Racquet Rating Lab

Data-driven tennis analytics

⌕
HomeTop PlayersExplorerCompareMajorsSummariesMethodology
⌕

Data sources

Match data by Jeff Sackmann / Tennis Abstract, licensed CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Racquet Rating transforms this data into a canonical match schema and derives its own ratings from it. Racquet Rating is operated on a non-commercial basis.

Tennis databases, files, and algorithms by Jeff Sackmann / Tennis Abstract is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Based on a work at https://github.com/JeffSackmann.

Full data sources, licence and derivation details

Loading player profile…
← Back to players

ATP·PAR

Adolfo DanielVallejo

AV

Racquet Rating: not currently rated. Insufficient recent evidence (9 qualifying matches; 40 required)

Racquet Rating

Not currently rated

Status: NOT CURRENTLY RATED

Reason: Insufficient recent evidence (9 qualifying matches; 40 required)

Last qualifying match: May 25, 2026

Official ATP Ranking

#72828 ranking points

As of 2026-06-08. Source: JeffSackmann. Separate from the Racquet Rating, and not an input to it.

Evidence behind this rating

Qualifying matches
9of 40 required
Record in window
5–4
Rating window
4 years
Distinct opponents
—

Model v1.1.0 · match data through 2026-05-25 · canonical id atp:209226.

Racquet Rating requires at least 40 qualifying matches in the current 4-year rating window. Players without sufficient recent evidence are not assigned a current rating. How ratings are calculated

Match data through 2026-05-25 · model v1.1.0. Data sources · Methodology

Rating history

Every published Racquet Rating observation for Adolfo Daniel Vallejo, from the canonical rating artifact.

Rating history is unavailable until the player meets the minimum evidence requirement. This player has 9 of the 40 qualifying matches required.

The history plots published Racquet Rating observations. It is never interpolated or back-filled.

Why this rating?

The published Racquet Rating is the sum of five weighted model components. This is that sum, for Adolfo Daniel Vallejo.

Racquet Rating requires at least 40 qualifying matches in the 4-year rating window before a current rating is published, so there are no components to explain yet. This player has 9 of them.

A published rating is required before it can be explained.

Surface performance

Performance over the headline rating window. Rates are shown only where the surface sample provides sufficient evidence.

Surface performance over the rating window: 9 matches, 9 with a recorded surface. Surfaces played: Clay. Clay, 5 wins and 4 losses. No win rate is published: a rate requires at least 10 matches on a surface and this record covers 9. These rates describe this player only and are not used to rank players.

  • Clay

    5–4Clay, 5 wins and 4 losses. No win rate is published: a rate requires at least 10 matches on a surface and this record covers 9.9 matches

    Rate requires at least 10 matches.

    Why no percentage

    A win rate needs at least 10 matches on a surface to mean anything. This record covers 9, so the matches are shown and the percentage is not.

9 matches in rating window · 9 known surface

How surface performance is measured

These records come from the same canonical match observations as the headline Racquet Rating, over the same 9-match rating window. Nothing here is a separate rating.

A win rate appears only where a surface has at least 10 matches. Below that a single result moves the percentage by ten points or more, so the record is shown and the percentage is not.

The range beside each rate is a 95% confidence interval. It is wide on purpose: a surface record of a few dozen matches does not pin a percentage down, and the interval is the honest width of that uncertainty rather than a claim of precision.

Matches whose source records no surface are counted in the totals and assigned to no surface. They are never redistributed.

Surface rates are descriptive. They are not combined into a surface rating, and they are not used to rank or compare players — at these sample sizes most players' rates cannot be told apart.

Highest-ranked opponents defeated

Victories over the highest-ranked opponents in the published rating window, using the opponent's official rank at the time of the match.

The 5 highest-ranked opponents defeated in the published rating window, out of 5 wins over ranked opponents. Ordered by the opponent's ranking at the time of each match, best first.

  1. Defeated Learner Tien, ranked number 21 at the time of the match, in April 2026 at Madrid Masters · Round of 64.

    Learner TienNo. 21 at the time

    April 2026 · Madrid Masters · Round of 64

    6-4 6-3

  2. Defeated Cameron Norrie, ranked number 24 at the time of the match, in May 2026 at Roland Garros · Round of 128, opponent retired.

    Cameron NorrieNo. 24 at the timeRET

    May 2026 · Roland Garros · Round of 128

    7-6(7) 2-0 RET

  3. Defeated Zachary Svajda, ranked number 82 at the time of the match, in March 2026 at Houston · Round of 32.

    Zachary SvajdaNo. 82 at the time

    March 2026 · Houston · Round of 32

    6-1 6-4

  4. Defeated Grigor Dimitrov, ranked number 137 at the time of the match, in April 2026 at Madrid Masters · Round of 128.

    Grigor DimitrovNo. 137 at the time

    April 2026 · Madrid Masters · Round of 128

    6-4 6-4

  5. Defeated Francesco Passaro, ranked number 144 at the time of the match, in February 2026 at Santiago · Round of 32, opponent retired.

    Francesco PassaroNo. 144 at the timeRET

    February 2026 · Santiago · Round of 32

    6-3 3-3 RET

From 5 wins over ranked opponents in the rating window.

How these are chosen

Every win this player recorded in the rating window against an opponent the source ranks, ordered by that opponent's official ranking in the week of the tournament, and limited to the 5 highest. Each opponent appears once, at that player's highest-ranked victory over them.

The ranking shown is the opponent's ranking at the time of that match, taken from the same match record as the result. It is not their ranking today, and not their career-high.

Retirements are included and marked. The match was played and a winner advanced, and it counts toward the rating this profile explains — but it was not completed, so it is not presented as though it had been.

This is a list ordered by one rule: how highly the opponent was ranked that week. It is not a judgement of which victories were the finest, and a higher-ranked opponent does not by itself mean a better performance.

Not yet available

These sections are published only once the underlying verified data exists. Nothing below is estimated or inferred in the meantime.

Recent form
A recent-results record covers the last 10 matches. This player has 9 in the rating window, so the record is not shown.
Performance signals
Performance signals are not published yet. Each one needs a defined trigger, data window and minimum-evidence rule before it can appear here.
Comparable players
Comparable players are not published yet. Ranking players by raw rating distance alone is not a defensible similarity method, so no comparison is shown.