RallyIQ

ATP · Left-handed · 41 charted matches · 2015–2025

Yoshihito Nishioka

Archetype: Avoids the wide serve · Ad-court slider

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 59.9% ±2.8 raw 58.2% · tour 63.4% · 3,146 points
Return points won 36.4% ±2.8 raw 33.9% · tour 36.6% · 3,012 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 −0.29 ±0.10 better than 6% of ATP · raw −0.29
Shot selection −0.18 ±0.14 better than 32% of ATP · raw −0.18
Execution +0.62 ±0.43 better than 87% of ATP · raw +0.63
Tactical adaptability +0.05 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 39 matches
Adaptation speed +0.07 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution +0.10 ±0.51 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 2,393 shots · better than 83% of ATP
Points left on the table 3.00 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 19% 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 16,251 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Yoshihito Nishioka 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 · 1,010 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 30% 52.6%±4.6 52.7%
FH through the middle 19% 50.9%±5.6 47.0%
BH through the middle 14% 48.1%±6.4 46.8%
FH down the line 13% 54.1%±6.6 51.5%
BH crosscourt 12% 57.3%±6.9 49.1%
BH down the line 7% 53.0%±8.8 48.3%
FH crosscourt + approach 1% 67.7%±13.8 69.9%
BH down the line + approach 1% 70.8%±13.7 66.2%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 977 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 48.4%±3.8 46.6%
FH through the middle 25% 48.0%±5.0 41.5%
FH down the line 18% 49.7%±5.8 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 5% 20.2%±7.9 24.5%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 36.1%±12.2 30.9%

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

position worth 46% to the average player · 846 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 51.0%±4.5 47.6%
BH through the middle 27% 51.5%±5.2 43.7%
BH down the line 20% 46.7%±5.9 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 4% 22.3%±9.3 35.1%
FH inside-in 3% 53.3%±12.5 54.7%
FH through the middle 3% 43.0%±12.6 45.2%
BH slice down the line 2% 35.3%±12.8 37.1%
BH down the line + approach 2% 64.4%±13.7 66.2%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 668 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 47% 52.6%±4.5 46.9%
FH through the middle 22% 45.7%±6.3 41.4%
FH down the line 20% 46.3%±6.7 44.8%
FH slice through the middle 4% 25.2%±10.8 25.4%
FH slice crosscourt 2% 30.1%±12.9 31.2%
BH inside-in 2% 42.6%±14.6 46.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Yoshihito Nishioka's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 336 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 25% 25% 62% / 73%
Body 22% 16% 57% / 63%
T 53% 59% 61% / 75%

1,557 normal · 83 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 55% 54% 63% / 73%
Body 16% 15% 60% / 63%
T 29% 31% 75% / 72%

1,249 normal · 253 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
Wide25% 54.7%±3.9 n=408 34% ▲
Body22% 53.8%±4.2 n=356 9% ▼
T53% 57.4%±2.7 n=876 57% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.37).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide55% 60.0%±2.8 n=820 55%
Body16% 59.1%±4.9 n=242 3% ▼
T29% 62.9%±3.7 n=440 42% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.45).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.46 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: +1.7±3.5 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. (1,088 repeats, 1,974 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 63 38% +0.7±8.3
1stAd courtT 402 23% −4.8±3.3
1stAd courtWide 361 22% −5.4±3.4
1stDeuce courtBody 87 45% +8.6±7.6
1stDeuce courtT 379 20% −4.6±3.3
1stDeuce courtWide 534 21% −6.2±2.8
2ndAd courtBody 233 50% +0.7±5.1
2ndAd courtT 192 54% +4.2±5.5
2ndAd courtWide 184 48% −0.5±5.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 230 51% +1.6±5.1
2ndDeuce courtT 168 49% −0.3±5.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 176 52% +3.6±5.7

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 63% · +1.2±6.7 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.3% · won 57% · −4.4±8.4 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.8% · won 57% · −4.8±6.9 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.1% · won 54% · −6.9±8.7 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 5.6% · won 56% · −5.2±5.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.8% · won 53% · +11.8±9.1 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.9% · won 51% · +9.9±9.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.5% · won 48% · +6.7±9.4 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt, short used 2.1% · won 42% · +1.4±9.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.1% · won 41% · ±0.0±8.7 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH through the middle → BH through the middle used 3.2% · won 58% · +7.0±6.8 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → BH down the line used 1.4% · won 60% · +9.1±9.2 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → BH through the middle used 2.4% · won 56% · +5.3±7.6 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 56% · +5.0±8.0 vs own baseline
  5. BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 4.2% · won 54% · +3.1±6.1 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 1.1% · won 57% · +6.4±7.6 vs own baseline · +4.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Andy Murray (2/6), Jordan Thompson (4/8)
  2. BH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.2% · won 64% · +13.9±12.0 vs own baseline · +30.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.6% · won 59% · +8.3±9.6 vs own baseline · +20.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Casper Ruud (4/6), Thiago Seyboth Wild (4/6)
  4. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 56% · +5.6±7.4 vs own baseline · +9.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jordan Thompson (3/7), Andy Murray (6/12)
  5. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 61% · +10.5±11.1 vs own baseline · +19.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH down the line → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 61% · +10.5±11.1 vs own baseline · +15.3 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+3.1263
FH to the middle · rally+2.9778
BH to their forehand · return +1+2.7204
BH to their forehand · serve +1+2.4351
FH to their backhand · return+2.3274

Most exposed to

BH to the middle · return−4.8881
FH to their backhand · return−3.9241
BH to their backhand · return−3.7259
FH to the middle · return−3.1538
BH to their forehand · return−3.1447

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +2.63, Jack Draper +2.29, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.04, Pedro Martinez +1.95, Casper Ruud +1.90

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +2.19, Pedro Martinez +2.16, Alexander Shevchenko +2.14, Roberto Bautista Agut +2.06, Cameron Norrie +2.05

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Juan Carlos Prado Angelo, Cameron Norrie, Daniil Medvedev, Dusan Lajovic, Ugo Humbert

Tactical fingerprint

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

T serves · deuce53%
Through the middle29%
1st serve in65%
Avg rally length4.4
Wide serves · ad55%
Forehand share56%
BH down the line22%
Chipped returns18%
Deep returns28%
Serve & volley1%
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Points at net8%
Unforced errors / shot8.4%
Backhand slice9%
Point-ending shots18.5%
Run-around forehands7%
T serves · ad29%
FH down the line24%
Wide serves · deuce25%

Plays most like

  1. Federico Delbonis 2013–2023 plan v
  2. Albert Ramos 2014–2025 plan v
  3. Cameron Norrie 2015–2026 plan v
  4. Dominik Koepfer 2018–2025 plan v
  5. Rafael Nadal 2003–2024 plan v
  6. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005 plan v
  7. Mattia Bellucci 2022–2025 plan v
  8. Guido Pella 2014–2021 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Gaston Gaudio 2002–2005
  2. Juan Carlos Ferrero 2000–2009
  3. Thomas Muster 1988–2011

Charted matches