RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 64 charted matches · 1994–2002

Yevgeny Kafelnikov

Archetype: Blocks returns short · Works the corners

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 64.1% ±2.4 raw 61.9% · tour 63.4% · 6,123 points
Return points won 38.2% ±2.5 raw 34.6% · tour 36.6% · 5,939 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 +0.30 ±0.06 better than 98% of ATP · raw +0.30
Shot selection −0.27 ±0.14 better than 26% of ATP · raw −0.27
Execution −0.55 ±0.29 better than 42% of ATP · raw −0.51
Tactical adaptability +0.04 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 62 matches
Adaptation speed +0.09 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.37 ±0.56 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 2,794 shots · better than 27% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.43 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 70% 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 27,832 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Yevgeny Kafelnikov 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 · 1,611 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 45% 47.7%±3.0 47.6%
BH through the middle 13% 43.4%±5.3 43.7%
BH slice crosscourt 12% 44.1%±5.5 42.5%
BH down the line 12% 46.2%±5.6 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 5% 28.0%±7.4 35.1%
FH inside-out 4% 45.9%±9.3 51.8%
BH slice down the line 2% 41.1%±10.7 37.1%
FH inside-in 2% 48.8%±12.0 54.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 1,088 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 50% 44.3%±3.4 46.6%
FH down the line 27% 40.7%±4.6 44.7%
FH through the middle 18% 42.9%±5.6 41.5%
FH down the line + approach 2% 61.6%±12.3 69.3%
FH slice down the line 2% 24.0%±11.4 25.6%
FH slice through the middle 1% 27.0%±12.7 24.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 985 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 24% 55.3%±5.1 52.7%
FH down the line 20% 45.5%±5.6 51.5%
BH crosscourt 15% 47.5%±6.4 49.1%
FH through the middle 13% 53.6%±6.7 47.0%
BH through the middle 10% 48.6%±7.6 46.8%
BH down the line 7% 42.0%±8.5 48.3%
FH down the line + approach 4% 66.3%±10.4 70.5%
BH crosscourt + approach 3% 65.0%±11.4 67.7%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 822 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 41% 42.3%±4.3 48.0%
BH slice crosscourt 18% 37.5%±6.1 42.1%
BH down the line 15% 48.1%±6.8 46.5%
BH through the middle 12% 47.6%±7.7 43.8%
BH slice through the middle 7% 37.7%±9.1 35.1%
BH slice down the line 3% 32.9%±11.8 35.8%
FH inside-out 2% 37.6%±13.3 52.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +7 How much less varied Yevgeny Kafelnikov's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 517 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 51% 56% 72% / 73%
Body 7% 3% 66% / 63%
T 42% 41% 76% / 75%

3,000 normal · 133 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 50% 51% 73% / 73%
Body 7% 4% 63% / 63%
T 43% 45% 69% / 72%

2,481 normal · 384 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
Wide51% 64.0%±2.0 n=1,589 64% ▲
Body7% 61.2%±5.1 n=215 0% ▼
T42% 62.0%±2.2 n=1,329 36% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.42).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide50% 59.7%±2.1 n=1,446 44% ▼
Body6% 57.5%±5.6 n=181 0% ▼
T43% 61.5%±2.2 n=1,238 56% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.40).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.36 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: +0.5±2.1 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. (2,486 repeats, 3,384 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 123 38% +1.0±6.5
1stAd courtT 702 28% −0.4±2.7
1stAd courtWide 720 25% −1.7±2.6
1stDeuce courtBody 131 40% +3.0±6.3
1stDeuce courtT 840 21% −4.0±2.3
1stDeuce courtWide 771 24% −2.7±2.5
2ndAd courtBody 318 47% −2.0±4.4
2ndAd courtT 262 54% +4.4±4.8
2ndAd courtWide 657 47% −1.3±3.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 420 47% −1.7±3.9
2ndDeuce courtT 557 47% −2.7±3.4
2ndDeuce courtWide 340 42% −6.3±4.2

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Yevgeny Kafelnikov'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 2.5% · won 58% · −8.2±6.3 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 57% · −9.7±6.4 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 53% · −12.9±6.8 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 53% · −13.1±6.6 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 51% · −15.0±6.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 5.9% · won 47% · +9.6±4.7 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.7% · won 50% · +12.5±6.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.8% · won 49% · +11.5±6.6 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH down the line, mid used 2.1% · won 50% · +12.5±7.4 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 3.0% · won 48% · +10.3±6.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 2.1% · won 56% · +10.6±6.9 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 53% · +7.1±6.1 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 51% · +5.7±5.0 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 6.7% · won 50% · +4.6±4.2 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 53% · +6.8±7.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 58% · +9.8±8.6 vs own baseline · +8.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Pete Sampras (5/8), Andre Agassi (10/15)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH slice down the line → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 60% · +12.2±10.1 vs own baseline · +15.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Younes El Aynaoui (6/9), Richard Krajicek (5/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line + approach used 0.2% · won 62% · +13.6±11.7 vs own baseline · +6.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH through the middle used 0.3% · won 58% · +9.9±10.3 vs own baseline · +16.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andrei Medvedev (8/11)
  5. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 56% · +8.0±9.5 vs own baseline · +12.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Lleyton Hewitt (3/6), Andrei Medvedev (4/7)
  6. Body serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 59% · +10.7±11.3 vs own baseline · +19.5 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 slice to their forehand · rally+2.0124
BH slice to their backhand · return +1+2.0179
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.5736
BH slice to the middle · rally+1.3209
FH to their backhand · return+0.4577

Most exposed to

BH to their forehand · serve +1−3.0255
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1−2.2157
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.91,235
BH slice to the middle · return +1−1.3121
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1−1.2144

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Jack Draper, Jannik Sinner, Miomir Kecmanovic, Alexander Zverev, Kei Nishikori

Tactical fingerprint

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

Wide serves · deuce51%
T serves · ad43%
Points at net14%
BH down the line23%
Serve & volley14%
FH down the line32%
Point-ending shots24.8%
Unforced errors / shot10.4%
Wide serves · ad50%
Backhand slice19%
Chipped returns12%
T serves · deuce42%
Avg rally length3.7
Drop shots / shot0.8%
Run-around forehands12%
Forehand share48%
Deep returns18%
1st serve in55%
Through the middle18%

Plays most like

  1. Thomas Johansson 1996–2005 plan v
  2. Thomas Enqvist 1993–2001 plan v
  3. Ivan Ljubicic 2003–2011 plan v
  4. Nicolas Kiefer 1999–2008 plan v
  5. David Nalbandian 2002–2012 plan v
  6. Andre Agassi 1988–2006 plan v
  7. Arnaud Clement 1999–2006 plan v
  8. Richard Gasquet 2002–2025 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Richard Gasquet 2002–2025
  2. Nishesh Basavareddy 2024–2025
  3. Kei Nishikori 2011–2025

Charted matches