±1.7
2ndAd courtBody 728 47% −2.4±3.0
2ndAd courtT 379 49% −0.7±4.1
2ndAd courtWide 708 48% −0.5±3.0
2ndDeuce courtBody 783 44% −4.6±2.9
2ndDeuce courtT 758 45% −4.7±2.9
2ndDeuce courtWide 378 45% −2.9±4.1

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 70% · −4.3±5.0 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.5% · won 62% · −12.3±4.9 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 62% · −11.7±4.4 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 60% · −14.4±4.9 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 55% · −19.2±5.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.3% · won 46% · +10.4±5.8 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.4% · won 41% · +5.2±5.6 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 2.1% · won 40% · +4.3±5.9 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.3% · won 37% · +1.4±5.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 5.4% · won 34% · −2.1±3.7 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH down the line used 1.2% · won 57% · +13.1±7.7 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 52% · +8.2±6.1 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → BH through the middle used 1.5% · won 54% · +9.4±7.1 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → BH down the line used 1.1% · won 53% · +8.4±8.0 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.1% · won 52% · +7.9±8.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. T serve → BH slice through the middle return → FH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 65% · +17.8±9.9 vs own baseline · +8.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivo Karlovic (5/7), Stefanos Tsitsipas (6/8)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.3% · won 57% · +10.5±8.8 vs own baseline · +7.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andy Murray (5/9), Grigor Dimitrov (4/7)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH slice through the middle → FH down the line used 0.2% · won 59% · +12.2±9.7 vs own baseline · +10.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH down the line → BH slice through the middle → FH down the line used 0.2% · won 60% · +12.7±10.0 vs own baseline · +8.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. Wide serve → FH through the middle return → BH volley crosscourt used 0.2% · won 62% · +14.9±11.0 vs own baseline · +3.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. T serve → FH through the middle return, short → FH down the line used 0.1% · won 63% · +16.4±11.6 vs own baseline · +23.0 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 · deuce court+5.83,109
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+5.42,024
T 1st serve · ad court+3.62,370
Wide 1st serve · ad court+3.52,198
Wide 2nd serve · ad court+2.9893

Most exposed to

BH volley to the middle · rally−5.0123
BH to their forehand · serve +1−4.8459
FH to their backhand · serve +1−4.21,349
FH volley to their backhand · rally−4.1121
BH volley to their forehand · rally−4.1160

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +2.87, Jack Draper +2.42, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.35, Nishesh Basavareddy +2.27, Casper Ruud +2.18

Favourable matchups

Fabian Marozsan +0.94, Pedro Martinez +0.81, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.79, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.73, Alexander Shevchenko +0.69

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Andy Murray, Carlos Alcaraz

Tactical fingerprint

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

T serves · deuce59%
Drop shots / shot3.5%
T serves · ad49%
1st serve in67%
Unforced errors / shot11.8%
Point-ending shots27.7%
Through the middle26%
Deep returns29%
Forehand share54%
Run-around forehands20%
Serve & volley8%
BH down the line19%
FH down the line30%
Chipped returns12%
Backhand slice14%
Points at net8%
Wide serves · ad46%
Wide serves · deuce38%
Avg rally length3.3

Plays most like

  1. Zhizhen Zhang 2019–2026 plan v
  2. Kevin Anderson 2011–2022 plan v
  3. Yannick Hanfmann 2021–2025 plan v
  4. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v
  5. Mackenzie Mcdonald 2015–2025 plan v
  6. Borna Coric 2015–2025 plan v
  7. Martin Klizan 2014–2019 plan v
  8. Nuno Borges 2021–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Andrei Pavel 1999–2006
  2. Marat Safin 1998–2009
  3. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005

Charted matches