RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 6 charted matches · 2010–2017

Teymuraz Gabashvili

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.6% ±3.6 raw 59.1% · tour 63.4% · 460 points
Return points won 35.8% ±3.6 raw 32.7% · tour 36.6% · 459 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.

Shot expected value

The share of points Teymuraz Gabashvili 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 middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 119 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 21% 54.0%±12.2 51.5%
FH crosscourt 20% 60.3%±12.1 52.7%
FH through the middle 18% 51.0%±12.7 47.0%
BH through the middle 18% 52.1%±12.8 46.8%
BH crosscourt 17% 47.1%±13.0 49.1%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 112 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 66% 37.8%±8.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 25% 43.2%±11.8 43.7%
BH down the line 9% 34.3%±14.3 46.4%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 69 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH through the middle 22% 49.9%±13.9 47.4%
FH down the line 22% 46.8%±13.9 52.0%
FH crosscourt 17% 64.2%±13.9 52.7%
BH crosscourt 17% 49.7%±14.5 49.6%
BH through the middle 14% 41.2%±14.8 46.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 69 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 43% 57.2%±11.5 48.0%
BH through the middle 32% 47.1%±12.7 43.8%
BH down the line 16% 52.6%±14.8 46.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +1 How much less varied Teymuraz Gabashvili's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 42 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 45% 66% / 73%
Body 14% 27% ▲ 58% / 63%
T 44% 27% ▼ 75% / 75%

229 normal · 11 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 43% 45% 74% / 73%
Body 12% 10% 65% / 63%
T 45% 45% 62% / 72%

188 normal · 31 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
Wide43% 60.5%±7.0 n=102 42%
Body15% 54.8%±10.2 n=35 2% ▼
T43% 64.1%±6.8 n=103 56% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.22).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide43% 64.3%±7.0 n=95 56% ▲
Body12% 54.9%±10.9 n=26 0% ▼
T45% 51.0%±7.3 n=98 44%

Off equilibrium (p = 0.035): serve wide more. Gap 7.1 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.67 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: +1.2±7.5 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. (152 repeats, 295 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 24 30% −7.2±10.2
1stAd courtT 39 28% +0.1±8.9
1stAd courtWide 81 28% +0.8±7.0
1stDeuce courtBody 25 42% +5.1±10.9
1stDeuce courtT 65 18% −6.6±6.5
1stDeuce courtWide 71 22% −5.2±6.8
2ndAd courtBody 24 53% +4.0±11.2
2ndAd courtT 11 51% +1.4±12.8
2ndAd courtWide 40 49% +0.9±9.8
2ndDeuce courtBody 44 46% −3.5±9.5
2ndDeuce courtT 25 47% −2.6±11.1
2ndDeuce courtWide 9 47% −0.8±13.2

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 9.2% · won 55% · −7.0±11.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 7.3% · won 54% · +5.3±11.1 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 8.8% · won 53% · +4.1±10.6 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.9% · won 49% · +0.6±11.8 vs own baseline
  4. BH direction unknown → FH direction unknown used 6.2% · won 40% · −8.2±11.4 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 54% · +3.5±11.2 vs own baseline · +8.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Pablo Carreno Busta (5/13), Damir Dzumhur (6/9)

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 to their forehand · rally+0.3124
BH to their backhand · rally−1.1153

Most exposed to

Charted matches