RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 11 charted matches · 1996–2005

Thomas Johansson

Archetype: Blocks returns short · Works the corners

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.8% ±3.1 raw 63.8% · tour 63.4% · 1,135 points
Return points won 39.0% ±3.2 raw 34.1% · tour 36.6% · 1,158 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 +0.21 ±0.10 better than 95% of ATP · raw +0.21
Shot selection −0.32 ±0.24 better than 21% of ATP · raw −0.32
Execution −0.41 ±0.55 better than 48% of ATP · raw −0.45
Tactical adaptability +0.09 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 10 matches
Adaptation speed −0.03 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.34 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 80% 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 5,456 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Thomas Johansson 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 · 276 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 45% 45.9%±6.8 47.6%
BH through the middle 24% 46.8%±8.9 43.7%
BH down the line 15% 46.4%±10.5 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 10% 39.4%±11.7 42.5%
BH slice through the middle 5% 33.4%±13.5 35.1%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 218 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 43% 48.1%±7.7 46.6%
FH down the line 33% 44.5%±8.5 44.7%
FH through the middle 24% 40.1%±9.4 41.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 196 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 28% 45.0%±9.5 51.5%
FH crosscourt 25% 50.1%±9.9 52.7%
FH through the middle 16% 55.7%±11.4 47.0%
BH through the middle 14% 51.8%±12.0 46.8%
BH crosscourt 10% 47.1%±13.0 49.1%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 171 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 49% 41.9%±8.0 48.0%
BH through the middle 19% 35.4%±10.8 43.8%
BH down the line 16% 51.7%±12.0 46.5%
BH slice crosscourt 12% 43.6%±12.9 42.1%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +21 How much less varied Thomas Johansson's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 91 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 58% 33% ▼ 76% / 73%
Body 4% 0% 57% / 63%
T 38% 67% ▲ 81% / 75%

555 normal · 27 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 51% 48% 75% / 73%
Body 6% 0% 65% / 63%
T 44% 52% 79% / 72%

459 normal · 64 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
Wide57% 66.3%±4.1 n=331 70% ▲
Body4% 58.0%±11.4 n=21 0% ▼
T40% 62.7%±4.9 n=230 30% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.19).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 59.5%±4.7 n=263 42% ▼
Body5% 61.0%±10.6 n=27 0% ▼
T45% 67.1%±4.8 n=233 58% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.12).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.50 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: −0.9±4.5 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. (508 repeats, 575 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 30 40% +3.2±10.4
1stAd courtT 172 24% −4.1±4.9
1stAd courtWide 141 22% −5.5±5.2
1stDeuce courtBody 30 43% +6.6±10.5
1stDeuce courtT 152 26% +1.0±5.4
1stDeuce courtWide 186 26% −0.7±4.9
2ndAd courtBody 72 47% −2.5±8.1
2ndAd courtT 32 51% +2.0±10.4
2ndAd courtWide 93 51% +2.5±7.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 103 46% −3.4±7.1
2ndDeuce courtT 45 45% −4.5±9.5
2ndDeuce courtWide 64 50% +2.4±8.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 68% · −1.0±10.8 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 3.1% · won 65% · −4.1±10.6 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 65% · −3.9±10.0 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.6% · won 62% · −6.9±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.6% · won 62% · −6.9±11.2 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 4.8% · won 49% · +12.5±10.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 4.5% · won 45% · +8.8±11.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 7.0% · won 43% · +6.8±9.7 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.6% · won 46% · +9.4±11.7 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.5% · won 44% · +7.0±11.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.3% · won 53% · +7.2±9.4 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 6.2% · won 50% · +4.6±8.9 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 3.3% · won 51% · +5.5±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 50% · +4.6±10.0 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 49% · +3.2±9.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 55% · +8.1±12.5 vs own baseline · +14.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.6% · won 56% · +8.4±12.8 vs own baseline · +25.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jiri Novak (3/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 51% · +4.0±10.2 vs own baseline · +5.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Yevgeny Kafelnikov (8/18), Nicolas Kiefer (4/6)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 51% · +4.2±11.0 vs own baseline · +6.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Yevgeny Kafelnikov (2/6), Roger Federer (4/7)
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 1.2% · won 50% · +2.4±11.0 vs own baseline · +4.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jiri Novak (7/14)
  6. BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 50% · +2.4±11.9 vs own baseline · +5.0 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

FH to their backhand · return+1.1143
Wide 2nd serve · ad court+0.5202
BH to their backhand · serve +1+0.2178
BH to their backhand · rally+0.1338
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.1331

Most exposed to

T 1st serve · ad court−2.6270
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.0271
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.5268
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.5233
BH to their backhand · rally−0.1288

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Reilly Opelka, Milos Raonic, Nick Kyrgios, Nicolas Jarry, Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard

Tactical fingerprint

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

Wide serves · deuce57%
FH down the line35%
T serves · ad45%
BH down the line23%
Point-ending shots24.2%
Wide serves · ad50%
Points at net11%
Unforced errors / shot9.7%
Serve & volley5%
Avg rally length3.8
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Backhand slice15%
Chipped returns11%
Through the middle21%
T serves · deuce40%
Forehand share48%
Run-around forehands8%
Deep returns19%
1st serve in54%

Plays most like

  1. Yevgeny Kafelnikov 1994–2002 plan v
  2. Thomas Enqvist 1993–2001 plan v
  3. Richard Gasquet 2002–2025 plan v
  4. Jiri Novak 1996–2004 plan v
  5. Nicolas Kiefer 1999–2008 plan v
  6. Arnaud Clement 1999–2006 plan v
  7. Ivan Ljubicic 2003–2011 plan v
  8. Tomas Berdych 2005–2019 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Nishesh Basavareddy 2024–2025
  2. Gregoire Barrere 2016–2024
  3. Karue Sell 2024–2025

Charted matches