RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 5 charted matches · 1980–1982

Vitas Gerulaitis

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 63.9% ±3.6 raw 59.7% · tour 63.4% · 521 points
Return points won 37.6% ±3.8 raw 35.4% · tour 36.6% · 520 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 ±0.16 better than 50% of ATP · raw −0.02
Shot selection −0.66 ±0.50 better than 7% of ATP · raw −0.66
Execution +0.43 ±0.48 better than 83% of ATP · raw +0.40
Points left on the table 4.06 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 4% 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 2,862 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Vitas Gerulaitis 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.

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 125 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 58% 43.9%±8.5 42.1%
BH slice through the middle 21% 43.5%±12.0 35.1%
BH slice down the line 18% 50.4%±12.7 35.8%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 123 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH slice crosscourt 57% 50.6%±8.7 42.5%
BH slice through the middle 16% 40.1%±12.7 35.1%
BH slice down the line 14% 41.7%±13.3 37.1%
BH slice crosscourt + approach 9% 54.4%±14.7 54.2%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 86 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 50% 42.8%±10.3 44.8%
FH through the middle 31% 34.6%±11.4 41.4%
FH crosscourt 19% 48.3%±13.7 46.9%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 84 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 49% 42.5%±10.4 44.7%
FH through the middle 35% 41.4%±11.6 41.5%
FH crosscourt 17% 48.0%±14.1 46.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +8 How much less varied Vitas Gerulaitis's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 49 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 44% 77% / 73%
Body 2% 0% 59% / 63%
T 56% 56% 63% / 75%

256 normal · 9 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 68% 73% 76% / 73%
Body 3% 3% 63% / 63%
T 29% 25% 68% / 72%

205 normal · 40 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% 59.8%±6.8 n=111 55% ▲
Body2% 51.4%±13.7 n=6 0% ▼
T56% 53.6%±6.1 n=148 45% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.15).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide69% 62.8%±5.6 n=168 58% ▼
Body3% 62.2%±13.1 n=7 0% ▼
T29% 63.2%±7.9 n=70 42% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.99).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.31 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: −5.0±5.8 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. (209 repeats, 291 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 5 40% +3.3±13.6
1stAd courtT 66 29% +0.5±7.6
1stAd courtWide 82 27% −0.3±6.9
1stDeuce courtBody 10 33% −4.2±12.2
1stDeuce courtT 61 28% +3.0±7.7
1stDeuce courtWide 93 26% −1.0±6.5
2ndAd courtBody 39 45% −4.7±9.8
2ndAd courtT 4 49% +0.1±14.1
2ndAd courtWide 50 42% −6.5±9.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 31 49% −0.3±10.5
2ndDeuce courtT 58 51% +1.3±8.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 17 52% +3.9±12.0

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Not enough data

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt used 11.0% · won 53% · +6.1±9.8 vs own baseline
  2. BH slice crosscourt → BH slice down the line used 7.2% · won 53% · +5.9±11.1 vs own baseline
  3. BH slice crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt used 7.8% · won 48% · +0.6±10.9 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → BH slice crosscourt used 6.1% · won 45% · −1.7±11.6 vs own baseline
  5. BH slice crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.3% · won 39% · −8.3±11.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt used 2.7% · won 51% · +4.1±10.8 vs own baseline · +10.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Bjorn Borg (7/17), Ivan Lendl (11/16)
  2. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt used 1.4% · won 47% · −0.1±12.7 vs own baseline · +3.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Bjorn Borg (4/13)
  3. BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt used 2.1% · won 43% · −4.5±11.4 vs own baseline · −6.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Bjorn Borg (3/13), Ivan Lendl (7/13)

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 slice to their backhand · rally+5.1213
FH to their backhand · rally+1.2162
BH slice to the middle · return+0.6122
T 1st serve · deuce court+0.5148
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.7168

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · rally−0.2151
BH to their backhand · rally±0.0205
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.2138
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.5125
FH to their forehand · rally+1.4140

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Adrian Andreev, Alex Molcan, Rafael Nadal, Hugo Gaston, Daniel Evans

Charted matches