RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 18 charted matches · 2021–2026

Zizou Bergs

Archetype: High-risk · Runs around the backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 62.8% ±3.0 raw 64.3% · tour 63.4% · 1,475 points
Return points won 36.9% ±3.0 raw 33.6% · tour 36.6% · 1,516 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 −0.08 ±0.07 better than 36% of ATP · raw −0.08
Shot selection +0.25 ±0.19 better than 75% of ATP · raw +0.27
Execution −1.10 ±0.72 better than 22% of ATP · raw −0.88
Tactical adaptability −0.01 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 18 matches
Adaptation speed −0.04 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.64 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 46% 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 6,804 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Zizou Bergs 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 · 379 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 35% 48.1%±6.6 47.6%
BH through the middle 26% 43.9%±7.5 43.7%
FH inside-out 8% 46.9%±11.4 51.8%
BH down the line 8% 43.7%±11.4 46.4%
BH slice crosscourt 8% 41.8%±11.6 42.5%
BH slice through the middle 7% 42.6%±11.9 35.1%
FH inside-in 3% 57.4%±14.2 54.7%

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

position worth 44% to the average player · 271 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 44% 51.3%±7.0 46.6%
FH through the middle 20% 47.1%±9.5 41.5%
FH down the line 20% 42.6%±9.4 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 8% 16.4%±9.4 24.5%
FH slice down the line 4% 28.5%±13.1 25.6%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 268 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 29% 51.6%±8.3 52.7%
FH down the line 27% 60.1%±8.4 51.5%
FH through the middle 17% 41.5%±10.0 47.0%
BH through the middle 9% 46.3%±12.4 46.8%
BH crosscourt 5% 60.1%±14.0 49.1%
BH down the line 4% 53.7%±14.7 48.3%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 198 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 43.6%±8.4 46.9%
BH through the middle 27% 45.4%±9.5 43.0%
BH slice through the middle 12% 33.7%±11.9 32.6%
BH down the line 10% 45.7%±13.1 44.2%
BH slice crosscourt 8% 47.7%±13.7 40.9%
FH inside-out 6% 46.2%±14.7 51.7%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +1 How much less varied Zizou Bergs's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 111 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 43% 75% / 73%
Body 11% 18% 68% / 63%
T 44% 39% 76% / 75%

746 normal · 28 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 48% 42% 72% / 73%
Body 9% 7% 67% / 63%
T 42% 51% ▲ 65% / 72%

617 normal · 83 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% 65.8%±4.0 n=347 43% ▼
Body11% 62.7%±7.3 n=88 0% ▼
T44% 68.8%±4.0 n=339 57% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.32).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide48% 60.4%±4.2 n=334 44% ▼
Body9% 60.9%±8.4 n=62 0% ▼
T43% 63.4%±4.3 n=304 56% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.69).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.55 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: −2.5±4.8 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. (488 repeats, 950 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 38 34% −3.0±9.4
1stAd courtT 204 23% −5.2±4.5
1stAd courtWide 201 26% −0.8±4.8
1stDeuce courtBody 33 37% −0.2±10.0
1stDeuce courtT 228 27% +1.9±4.5
1stDeuce courtWide 259 27% −0.1±4.3
2ndAd courtBody 92 51% +1.3±7.4
2ndAd courtT 53 48% −1.3±9.0
2ndAd courtWide 129 46% −2.8±6.5
2ndDeuce courtBody 77 54% +4.9±7.9
2ndDeuce courtT 106 45% −4.9±7.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 92 41% −7.6±7.3

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 69% · −1.7±10.1 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 68% · −2.3±10.3 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.1% · won 68% · −2.5±9.5 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 67% · −3.5±10.6 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 65% · −5.3±10.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 4.2% · won 51% · +15.4±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 3.1% · won 50% · +14.7±11.1 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.4% · won 50% · +13.8±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 4.9% · won 47% · +11.0±9.7 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 7.4% · won 42% · +6.2±8.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 3.7% · won 58% · +8.9±10.5 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 7.1% · won 54% · +4.8±8.6 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 53% · +4.5±10.1 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 53% · +4.6±10.3 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.9% · won 52% · +3.3±11.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 57% · +8.7±12.3 vs own baseline · +15.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 58% · +9.4±12.9 vs own baseline · +22.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 54% · +5.3±9.7 vs own baseline · +7.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Flavio Cobolli (3/6), Gregoire Barrere (5/8)
  4. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.5% · won 56% · +8.0±12.8 vs own baseline · +25.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 56% · +8.0±12.8 vs own baseline · +14.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 56% · +8.0±12.8 vs own baseline · +15.6 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

Wide 1st serve · deuce court+1.3347
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.9334
T 1st serve · deuce court+0.8339
BH to their backhand · serve +1+0.3142
FH to their forehand · serve +1−0.3202

Most exposed to

Wide 2nd serve · ad court−2.3129
T 1st serve · ad court−1.9294
BH to their backhand · return−1.4180
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.1359
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.9241

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Miomir Kecmanovic +0.93, Nishesh Basavareddy +0.85, Pedro Martinez +0.76, Casper Ruud +0.73, Rafael Nadal +0.73

Favourable matchups

Fabian Marozsan +0.35, Miomir Kecmanovic +0.31, Pedro Martinez +0.13, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.12, Roberto Carballes Baena +0.09

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Reilly Opelka, Nick Kyrgios, Arthur Rinderknech, Nicolas Jarry, Miomir Kecmanovic

Tactical fingerprint

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

Unforced errors / shot12.3%
Forehand share58%
Deep returns33%
Drop shots / shot2.4%
Point-ending shots27.4%
T serves · ad43%
Run-around forehands23%
1st serve in62%
Wide serves · deuce45%
Through the middle25%
Backhand slice19%
Serve & volley5%
T serves · deuce44%
Points at net10%
Chipped returns12%
Wide serves · ad48%
FH down the line28%
BH down the line16%
Avg rally length3.5

Plays most like

  1. Stefanos Tsitsipas 2016–2026 plan v
  2. Alexei Popyrin 2019–2026 plan v
  3. Felix Auger Aliassime 2017–2026 plan v
  4. Zhizhen Zhang 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Roman Safiullin 2017–2025 plan v
  6. Lucas Pouille 2015–2024 plan v
  7. Ben Shelton 2021–2026 plan v
  8. Otto Virtanen 2022–2025 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. James Blake 2002–2011
  2. Robin Soderling 2004–2011
  3. Mario Ancic 2002–2008

Charted matches