Game plan

Bianca Andreescu v Angelique Kerber

Every number combines what Bianca Andreescu does well with what Angelique Kerber allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Bianca Andreescu wins, best of 3 74%90%: 63%–83% · best of 5: 79%

Serve points won 59.5% / 54.7% Bianca / Angelique · tour 56.4%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 68%serve 58.7% / 55.3%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Bianca Andreescu's record against Angelique Kerber's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +3.2 on serve, +2.1 on return vs expectation (521 points); head-to-head: +2.6 on serve, +3.0 on return vs expectation (377 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	Bianca	Angelique
Direction choice	−0.35 ±0.03 better than 4%	+0.18 ±0.05 better than 83%
Shot selection	−0.08 ±0.07 better than 36%	+0.05 ±0.08 better than 50%
Execution	−0.56 ±0.16 better than 31%	+1.65 ±0.29 better than 97%
Points left on the table	3.03 ±0.04 lower than 10%	2.57 ±0.07 lower than 56%

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: Bianca Andreescu +1.52, Angelique Kerber +0.36. 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.

Bianca Andreescu serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Bianca wins	v Angelique	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	38%	67%	69%	69.7%±3.1	53% ▲
Body	30%	59%	59%	60.9%±4.4	14% ▼
T	32%	72%	63%	68.0%±3.5	33%

Optimal v Angelique Kerber: +0.5±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Bianca wins	v Angelique	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	39%	67%	67%	68.5%±3.6	54% ▲
Body	27%	57%	58%	59.0%±4.4	27%
T	34%	65%	60%	60.4%±3.5	19% ▼

Optimal v Angelique Kerber: +0.4±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +5.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Angelique Kerber serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Angelique wins	v Bianca	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	36%	65%	68%	66.8%±3.6	51% ▲
Body	27%	56%	56%	54.6%±4.0	12% ▼
T	37%	59%	66%	56.8%±3.6	37%

Optimal v Bianca Andreescu: +0.8±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +7.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Angelique wins	v Bianca	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	62%	62%	68%	64.5%±2.9	77% ▲
Body	19%	54%	57%	55.2%±4.7	4% ▼
T	18%	71%	64%	71.0%±4.9	19%

Optimal v Bianca Andreescu: +0.9±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +7.1 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.

Bianca Andreescu returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.2	+0.7	+1.1	+6.0±1.4
FH down the line	16%	+1.5	−3.9	−0.6	−3.0±3.3
FH slice through the middle	13%	−6.7	−1.5	−1.0	−9.2±2.2
FH crosscourt	13%	+5.3	−2.7	+3.8	+6.3±3.0
FH slice crosscourt	4%	−6.6	−3.1	+1.0	−8.7±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.9±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (2739 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
BH through the middle	55%	+6.0	−0.2	+1.3	+7.1±1.1
BH crosscourt	17%	+7.7	−1.3	+6.5	+12.9±2.1
BH down the line	16%	+2.2	+0.1	−1.7	+0.6±2.9
BH slice through the middle	7%	−6.2	−3.5	+0.6	−9.2±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	−3.7	+2.1	−5.8±3.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +8.0±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (2846 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
FH through the middle	51%	−3.2	+0.2	+2.0	−1.0±2.3
FH down the line	21%	−0.6	+0.8	+2.4	+2.7±4.7
FH crosscourt	19%	+0.5	+0.9	+2.0	+3.4±4.1
FH slice through the middle	6%	−15.2	−1.0	±0.0	−16.2±1.9
FH slice crosscourt	2%	−14.9	−1.6	±0.0	−16.5±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.1±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (778 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
BH through the middle	48%	−2.6	+0.1	−0.1	−2.7±1.5
BH crosscourt	20%	+1.5	−1.1	+3.7	+4.1±2.5
BH down the line	19%	−0.5	+1.7	+0.4	+1.5±3.8
FH through the middle	5%	−2.7	+1.6	+2.0	+0.9±2.5
FH inside-out	3%	+1.4	−1.1	+2.4	+2.6±4.2
FH inside-in	3%	+0.7	+1.8	+2.0	+4.5±4.6

Lean FH inside-in: +4.5±4.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1462 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Angelique Kerber returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Bianca	Value
FH through the middle	53%	+4.2	+2.6	−0.4	+6.3±1.4
FH crosscourt	34%	+5.3	+5.1	−2.0	+8.5±2.6
FH down the line	11%	+1.5	+5.5	−0.7	+6.4±3.5
FH slice through the middle	1%	−6.7	−0.1	+0.2	−6.6±1.8
BH through the middle	1%	+5.2	+1.3	−0.9	+5.7±1.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.7±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1007 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Bianca	Value
BH through the middle	48%	+6.0	+1.1	−0.9	+6.3±1.2
BH crosscourt	30%	+7.7	−0.4	−4.7	+2.6±2.0
BH down the line	12%	+2.2	+7.3	−1.2	+8.3±3.1
BH slice through the middle	5%	−6.2	−0.7	+0.1	−6.9±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	2%	−4.2	−0.4	−4.3	−8.9±3.0

Lean BH down the line: +4.2±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1499 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Bianca	Value
FH crosscourt	39%	+0.5	−1.4	−0.7	−1.5±3.7
FH down the line	32%	−0.6	+1.3	−3.4	−2.7±4.2
FH through the middle	28%	−3.2	+0.3	−0.5	−3.4±2.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +0.9±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (285 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Bianca	Value
BH crosscourt	39%	+1.5	+2.8	−3.0	+1.2±2.4
BH through the middle	37%	−2.6	+1.3	−0.8	−2.1±1.7
BH down the line	20%	−0.5	+4.0	−1.4	+2.0±3.7
FH inside-in	1%	+0.7	−0.9	−0.7	−0.8±3.4
FH through the middle	1%	−2.7	+1.2	−0.5	−2.0±1.6

Lean BH down the line: +2.0±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (646 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 hard. Each player's hard record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.