Game plan
Andy Roddick v Guillermo Canas
Every number combines what Andy Roddick does well with what Guillermo Canas allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective
Forecast
Each player's serve and return strength is fitted against every opponent they were charted against, so a record built on weak opponents counts for less. At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers. The result is then nudged by Andy Roddick's record against Guillermo Canas's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +2.8 on serve, +3.7 on return vs expectation (487 points); head-to-head: +3.1 on serve, +1.5 on return vs expectation (274 points)). A game-by-game Markov chain turns point odds into match odds; the 90% range covers the uncertainty in the two strengths, not the nudges. Charted matches lean toward big events, so treat this as a scouting estimate, not a betting line.
Head to head, per 100 shots
| Career | Andy | Guillermo |
|---|---|---|
| Direction choice | +0.07 ±0.04 better than 75% | −0.13 ±0.13 better than 23% |
| Shot selection | +0.10 ±0.08 better than 64% | −0.02 ±0.24 better than 50% |
| Execution | +0.65 ±0.22 better than 87% | +0.01 ±0.49 better than 68% |
| Points left on the table | 2.50 ±0.07 lower than 60% | 2.57 ±0.12 lower than 53% |
Each player's career against an average tour player in the same position, adjusted for opponent strength, with a 90% margin (shots clustered by match). Points left on the table is the gap to the best-value direction for the same stroke, so lower is better. Percentiles are within each player's own tour. A side is highlighted only when the gap is larger than the margin on the difference.
Serve plan
The share of points the server wins when a first serve lands in that direction (hover a rate for its 90% interval; ± is the 90% margin). "Matchup" combines the server's rate with how this returner handles that serve. "Optimal" is the mix that wins most against this returner once they start reading a habit, at the response measured across the tour, and only within the range servers' habits actually vary. The gain over the current mix is how exploitable that mix is.
Andy Roddick serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Andy wins | v Guillermo | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 47% | 75% | 76% | 78.1%±6.4 | 41% ▼ |
| Body | 7% | 71% | 64% | 72.1%±11.1 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 46% | 82% | 79% | 84.9%±5.3 | 59% ▲ |
Optimal v Guillermo Canas: +0.4±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +4.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Andy wins | v Guillermo | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 41% | 77% | 71% | 76.1%±6.3 | 35% ▼ |
| Body | 8% | 70% | 71% | 77.0%±10.2 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 52% | 75% | 73% | 76.0%±7.1 | 65% ▲ |
Optimal v Guillermo Canas: +0.3±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +0.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Guillermo Canas serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Guillermo wins | v Andy | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 44% | 66% | 78% | 72.0%±7.0 | 44% |
| Body | 13% | 56% | 63% | 55.8%±12.0 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 43% | 77% | 80% | 82.2%±6.2 | 56% ▲ |
Optimal v Andy Roddick: +1.2±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +8.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Guillermo wins | v Andy | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 39% | 69% | 76% | 72.4%±7.9 | 52% ▲ |
| Body | 8% | 67% | 66% | 69.8%±12.9 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 54% | 68% | 75% | 70.8%±7.6 | 48% ▼ |
Optimal v Andy Roddick: +0.3±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Return plan
Value of each return, in points per 100 returns against an average return of the same serve (direction, court, surface): the tour's result with that return, the returner's own edge with it, and what this server gives up when it comes back to that side. Returns with no charted direction are left out, so values compare with each other rather than with zero. Depth isn't a choice here: missed returns have no depth. Serve quality isn't charted, so a block through the middle partly reflects the serve that forced it.
Andy Roddick returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Guillermo | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 44% | +4.3 | +0.7 | +1.7 | +6.7±2.4 |
| FH down the line | 23% | +1.7 | +1.1 | +0.7 | +3.4±3.7 |
| FH crosscourt | 13% | +5.5 | −2.4 | −1.7 | +1.4±3.5 |
| FH slice through the middle | 12% | −4.2 | +2.5 | ±0.0 | −1.7±1.2 |
| FH slice down the line | 5% | −4.3 | +1.8 | ±0.0 | −2.5±2.1 |
Lean FH through the middle: +3.1±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (2346 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Guillermo | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 44% | +6.4 | +0.5 | +1.9 | +8.8±2.2 |
| BH crosscourt | 28% | +8.8 | +1.3 | +0.3 | +10.4±2.8 |
| BH down the line | 12% | +4.2 | +0.3 | −1.0 | +3.6±3.7 |
| BH slice through the middle | 9% | −4.2 | +2.6 | −1.6 | −3.2±2.2 |
| BH slice crosscourt | 4% | +0.5 | −2.5 | +1.8 | −0.2±2.6 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +3.7±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (2177 returns charted)
2nd serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Guillermo | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 48% | −3.5 | +0.3 | +0.7 | −2.4±2.4 |
| FH down the line | 20% | −1.8 | +2.6 | −1.2 | −0.4±4.1 |
| FH crosscourt | 16% | −0.2 | −1.1 | −0.5 | −1.8±3.9 |
| FH slice through the middle | 6% | −12.7 | +2.5 | ±0.0 | −10.1±1.7 |
| BH through the middle | 3% | +0.1 | −2.2 | +0.3 | −1.8±2.0 |
Lean FH down the line: +2.2±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (718 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Guillermo | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 43% | +1.0 | +0.8 | +0.4 | +2.2±2.6 |
| BH through the middle | 36% | −2.9 | +1.0 | +0.3 | −1.6±2.1 |
| BH down the line | 10% | −0.2 | +1.4 | +1.1 | +2.3±3.7 |
| FH through the middle | 5% | −2.9 | +1.4 | +0.7 | −0.8±2.4 |
| FH inside-out | 4% | +1.0 | +1.3 | −1.2 | +1.1±3.4 |
Lean BH down the line: +1.8±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1827 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
Guillermo Canas returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Andy | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 53% | +4.3 | −0.8 | −1.3 | +2.1±2.4 |
| FH down the line | 28% | +1.7 | +1.0 | −2.5 | +0.2±3.6 |
| FH crosscourt | 19% | +5.5 | +1.9 | −1.9 | +5.5±3.4 |
Lean FH crosscourt: +3.3±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (102 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Andy | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 44% | +6.4 | −2.2 | −1.5 | +2.7±2.3 |
| BH crosscourt | 26% | +8.8 | −0.5 | −3.4 | +4.8±3.0 |
| BH slice through the middle | 12% | −4.2 | −1.4 | +0.8 | −4.8±1.8 |
| BH down the line | 9% | +4.2 | ±0.0 | −4.1 | +0.2±3.6 |
| BH slice crosscourt | 9% | +0.5 | −1.0 | −0.8 | −1.2±2.2 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +3.1±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (123 returns charted)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Andy | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 61% | −2.9 | −2.4 | −1.0 | −6.3±2.0 |
| BH crosscourt | 29% | +1.0 | −0.5 | −1.4 | −0.9±2.6 |
| BH down the line | 10% | −0.2 | +1.7 | −1.7 | −0.2±3.9 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +3.2±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (124 returns charted)
Rally plan
Edge, in points per 100 shots: the hitter's skill with the shot (own) plus how much the receiver usually gives up against it (theirs), both measured against the tour average on grass. Each player's grass record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.
Andy Roddick
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | +4.8±3.4 | +3.0 | +1.8 |
| FH to the middle · return | +3.6±2.6 | +1.5 | +2.1 |
| BH to their backhand · return | +2.4±3.2 | +2.6 | −0.2 |
| BH to the middle · return | +2.0±2.3 | +1.0 | +1.0 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | +1.0±2.4 | −0.9 | +2.0 |
| BH to their forehand · rally | −0.1±4.4 | −0.9 | +0.8 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their forehand · rally | −3.1±2.9 | −2.5 | −0.6 |
| FH to their forehand · return +1 | −2.0±4.3 | −1.1 | −0.8 |
| BH to their backhand · return +1 | −1.5±3.8 | −3.5 | +2.0 |
| FH to their forehand · serve +1 | −1.5±3.9 | −5.3 | +3.9 |
| FH to the middle · rally | −1.3±2.5 | −0.8 | −0.5 |
Guillermo Canas
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their forehand · return +1 | +5.2±4.5 | +2.0 | +3.1 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | +3.7±2.9 | +1.4 | +2.3 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | +2.5±2.8 | +0.5 | +2.0 |
| FH to their forehand · serve +1 | +2.3±3.8 | +2.4 | −0.1 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | +2.1±3.4 | −0.2 | +2.3 |
| FH to the middle · return | +0.4±2.7 | −0.4 | +0.8 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to the middle · return | −3.0±2.4 | −2.4 | −0.7 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | −1.1±2.5 | −1.3 | +0.2 |
| BH to the middle · rally | −1.0±2.2 | +0.7 | −1.7 |
| BH to their backhand · return | −0.4±3.6 | −1.0 | +0.7 |
| FH to the middle · rally | +0.3±2.4 | +0.6 | −0.3 |
Against Guillermo Canas-like opponents
| Andy Roddick v | Matches | Serve pts won | Return pts won |
|---|---|---|---|
| All charted opponents | – | 68.4% | 32.4% |
| Players most similar to Guillermo Canas | 3 | 71.7% | 41.0% |
| Guillermo Canas (charted head-to-head) | 2 | 71.7% | 37.4% |
Similar by tactical fingerprint: Tomas Martin Etcheverry, Botic Van De Zandschulp, Miomir Kecmanovic, Camilo Ugo Carabelli, Jordan Thompson, Andreas Seppi, David Ferrer, Sebastien Grosjean, Aaron Krickstein. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.