Game plan

Ashlyn Krueger v Camila Osorio

Every number combines what Ashlyn Krueger does well with what Camila Osorio allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Ashlyn Krueger wins, best of 3 69%90%: 28%–94% · best of 5: 73%

Serve points won 59.9% / 56.2% Ashlyn / Camila · tour 58.1%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 69%serve 59.9% / 56.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Ashlyn Krueger's record against Camila Osorio'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

Career	Ashlyn	Camila
Direction choice	+0.02 ±0.08 better than 57%	−0.19 ±0.11 better than 19%
Shot selection	+0.13 ±0.12 better than 59%	−0.69 ±0.25 better than 6%
Execution	−0.34 ±0.51 better than 40%	−0.11 ±0.67 better than 56%
Points left on the table	2.40 ±0.13 lower than 76%	2.68 ±0.13 lower than 37%

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.

Structural compatibility

Expected edge per 100 rally shots from style alone: Ashlyn Krueger −1.34, Camila Osorio +0.41. Each player's shot mix weighted by their own skill with each shot and by how much the other gives up against it. This is why some rankings gaps don't hold in a given matchup.

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.

Ashlyn Krueger serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Ashlyn wins	v Camila	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	34%	61%	65%	60.3%±7.8	34%
Body	27%	54%	52%	48.4%±8.8	12% ▼
T	39%	76%	65%	73.9%±7.1	54% ▲

Optimal v Camila Osorio: +1.7±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +11.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Ashlyn wins	v Camila	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	31%	66%	63%	63.4%±8.0	32%
Body	18%	52%	48%	43.5%±10.7	2% ▼
T	51%	68%	63%	67.1%±7.6	66% ▲

Optimal v Camila Osorio: +1.3±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Camila Osorio serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Camila wins	v Ashlyn	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	48%	67%	66%	66.7%±6.6	63% ▲
Body	32%	57%	59%	58.4%±8.7	17% ▼
T	20%	70%	69%	70.7%±9.3	20%

Optimal v Ashlyn Krueger: +0.9±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +5.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Camila wins	v Ashlyn	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	27%	66%	65%	65.7%±8.5	43% ▲
Body	39%	51%	59%	54.2%±9.5	24% ▼
T	34%	58%	63%	56.1%±8.7	33%

Optimal v Ashlyn Krueger: +0.6±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +7.7 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.

Ashlyn Krueger returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Camila	Value
FH through the middle	44%	+4.2	−2.4	−1.8	−0.1±2.5
FH crosscourt	32%	+5.3	−0.8	+2.3	+6.8±4.1
FH slice through the middle	11%	−6.7	+0.6	+0.4	−5.7±2.5
FH down the line	8%	+1.5	−0.2	+0.6	+2.0±4.4
FH slice crosscourt	5%	−6.6	+1.0	±0.0	−5.6±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.4±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (422 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Camila	Value
BH through the middle	45%	+6.0	+0.7	−2.2	+4.5±2.5
BH crosscourt	26%	+7.7	+2.3	−0.2	+9.8±3.6
BH slice through the middle	14%	−6.2	+1.4	±0.0	−4.8±2.3
BH down the line	8%	+2.2	+1.4	−0.3	+3.2±4.6
BH slice crosscourt	4%	−4.2	+0.5	−0.5	−4.2±2.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.1±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (337 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Camila	Value
FH crosscourt	47%	+0.5	+4.7	+3.7	+8.9±4.4
FH through the middle	47%	−3.2	−0.3	+1.6	−1.9±2.9
FH down the line	6%	−0.6	−1.0	−0.3	−1.8±4.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.7±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (81 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Camila	Value
BH through the middle	50%	−2.6	−1.7	+0.8	−3.5±2.8
BH crosscourt	34%	+1.5	−0.9	−0.3	+0.3±3.6
BH down the line	16%	−0.5	+0.1	−0.1	−0.4±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.0±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (135 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Camila Osorio returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ashlyn	Value
FH through the middle	40%	+4.2	−0.7	+1.7	+5.1±2.7
FH slice through the middle	26%	−6.7	+0.6	−1.0	−7.1±2.6
FH crosscourt	15%	+5.3	−0.6	+0.9	+5.6±4.4
FH down the line	9%	+1.5	−1.8	−2.8	−3.1±4.4
FH slice crosscourt	9%	−6.6	+1.9	±0.0	−4.7±2.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.3±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (267 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ashlyn	Value
BH through the middle	52%	+6.0	−2.0	+0.1	+4.2±2.4
BH crosscourt	21%	+7.7	−1.0	−2.2	+4.5±3.5
BH slice through the middle	11%	−6.2	−0.4	−2.8	−9.5±2.5
BH down the line	10%	+2.2	+1.5	+2.0	+5.7±4.6
BH slice crosscourt	6%	−4.2	+0.5	+1.3	−2.4±2.7

Lean BH down the line: +3.1±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (313 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ashlyn	Value
FH through the middle	54%	−3.2	−2.7	+0.1	−5.7±2.9
FH crosscourt	33%	+0.5	±0.0	−2.1	−1.6±4.3
FH down the line	13%	−0.6	−1.5	−4.9	−7.0±4.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.0±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (67 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ashlyn	Value
BH through the middle	38%	−2.6	+0.3	+0.6	−1.7±2.7
BH crosscourt	33%	+1.5	+2.2	−1.3	+2.4±3.7
BH down the line	11%	−0.5	−1.6	−2.0	−4.1±4.8
FH inside-in	8%	+0.7	−1.5	−2.1	−2.9±4.2
FH through the middle	6%	−2.7	−0.2	+0.1	−2.7±2.2

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.2±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (141 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.

Ashlyn Krueger

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · return	+7.0±3.8	+3.4	+3.6
FH to their backhand · return +1	+3.6±4.2	+2.2	+1.4
BH to their backhand · return	+3.3±3.2	+2.8	+0.5
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+1.7±4.8	+2.9	−1.2
BH to the middle · serve +1	+1.1±2.4	+1.7	−0.5
BH to their backhand · rally	+0.5±2.4	+1.4	−0.9

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	−8.1±4.1	−4.5	−3.6
FH to the middle · serve +1	−5.8±2.6	−4.0	−1.8
FH to their forehand · return +1	−5.0±3.6	−3.9	−1.1
FH to the middle · rally	−3.3±2.1	−1.4	−1.8
BH to their backhand · serve +1	−3.2±3.2	−0.1	−3.2

Camila Osorio

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	+6.9±4.2	+5.4	+1.5
FH to their backhand · return +1	+2.9±4.3	+2.6	+0.3
BH to their backhand · serve +1	+2.5±3.3	+1.6	+0.8
FH to the middle · return +1	+2.3±2.7	+2.0	+0.3
BH to the middle · return +1	+2.2±2.5	+2.9	−0.7
FH to their backhand · rally	+1.9±3.0	−0.1	+2.1

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	−8.8±4.1	−4.4	−4.4
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−4.4±4.8	−3.8	−0.6
FH to the middle · serve +1	−2.4±2.5	−1.1	−1.3
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−2.3±3.6	−2.9	+0.6
FH to the middle · return	−1.1±2.2	−2.0	+0.9

Against Camila Osorio-like opponents

Ashlyn Krueger v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	57.5%	41.7%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Bianca Andreescu, Viktorija Golubic, Antonia Ruzic, Emma Navarro, Yulia Putintseva, Lin Zhu, Anastasija Sevastova, Petra Martic, Clara Burel, R. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.