RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 11 charted matches · 2022–2025

Otto Virtanen

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.4% ±3.1 raw 62.0% · tour 63.4% · 1,123 points
Return points won 36.1% ±3.1 raw 34.5% · tour 36.6% · 1,051 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 −0.01 ±0.08 better than 53% of ATP · raw −0.01
Shot selection +0.30 ±0.21 better than 80% of ATP · raw +0.31
Execution −1.35 ±0.59 better than 14% of ATP · raw −1.16
Tactical adaptability −0.08 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 11 matches
Adaptation speed +0.02 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.48 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 65% 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 5,487 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Otto Virtanen 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 · 311 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 39% 44.3%±6.9 47.6%
BH through the middle 29% 39.2%±7.7 43.7%
BH down the line 17% 31.5%±8.9 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 40.3%±13.4 42.5%
FH inside-out 5% 42.3%±13.9 51.8%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 205 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 23% 50.1%±10.0 52.7%
FH down the line 18% 50.5%±11.0 51.5%
FH through the middle 16% 45.0%±11.3 47.0%
BH down the line 13% 46.1%±12.0 48.3%
BH crosscourt 13% 51.8%±12.1 49.1%
BH through the middle 12% 47.5%±12.2 46.8%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 196 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 40% 50.4%±8.3 46.9%
BH through the middle 34% 33.3%±8.4 43.0%
BH down the line 11% 35.3%±12.1 44.2%
BH slice crosscourt 9% 38.3%±13.1 40.9%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 196 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 51% 41.7%±7.4 48.0%
BH through the middle 31% 38.5%±8.9 43.8%
BH down the line 10% 30.7%±12.0 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 6% 40.1%±14.5 42.1%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +10 How much less varied Otto Virtanen's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 97 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 48% 40% 72% / 73%
Body 7% 4% 58% / 63%
T 45% 56% ▲ 79% / 75%

555 normal · 25 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 60% ▲ 78% / 73%
Body 9% 6% 62% / 63%
T 48% 35% ▼ 70% / 72%

471 normal · 72 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
Wide48% 62.7%±4.5 n=276 61% ▲
Body7% 54.3%±9.7 n=41 0% ▼
T45% 61.7%±4.7 n=263 39% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.23).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide45% 66.3%±4.7 n=243 58% ▲
Body9% 54.7%±9.3 n=47 0% ▼
T47% 61.2%±4.8 n=253 42% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.06).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.57 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: +3.6±5.6 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. (505 repeats, 596 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 22 31% −6.0±10.5
1stAd courtT 122 27% −1.4±5.9
1stAd courtWide 157 26% −0.9±5.3
1stDeuce courtBody 39 32% −4.8±9.2
1stDeuce courtT 161 29% +3.5±5.4
1stDeuce courtWide 144 27% −0.1±5.5
2ndAd courtBody 73 44% −4.9±8.1
2ndAd courtT 31 52% +2.8±10.5
2ndAd courtWide 94 44% −4.4±7.3
2ndDeuce courtBody 87 42% −6.5±7.5
2ndDeuce courtT 83 56% +6.0±7.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 38 46% −1.9±9.9

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 68% · −4.0±10.8 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 66% · −6.0±11.0 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.7% · won 61% · −10.7±11.4 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 61% · −10.5±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.8% · won 61% · −10.5±10.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 7.2% · won 53% · +14.8±9.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.9% · won 43% · +4.5±11.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 5.6% · won 41% · +3.3±10.5 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.9% · won 41% · +2.7±11.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 4.7% · won 40% · +1.6±11.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 52% · +11.6±11.0 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 49% · +8.3±9.9 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 45% · +4.3±9.4 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.7% · won 45% · +4.9±10.4 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 6.9% · won 44% · +3.5±8.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 50% · +7.8±11.3 vs own baseline · +8.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Dino Prizmic (3/6)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 1.1% · won 47% · +5.0±11.2 vs own baseline · +6.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Filip Misolic (3/8)
  3. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 48% · +5.6±12.3 vs own baseline · +9.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tommy Paul (2/6)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.7% · won 47% · +4.4±12.4 vs own baseline · +8.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alex De Minaur (1/6)
  5. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.6% · won 44% · +1.6±12.9 vs own baseline · +2.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 42% · −0.1±9.2 vs own baseline · −6.1 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

BH to the middle · rally+1.9207
FH to the middle · rally+1.4165
BH to the middle · return+1.3261
T 1st serve · ad court+0.9253
BH to their backhand · rally+0.6309

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−3.3325
FH to their backhand · rally−1.5311
BH to their backhand · rally−1.1242
FH to the middle · rally−0.7143
FH to the middle · return−0.6227

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Miomir Kecmanovic +2.07, Rafael Nadal +2.05, Nishesh Basavareddy +1.90, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.87, Daniil Medvedev +1.74

Favourable matchups

Fabian Marozsan +1.13, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.10, Pedro Martinez +1.10, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.94, Alexander Shevchenko +0.93

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.

Drop shots / shot2.9%
T serves · ad47%
Unforced errors / shot11.6%
Wide serves · deuce48%
Through the middle27%
Point-ending shots26.3%
BH down the line21%
Deep returns28%
T serves · deuce45%
FH down the line31%
Forehand share53%
Serve & volley8%
Points at net11%
Avg rally length3.9
Run-around forehands16%
Chipped returns10%
Backhand slice13%
1st serve in58%
Wide serves · ad45%

Plays most like

  1. Frances Tiafoe 2016–2026 plan v
  2. Fabio Fognini 2012–2025 plan v
  3. Matteo Arnaldi 2022–2025 plan v
  4. Alexander Shevchenko 2023–2026 plan v
  5. Lucas Pouille 2015–2024 plan v
  6. Roman Safiullin 2017–2025 plan v
  7. Zizou Bergs 2021–2026 plan v
  8. Gregoire Barrere 2016–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Ivan Ljubicic 2003–2011
  2. Nicolas Kiefer 1999–2008
  3. Mardy Fish 2003–2012

Charted matches