RallyIQ

Game plan

Anna Bondar v Louisa Chirico

Every number combines what Anna Bondar does well with what Louisa Chirico allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Anna Bondar wins, best of 3 43%90%: 12%–80% · best of 5: 41%
Serve points won 59.9% / 61.2% Anna / Louisa · tour 58.1%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 43%serve 59.9% / 61.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Anna Bondar's record against Louisa Chirico's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads. 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

CareerAnnaLouisa
Direction choice−0.11 ±0.11
better than 35%
−0.13 ±0.14
better than 30%
Shot selection+0.19 ±0.20
better than 63%
+0.09 ±0.19
better than 54%
Execution−0.59 ±0.68
better than 30%
−0.96 ±1.01
better than 19%

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.

Anna Bondar serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowAnna winsv LouisaMatchupOptimal
Wide46%66%69%68.6%±10.161% ▲
Body20%65%57%64.4%±12.05% ▼
T34%75%62%69.8%±11.034%

Optimal v Louisa Chirico: +0.5±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowAnna winsv LouisaMatchupOptimal
Wide31%68%58%61.1%±11.430%
Body16%63%56%62.8%±12.81% ▼
T53%66%72%73.3%±9.769% ▲

Optimal v Louisa Chirico: +1.1±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +5.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Louisa Chirico serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowLouisa winsv AnnaMatchupOptimal
Wide42%66%71%70.9%±9.757% ▲
Body29%64%61%67.7%±10.414% ▼
T28%68%72%72.5%±11.029%

Optimal v Anna Bondar: +0.4±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowLouisa winsv AnnaMatchupOptimal
Wide33%67%68%68.8%±9.948% ▲
Body26%55%61%59.8%±11.411% ▼
T42%65%68%68.5%±10.141%

Optimal v Anna Bondar: +0.8±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.5 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.

Anna Bondar returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LouisaValue
FH through the middle43%+4.2+0.4−3.6+0.9±3.1
FH down the line21%+1.5+0.7−0.9+1.4±4.5
FH crosscourt13%+5.3−3.2−3.9−1.9±4.2
FH slice through the middle13%−6.7+1.5−0.5−5.6±2.3
FH slice crosscourt10%−6.6−0.5±0.0−7.1±1.8

Lean FH down the line: +2.4±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (207 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LouisaValue
BH through the middle50%+6.0+1.6−0.9+6.7±2.8
BH crosscourt27%+7.7−0.7+0.4+7.5±3.5
BH down the line11%+2.2−2.1−4.6−4.5±4.4
BH slice crosscourt5%−4.2−1.7+0.3−5.5±2.2
BH slice through the middle5%−6.2+0.4−0.2−6.0±2.2

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.5±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (240 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LouisaValue
FH through the middle46%−3.2+1.5−0.2−1.9±3.0
FH crosscourt28%+0.5−0.1+0.7+1.2±4.1
FH down the line26%−0.6−0.1−3.0−3.7±4.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.7±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (54 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LouisaValue
BH through the middle47%−2.6+2.1−0.1−0.6±2.8
BH crosscourt30%+1.5−0.8+2.2+2.9±3.6
FH through the middle10%−2.7+0.1−0.2−2.7±2.4
BH down the line9%−0.5−0.5−1.2−2.1±4.5
FH inside-in4%+0.7+0.4+0.7+1.8±3.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.7±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (137 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Louisa Chirico returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AnnaValue
FH through the middle65%+4.2−1.2−2.2+0.8±3.0
FH crosscourt17%+5.3−2.1+1.5+4.7±4.0
FH down the line12%+1.5+0.8−2.8−0.5±4.1
FH slice through the middle6%−6.7−0.3−0.4−7.4±2.1

Lean FH through the middle: ±0.0±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (83 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AnnaValue
BH through the middle52%+6.0−1.3−0.5+4.2±2.8
BH crosscourt20%+7.7+0.5−1.4+6.8±3.5
BH down the line12%+2.2−0.2+0.4+2.3±4.2
BH slice through the middle10%−6.2+0.3−1.8−7.7±2.0
BH slice crosscourt6%−4.2−0.8−1.0−5.9±2.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.1±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (90 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AnnaValue
BH crosscourt47%+1.5+0.3−1.7+0.1±3.5
BH through the middle38%−2.6+1.1+0.3−1.2±2.6
FH through the middle15%−2.7−0.3+0.8−2.2±2.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +0.8±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (66 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

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.

Anna Bondar

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · return+2.2±3.2+3.0−0.8
FH to their backhand · serve +1+2.2±4.8−0.4+2.5
BH to their backhand · rally−0.4±3.9+0.7−1.1
BH to the middle · rally−1.0±2.9+1.0−2.0
FH to the middle · rally−1.4±3.2−1.2−0.2
FH to the middle · return−1.5±3.5+1.5−3.0

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · rally−6.9±4.7−3.5−3.3
FH to their forehand · rally−5.2±4.4−5.3+0.1
FH to the middle · return−1.5±3.5+1.5−3.0
FH to the middle · rally−1.4±3.2−1.2−0.2
BH to the middle · rally−1.0±2.9+1.0−2.0

Louisa Chirico

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1+5.1±5.1−0.2+5.3
FH to their forehand · serve +1+4.2±5.0+2.3+1.9
BH to their backhand · rally+3.3±3.6+1.6+1.7
FH to the middle · rally+1.8±3.1+0.7+1.2
BH to their forehand · rally+1.3±4.5+0.9+0.4
FH to their backhand · rally−0.1±4.9−0.8+0.7

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return−5.2±3.5−2.5−2.7
BH to the middle · return−2.7±3.2−0.1−2.6
BH to the middle · rally−2.2±2.9+0.4−2.5
FH to their forehand · rally−0.3±4.3−2.2+1.9
FH to their backhand · rally−0.1±4.9−0.8+0.7

Against Louisa Chirico-like opponents

Anna Bondar vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–59.0%41.0%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Coco Gauff, Iva Jovic, Anastasia Potapova, Varvara Gracheva, Jessica Bouzas Maneiro, Venus Williams, Jennifer Brady, Eugenie Bouchard, Ana Ivanovic. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.