RallyIQ

Game plan

Ben Shelton v Lukas Rosol

Every number combines what Ben Shelton does well with what Lukas Rosol allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Ben Shelton wins, best of 3 61%90%: 35%–82% · best of 5: 63%
Serve points won 68.9% / 66.6% Ben / Lukas · tour 63.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 59%serve 68.2% / 66.3%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Ben Shelton's record against Lukas Rosol's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +19.5 on serve, −8.6 on return vs expectation (119 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

CareerBenLukas
Direction choice−0.37 ±0.06
better than 3%
−0.27 ±0.17
better than 7%
Shot selection+0.04 ±0.16
better than 57%
−0.18 ±0.18
better than 31%
Execution−0.67 ±0.48
better than 38%
−1.65 ±0.79
better than 7%
Points left on the table3.64 ±0.10
lower than 7%
2.97 ±0.26
lower than 21%

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.

Ben Shelton serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowBen winsv LukasMatchupOptimal
Wide46%72%80%79.5%±6.546%
Body14%62%67%65.8%±9.41% ▼
T40%72%77%74.4%±6.753% ▲

Optimal v Lukas Rosol: +1.3±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +4.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowBen winsv LukasMatchupOptimal
Wide51%74%78%78.6%±6.064% ▲
Body14%71%66%73.7%±8.81% ▼
T35%80%71%79.4%±6.435%

Optimal v Lukas Rosol: +0.6±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Lukas Rosol serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowLukas winsv BenMatchupOptimal
Wide49%66%75%68.7%±6.550%
Body18%63%61%60.6%±10.95% ▼
T32%78%77%79.8%±6.545% ▲

Optimal v Ben Shelton: +1.0±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +9.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowLukas winsv BenMatchupOptimal
Wide42%75%77%78.7%±6.255% ▲
Body20%53%64%53.7%±11.46% ▼
T38%68%74%69.9%±7.539%

Optimal v Ben Shelton: +1.5±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +8.3 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.

Ben Shelton returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LukasValue
FH through the middle49%+4.3−0.4−1.2+2.7±2.5
FH down the line18%+1.7+1.6−2.0+1.3±4.1
FH slice through the middle13%−4.2+2.0+0.1−2.1±2.3
FH crosscourt13%+5.5−0.2+0.1+5.5±4.0
FH slice down the line4%−4.3−2.3±0.0−6.5±2.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.9±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (792 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LukasValue
BH through the middle35%+6.4+0.3+0.6+7.3±2.4
BH slice through the middle21%−4.2−0.3−0.9−5.4±2.3
BH down the line17%+4.2−2.6+0.1+1.7±4.2
BH crosscourt15%+8.8−5.4−3.0+0.4±3.1
BH slice down the line8%−8.4+2.5−0.6−6.4±3.2

Lean BH through the middle: +6.1±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (972 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LukasValue
FH through the middle58%−3.5−2.7−0.6−6.7±2.7
FH crosscourt22%−0.2+1.2−2.4−1.4±4.1
FH down the line20%−1.8−8.0−0.3−10.1±4.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.8±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (294 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LukasValue
BH through the middle56%−2.9+0.9+1.0−1.0±2.2
BH crosscourt17%+1.0−1.0−1.9−1.8±3.0
BH down the line17%−0.2−3.4+1.3−2.4±4.8
FH through the middle6%−2.9±0.0−0.6−3.5±2.4
FH inside-in2%+0.6−2.1−2.4−4.0±3.7

Lean BH through the middle: +0.6±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (622 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Lukas Rosol returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenValue
FH through the middle56%+4.3−2.4−0.7+1.1±2.6
FH crosscourt35%+5.5±0.0−2.4+3.1±3.9
FH down the line9%+1.7+0.4−2.3−0.3±3.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.4±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (94 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenValue
BH through the middle29%+6.4−1.1+0.1+5.4±2.3
BH crosscourt20%+8.8−0.7−1.6+6.5±3.1
BH slice down the line14%−8.4+2.4−1.3−7.3±3.3
BH slice through the middle12%−4.2−1.8−1.3−7.3±2.2
BH down the line9%+4.2−0.2−2.5+1.5±3.7

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.7±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (114 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenValue
BH crosscourt39%+1.0+1.1−1.5+0.6±2.9
BH through the middle35%−2.9−2.5−0.9−6.3±2.1
BH down the line17%−0.2+1.7−3.4−1.9±4.2
FH through the middle9%−2.9−1.3−1.8−5.9±1.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.5±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (54 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.

Ben Shelton

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1+2.8±3.4+1.0+1.8
FH to their backhand · rally+2.2±2.5−0.2+2.4
BH to their forehand · rally+1.0±3.7−0.1+1.1
FH to their backhand · serve +1+0.9±3.0−0.6+1.5
BH to the middle · return+0.8±2.1+0.2+0.6
BH slice to the middle · rally+0.2±2.0+0.3−0.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · rally−2.9±2.6−3.0+0.1
BH to their backhand · return−2.8±3.0−3.7+0.9
BH to the middle · rally−2.7±1.9−0.7−2.0
FH to the middle · return−2.5±2.1−1.3−1.1
BH slice to their backhand · rally−1.2±2.3−1.6+0.4

Lukas Rosol

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · rally±0.0±1.8−1.7+1.7
FH to their backhand · return +1−0.3±3.6−2.0+1.7
FH to their forehand · serve +1−0.7±3.2−0.1−0.6
FH to the middle · serve +1−1.4±2.3−1.9+0.5
FH to their backhand · serve +1−1.6±2.9−1.4−0.2
BH to their forehand · rally−1.8±3.6−3.4+1.6

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return−7.1±2.2−5.2−1.9
BH to their backhand · serve +1−3.9±3.3−4.5+0.6
BH to the middle · return−3.8±2.1−4.0+0.2
FH to the middle · rally−3.3±2.0−2.9−0.4
BH to their backhand · rally−2.8±2.3−2.5−0.2

Against Lukas Rosol-like opponents

Ben Shelton vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–65.5%31.9%
Players most similar to Lukas Rosol1 85.2%22.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Arthur Fils, Arthur Rinderknech, Guy Den Ouden, Alexander Shevchenko, Zizou Bergs, Holger Rune, Roman Safiullin, Fabio Fognini, Gregoire Barrere. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.