RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 58 charted matches · 2019–2026

Ugo Humbert

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 65.7% ±2.6 raw 66.6% · tour 63.4% · 4,214 points
Return points won 36.8% ±2.7 raw 34.7% · tour 36.6% · 4,128 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 −0.09 ±0.06 better than 34% of ATP · raw −0.08
Shot selection −0.20 ±0.13 better than 30% of ATP · raw −0.19
Execution +0.66 ±0.45 better than 87% of ATP · raw +0.77
Tactical adaptability +0.08 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 56 matches
Adaptation speed −0.02 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.84 ±0.53 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 2,323 shots · better than 1% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.97 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 21% 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 20,264 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Ugo Humbert 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 · 1,178 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 25% 43.3%±4.6 52.7%
FH through the middle 18% 45.2%±5.4 47.0%
FH down the line 16% 51.6%±5.7 51.5%
BH crosscourt 13% 52.2%±6.2 49.1%
BH through the middle 13% 49.4%±6.2 46.8%
BH down the line 8% 54.7%±7.5 48.3%
BH slice through the middle 1% 55.4%±13.6 44.8%
FH down the line + approach 1% 73.0%±12.7 70.5%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 1,021 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 40% 47.8%±4.0 47.6%
BH through the middle 26% 38.0%±4.8 43.7%
BH down the line 18% 50.4%±5.7 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 6% 40.8%±9.0 35.1%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 40.6%±11.7 42.5%
BH slice down the line 2% 34.3%±12.1 37.1%
FH inside-out 2% 47.1%±13.1 51.8%
FH inside-in 1% 59.2%±14.3 54.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 907 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 44.2%±3.9 46.6%
FH through the middle 22% 45.6%±5.5 41.5%
FH down the line 18% 41.6%±6.0 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 7% 22.6%±7.3 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 4% 34.9%±10.6 30.9%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 569 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 40.1%±4.8 46.9%
FH down the line 23% 35.5%±6.5 44.8%
FH through the middle 20% 33.3%±6.6 41.4%
FH slice through the middle 8% 17.3%±7.8 25.4%
FH slice crosscourt 4% 35.6%±12.5 31.2%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −1 How much less varied Ugo Humbert's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 304 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 46% 78% / 73%
Body 5% 5% 64% / 63%
T 49% 49% 70% / 75%

2,145 normal · 61 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 54% 47% 72% / 73%
Body 5% 5% 59% / 63%
T 41% 48% 81% / 72%

1,764 normal · 243 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
Wide45% 66.9%±2.4 n=998 58% ▲
Body5% 63.5%±6.5 n=120 0% ▼
T49% 63.7%±2.4 n=1,088 42% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.24).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide53% 68.5%±2.3 n=1,062 45% ▼
Body5% 58.9%±6.9 n=107 0% ▼
T42% 69.7%±2.6 n=838 55% ▲

Off equilibrium (p = 0.014): serve T more. Gap 1.2 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.56 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±2.2 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. (1,589 repeats, 2,508 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 87 32% −5.3±7.1
1stAd courtT 656 27% −0.7±2.8
1stAd courtWide 493 21% −6.4±2.9
1stDeuce courtBody 100 35% −2.1±6.9
1stDeuce courtT 602 25% −0.3±2.8
1stDeuce courtWide 684 27% ±0.0±2.7
2ndAd courtBody 229 46% −3.1±5.1
2ndAd courtT 290 51% +1.6±4.6
2ndAd courtWide 206 50% +1.4±5.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 233 51% +2.2±5.1
2ndDeuce courtT 237 52% +2.0±5.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 307 51% +2.5±4.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 64% · −4.6±6.0 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 4.7% · won 65% · −4.1±5.3 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 62% · −6.8±7.6 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 56% · −12.6±6.3 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.1% · won 52% · −17.0±7.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.1% · won 55% · +15.1±7.6 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.8% · won 53% · +12.7±7.9 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.7% · won 52% · +11.3±8.0 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.9% · won 46% · +5.5±6.9 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.3% · won 46% · +5.5±8.5 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.2% · won 53% · +7.5±5.7 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 3.7% · won 51% · +5.6±6.1 vs own baseline
  3. BH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 56% · +10.3±9.6 vs own baseline
  4. BH down the line → FH down the line used 1.9% · won 51% · +5.3±8.0 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.5% · won 50% · +4.8±8.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. T serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 59% · +10.4±8.5 vs own baseline · +8.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Alexander Zverev (3/6), Hubert Hurkacz (7/9)
  2. FH down the line → FH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 60% · +10.9±10.1 vs own baseline · +5.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. Wide serve → BH through the middle return → FH down the line used 0.2% · won 63% · +14.1±11.5 vs own baseline · +20.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 60% · +11.6±10.8 vs own baseline · +19.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Hubert Hurkacz (5/7)
  5. FH crosscourt → BH slice through the middle → FH down the line used 0.3% · won 61% · +12.0±11.0 vs own baseline · +11.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → FH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 62% · +12.9±11.4 vs own baseline · +14.3 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 their forehand · return+4.1299
FH to their backhand · return +1+3.0389
Wide 1st serve · ad court+2.91,062
T 1st serve · ad court+2.7838
BH to their backhand · return+2.7318

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · return−3.8196
BH slice to their forehand · rally−2.9147
BH slice to the middle · return−2.7218
FH slice to their backhand · rally−2.5152
T 1st serve · ad court−2.4928

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +1.88, Jack Draper +1.56, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.26, Pedro Martinez +1.16, Casper Ruud +1.14

Favourable matchups

Pedro Martinez +1.20, Miomir Kecmanovic +1.15, Fabian Marozsan +1.11, Alexander Shevchenko +1.11, Cameron Norrie +0.95

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Miomir Kecmanovic, Andy Murray, Joao Fonseca, Bernard Tomic, Albert Ramos

Tactical fingerprint

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

Deep returns37%
BH down the line26%
Unforced errors / shot11.5%
T serves · deuce49%
1st serve in64%
Forehand share56%
T serves · ad42%
Wide serves · ad53%
Point-ending shots25.9%
Wide serves · deuce45%
Through the middle25%
Avg rally length3.9
Chipped returns12%
Serve & volley1%
FH down the line28%
Backhand slice12%
Drop shots / shot0.7%
Points at net8%
Run-around forehands8%

Plays most like

  1. Rafael Jodar 2025–2026 plan v
  2. Sebastian Korda 2021–2026 plan v
  3. Learner Tien 2022–2026 plan v
  4. Hubert Hurkacz 2018–2026 plan v
  5. Fernando Verdasco 2005–2022 plan v
  6. Gregoire Barrere 2016–2024 plan v
  7. Denis Istomin 2006–2021 plan v
  8. Joao Fonseca 2024–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Robin Soderling 2004–2011
  2. Ivan Ljubicic 2003–2011
  3. Marat Safin 1998–2009

Charted matches