RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 32 charted matches · 1992–2000

Richard Krajicek

Archetype: Serve-and-volleyer · Net rusher (6)

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 68.2% ±2.4 raw 67.1% · tour 63.4% · 3,555 points
Return points won 36.3% ±2.6 raw 32.2% · tour 36.6% · 3,552 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 −0.02 ±0.09 better than 52% of ATP · raw −0.01
Shot selection +0.82 ±0.24 better than 98% of ATP · raw +0.82
Execution −1.17 ±0.53 better than 19% of ATP · raw −1.14
Tactical adaptability +0.15 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 31 matches
Adaptation speed +0.11 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 4.60 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 1% 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 12,239 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Richard Krajicek 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 +1: drive to your middle, you at net

position worth 61% to the average player · 284 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH volley crosscourt 27% 60.8%±8.1 62.9%
FH volley down the line 22% 60.0%±8.8 63.8%
FH volley crosscourt 17% 67.7%±9.3 68.7%
BH volley down the line 12% 53.1%±11.2 58.4%
BH volley through the middle 11% 38.5%±11.2 43.2%
FH volley through the middle 10% 43.5%±11.7 46.6%

Return +1: volley to your backhand side, opponent at net

position worth 33% to the average player · 280 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH down the line 43% 32.3%±6.5 39.2%
BH crosscourt 19% 36.5%±9.3 43.4%
BH through the middle 8% 21.7%±10.5 25.6%
BH slice crosscourt 7% 19.3%±10.4 22.7%
BH lob crosscourt 7% 29.2%±12.0 26.9%
BH lob through the middle 5% 24.2%±11.9 17.4%
BH slice down the line 4% 22.1%±12.3 19.3%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 258 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 28% 46.3%±8.6 40.9%
BH slice through the middle 19% 32.2%±9.2 32.6%
BH crosscourt 11% 45.7%±11.7 46.9%
BH slice down the line 10% 29.7%±11.1 33.3%
BH through the middle 9% 34.0%±11.9 43.0%
BH down the line 6% 36.7%±13.4 44.2%
FH inside-out 5% 51.0%±14.1 51.7%
BH slice down the line + approach 5% 44.4%±14.2 48.3%

Serve +1: short return to your middle, you at net

position worth 54% to the average player · 254 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH volley crosscourt 22% 58.3%±9.3 56.5%
FH volley down the line 19% 49.4%±9.9 55.4%
BH volley through the middle 17% 39.2%±10.2 36.6%
FH volley crosscourt 13% 52.3%±11.2 61.3%
BH volley down the line 12% 51.3%±11.5 50.8%
FH volley through the middle 8% 35.8%±12.5 36.5%
FH down the line 6% 80.8%±11.1 77.3%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +3 How much less varied Richard Krajicek's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 223 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 39% 31% ▼ 84% / 73%
Body 8% 12% 69% / 63%
T 52% 57% 81% / 75%

1,759 normal · 51 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 41% 81% / 73%
Body 8% 6% 59% / 63%
T 46% 53% 79% / 72%

1,460 normal · 172 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
Wide39% 72.8%±2.7 n=710 52% ▲
Body9% 64.3%±5.8 n=154 0% ▼
T52% 66.6%±2.5 n=946 48% ▼

Off equilibrium (p = 0.005): serve wide more. Gap 4.0 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +1.0 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide45% 65.3%±2.8 n=739 40% ▼
Body8% 55.4%±6.6 n=124 0% ▼
T47% 66.8%±2.7 n=769 60% ▲

Off equilibrium (p = 0.010): serve T more. Gap 1.6 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.90 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: ±0.0±2.4 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. (1,522 repeats, 1,856 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 103 38% +1.4±6.9
1stAd courtT 359 27% −1.5±3.7
1stAd courtWide 530 21% −5.8±2.9
1stDeuce courtBody 105 37% +0.3±6.8
1stDeuce courtT 551 21% −4.2±2.8
1stDeuce courtWide 436 24% −3.1±3.3
2ndAd courtBody 217 49% −0.9±5.2
2ndAd courtT 81 53% +3.7±7.8
2ndAd courtWide 357 45% −3.0±4.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 231 41% −7.7±5.0
2ndDeuce courtT 365 47% −3.1±4.1
2ndDeuce courtWide 124 41% −6.9±6.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH volley crosscourt used 2.2% · won 75% · +3.6±7.2 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH volley crosscourt used 2.9% · won 68% · −2.9±7.0 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH volley down the line used 2.0% · won 65% · −6.1±8.1 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → BH volley crosscourt used 3.4% · won 65% · −5.5±6.6 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH volley down the line used 2.1% · won 64% · −7.1±8.0 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice crosscourt, mid used 3.2% · won 40% · +10.0±7.8 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH slice through the middle, short used 2.3% · won 30% · +0.3±8.2 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice crosscourt used 2.2% · won 21% · −8.6±7.5 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 2.9% · won 20% · −9.4±6.7 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.5% · won 19% · −10.3±7.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH slice crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.3% · won 51% · +7.8±11.6 vs own baseline
  2. BH slice crosscourt → BH slice down the line used 8.9% · won 45% · +1.9±10.5 vs own baseline
  3. BH slice crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt used 11.9% · won 38% · −4.5±9.4 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH volley crosscourt → BH down the line → FH volley crosscourt used 0.6% · won 69% · +20.6±11.3 vs own baseline · +18.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. T serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH volley crosscourt used 0.6% · won 58% · +9.1±11.9 vs own baseline · +7.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andre Agassi (2/6), Boris Becker (6/7)
  3. Wide serve → BH through the middle return → FH volley crosscourt used 0.6% · won 58% · +9.4±12.1 vs own baseline · −3.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Boris Becker (4/6)
  4. T serve → BH through the middle return → FH volley down the line used 0.6% · won 58% · +9.4±12.1 vs own baseline · +4.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Stefan Edberg (5/6), Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6/6)
  5. T serve → BH through the middle return → BH volley crosscourt used 0.7% · won 55% · +5.8±11.8 vs own baseline · +1.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Michael Stich (4/7)
  6. Wide serve → FH crosscourt return, short → FH volley down the line used 0.5% · won 55% · +6.5±12.6 vs own baseline · +9.0 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

Wide 1st serve · deuce court+4.9710
T 1st serve · ad court+2.9769
T 1st serve · deuce court+2.7946
Body 1st serve · deuce court+2.3154
FH to their forehand · return+2.2210

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · return +1−5.1195
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1−3.8150
FH to their backhand · return−3.3223
BH volley to their backhand · serve +1−3.2248
FH to their backhand · return +1−3.1126

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Jesper De Jong, Lorenzo Musetti, Sebastian Baez, Nishesh Basavareddy, Cameron Norrie

Tactical fingerprint

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

BH down the line45%
Serve & volley75%
Point-ending shots40.4%
Points at net28%
Backhand slice57%
Chipped returns36%
FH down the line39%
T serves · ad47%
T serves · deuce52%
Unforced errors / shot12.1%
Run-around forehands16%
Wide serves · deuce39%
Wide serves · ad45%
1st serve in58%
Drop shots / shot0.3%
Deep returns17%
Forehand share45%
Through the middle18%
Avg rally length2.5

Plays most like

  1. Michael Stich 1990–1997 plan v
  2. Boris Becker 1985–1999 plan v
  3. Greg Rusedski 1993–2005 plan v
  4. Tim Henman 1995–2006 plan v
  5. Max Mirnyi 2001–2006 plan v
  6. Pete Sampras 1990–2002 plan v
  7. Patrick Rafter 1993–2001 plan v
  8. John Mcenroe 1978–1992 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Gilles Muller 2005–2017
  2. Ivo Karlovic 2003–2021
  3. Nicolas Mahut 2007–2021

Charted matches