RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 193 charted matches · 1985–2012

Stefan Edberg

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 66.2% ±2.2 raw 65.1% · tour 63.4% · 18,051 points
Return points won 39.7% ±2.3 raw 37.6% · tour 36.6% · 18,560 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 +0.16 ±0.05 better than 89% of ATP · raw +0.16
Shot selection +0.79 ±0.06 better than 98% of ATP · raw +0.79
Execution −0.62 ±0.21 better than 40% of ATP · raw −0.51
Tactical adaptability +0.10 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 160 matches
Adaptation speed +0.04 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.81 ±0.50 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 3,861 shots · better than 2% of ATP
Points left on the table 3.93 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 5% 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 72,481 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Stefan Edberg 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: short return to your middle, you at net

position worth 54% to the average player · 1,942 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH volley crosscourt 31% 64.2%±3.2 56.5%
FH volley crosscourt 19% 68.0%±3.9 61.3%
FH volley down the line 16% 59.5%±4.5 55.4%
BH volley through the middle 14% 39.5%±4.8 36.6%
FH volley through the middle 9% 39.2%±5.7 36.5%
BH volley down the line 8% 54.4%±6.4 50.8%
FH down the line 1% 73.7%±11.5 77.3%
FH crosscourt 1% 84.0%±10.7 79.4%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle, you at net

position worth 57% to the average player · 1,926 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH volley crosscourt 43% 69.2%±2.6 64.6%
FH volley crosscourt 22% 68.5%±3.6 63.8%
FH volley down the line 13% 67.4%±4.6 60.6%
BH volley through the middle 9% 46.3%±6.0 39.5%
BH volley down the line 7% 68.3%±6.1 58.0%
FH volley through the middle 5% 42.9%±7.6 39.5%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 1,888 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 33% 47.4%±3.3 42.5%
BH crosscourt 23% 45.1%±3.8 47.6%
BH through the middle 10% 41.8%±5.6 43.7%
BH slice through the middle 8% 34.1%±6.0 35.1%
BH down the line 7% 39.8%±6.4 46.4%
BH slice down the line + approach 4% 47.7%±8.3 48.6%
BH slice down the line 4% 36.5%±8.0 37.1%
BH slice crosscourt + approach 3% 56.4%±9.4 54.2%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,753 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 32% 46.7%±3.4 46.9%
BH slice crosscourt 23% 49.0%±4.0 40.9%
BH through the middle 13% 42.3%±5.2 43.0%
BH slice through the middle 9% 38.2%±5.9 32.6%
BH down the line 8% 47.6%±6.6 44.2%
BH slice down the line 5% 36.3%±7.9 33.3%
BH slice down the line + approach 2% 47.8%±10.6 48.3%
BH down the line + approach 2% 58.9%±11.2 63.2%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +6 How much less varied Stefan Edberg's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 1371 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 47% 75% / 73%
Body 20% 18% 69% / 63%
T 38% 36% 72% / 75%

8,583 normal · 312 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 54% 62% 72% / 73%
Body 15% 13% 65% / 63%
T 30% 25% 70% / 72%

7,331 normal · 1,059 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
Wide42% 66.0%±1.3 n=3,712 55% ▲
Body20% 66.1%±1.8 n=1,780 20%
T38% 64.6%±1.3 n=3,403 25% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.35).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide55% 64.6%±1.2 n=4,646 68% ▲
Body15% 62.4%±2.2 n=1,260 2% ▼
T30% 62.2%±1.6 n=2,484 30%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.05).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.30 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: −1.3±1.3 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. (6,517 repeats, 10,388 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 598 37% +0.3±3.2
1stAd courtT 1,852 30% +1.7±1.7
1stAd courtWide 2,655 31% +3.7±1.5
1stDeuce courtBody 669 38% +1.3±3.0
1stDeuce courtT 2,405 26% +1.0±1.5
1stDeuce courtWide 2,519 31% +4.2±1.5
2ndAd courtBody 1,072 50% +0.8±2.5
2ndAd courtT 474 53% +3.3±3.7
2ndAd courtWide 1,860 50% +1.6±1.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 1,407 52% +3.0±2.2
2ndDeuce courtT 1,372 48% −2.1±2.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 950 47% −0.7±2.6

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH volley crosscourt used 3.1% · won 72% · +4.6±3.2 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH volley crosscourt used 3.0% · won 70% · +2.4±3.3 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH volley down the line used 2.2% · won 70% · +2.3±3.8 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → BH volley crosscourt used 3.1% · won 69% · +1.8±3.2 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → BH volley down the line used 3.5% · won 68% · +1.0±3.1 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line, mid used 2.0% · won 55% · +15.9±4.4 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.2% · won 53% · +14.5±4.2 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice crosscourt, mid used 4.2% · won 49% · +10.5±3.1 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH slice crosscourt, short used 2.6% · won 51% · +11.9±4.0 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.1% · won 47% · +7.9±4.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line + approach used 1.7% · won 60% · +12.5±6.0 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.8% · won 52% · +4.3±6.0 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 50% · +1.8±6.6 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 1.3% · won 48% · +0.5±6.7 vs own baseline
  5. BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 48% · −0.1±5.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. Body serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH volley crosscourt used 0.7% · won 73% · +21.3±5.0 vs own baseline · +13.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Goran Ivanisevic (5/7), Michael Chang (10/14)
  2. BH volley crosscourt → BH down the line → FH volley crosscourt used 0.4% · won 77% · +25.3±5.8 vs own baseline · +5.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Boris Becker (11/15), Michael Chang (13/17)
  3. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH volley crosscourt used 0.6% · won 72% · +19.9±5.5 vs own baseline · +5.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Boris Becker (22/35), Pete Sampras (10/15)
  4. BH volley crosscourt → BH lob through the middle → Smash crosscourt used 0.3% · won 78% · +26.5±6.9 vs own baseline · −3.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ivan Lendl (9/10), Boris Becker (14/16)
  5. T serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH volley crosscourt used 0.8% · won 67% · +15.3±5.2 vs own baseline · +8.1 vs tour on the same sequence · +12.6 v lefties Disrupted by Aaron Krickstein (4/7), Jim Courier (4/6)
  6. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → BH volley crosscourt used 0.5% · won 70% · +17.8±6.0 vs own baseline · −0.4 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

FH volley to their forehand · rally+7.7616
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1+6.41,395
FH volley to their forehand · return +1+6.1141
BH slice to their forehand · return+5.1953
BH volley to their backhand · rally+4.8510

Most exposed to

BH volley to their backhand · rally−6.9326
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1−5.2334
FH to their backhand · return−3.61,505
FH volley to their forehand · rally−3.6418
BH slice to their forehand · return−3.5427

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

Tactical fingerprint

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

Points at net35%
Serve & volley79%
Chipped returns38%
Point-ending shots35.0%
FH down the line36%
Backhand slice39%
BH down the line26%
Wide serves · ad55%
1st serve in64%
Unforced errors / shot9.6%
Wide serves · deuce42%
Drop shots / shot0.3%
T serves · deuce38%
Through the middle20%
Avg rally length3.2
T serves · ad30%
Run-around forehands2%
Forehand share44%
Deep returns10%

Plays most like

  1. Pat Cash 1984–1992 plan v
  2. Patrick Rafter 1993–2001 plan v
  3. John Mcenroe 1978–1992 plan v
  4. Boris Becker 1985–1999 plan v
  5. Max Mirnyi 2001–2006 plan v
  6. Tim Henman 1995–2006 plan v
  7. Greg Rusedski 1993–2005 plan v
  8. Mark Philippoussis 1995–2003 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Mischa Zverev 2013–2020
  2. Sergiy Stakhovsky 2010–2022
  3. Nicolas Mahut 2007–2021

Charted matches