RallyIQ

Game plan

Bibiane Schoofs v Caroline Wozniacki

Every number combines what Bibiane Schoofs does well with what Caroline Wozniacki allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Bibiane Schoofs wins, best of 3 2%90%: 0%–10% · best of 5: 0%
Serve points won 46.7% / 62.7% Bibiane / Caroline · tour 56.3%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 2%serve 47.0% / 62.4%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Bibiane Schoofs's record against Caroline Wozniacki's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −9.2 on serve, −12.5 on return vs expectation (89 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

CareerBibianeCaroline
Direction choice−0.16 ±0.18
better than 24%
+0.03 ±0.05
better than 59%
Shot selection−0.47 ±0.26
better than 12%
+0.06 ±0.06
better than 52%
Execution−2.62 ±1.32
better than 2%
+2.22 ±0.16
better than 100%

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.

Bibiane Schoofs serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowBibiane winsv CarolineMatchupOptimal
Wide33%62%60%56.2%±9.748% ▲
Body34%47%50%39.8%±9.619% ▼
T33%65%63%59.3%±10.333%

Optimal v Caroline Wozniacki: +1.0±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +7.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowBibiane winsv CarolineMatchupOptimal
Wide46%61%60%55.8%±9.653% ▲
Body28%51%47%42.5%±10.413% ▼
T27%55%59%48.6%±11.034% ▲

Optimal v Caroline Wozniacki: +1.0±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +5.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Caroline Wozniacki serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowCaroline winsv BibianeMatchupOptimal
Wide42%67%71%72.5%±7.857% ▲
Body25%62%50%55.0%±11.610% ▼
T33%71%74%76.6%±9.833%

Optimal v Bibiane Schoofs: +1.1±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +7.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowCaroline winsv BibianeMatchupOptimal
Wide35%68%63%64.9%±9.936%
Body24%59%55%57.8%±10.49% ▼
T41%63%60%58.3%±10.755% ▲

Optimal v Bibiane Schoofs: +0.5±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.4 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.

Bibiane Schoofs returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CarolineValue
FH through the middle40%+4.2+1.1+0.9+6.1±2.3
FH slice through the middle21%−6.7−0.5+0.3−6.9±2.1
FH down the line17%+1.5−0.6+3.6+4.5±3.3
FH crosscourt12%+5.3+0.8+1.4+7.5±2.7
FH slice crosscourt12%−6.6−0.1−1.1−7.8±2.4

Lean FH through the middle: +4.4±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (78 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CarolineValue
BH through the middle33%+6.0−1.6±0.0+4.5±1.9
BH crosscourt22%+7.7−1.5+1.2+7.4±2.4
BH slice through the middle22%−6.2+0.5−1.3−7.0±1.9
BH slice crosscourt13%−4.2+0.6−0.1−3.7±2.5
BH slice down the line11%−12.5−0.6−0.6−13.7±3.0

Lean BH through the middle: +4.9±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (46 returns charted)

Caroline Wozniacki returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BibianeValue
FH through the middle52%+4.2+3.4+2.8+10.3±2.4
FH crosscourt21%+5.3+3.9−1.5+7.7±3.0
FH down the line16%+1.5+6.2−0.8+6.9±3.5
FH slice through the middle7%−6.7−1.5±0.0−8.2±1.4
FH slice crosscourt2%−6.6−1.7±0.0−8.3±2.0

Lean FH through the middle: +3.1±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (2852 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BibianeValue
BH through the middle45%+6.0+2.8+1.0+9.9±2.3
BH crosscourt36%+7.7+4.0+0.3+12.0±2.8
BH slice through the middle9%−6.2−1.9±0.0−8.1±1.6
BH down the line5%+2.2+5.0+1.7+8.8±4.5
BH slice down the line3%−12.5−2.1±0.0−14.6±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.0±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (1809 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BibianeValue
FH through the middle43%−3.2+3.7−1.0−0.4±2.6
FH down the line29%−0.6+2.5−1.4+0.5±3.6
FH crosscourt26%+0.5+3.0−0.5+3.0±3.5
BH inside-out1%+2.2+0.3±0.0+2.5±2.3
BH through the middle1%−1.0−0.3+0.7−0.5±2.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.4±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (983 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BibianeValue
BH crosscourt54%+1.5+3.5+0.3+5.3±2.7
BH through the middle35%−2.6+4.1+0.7+2.2±2.4
BH down the line12%−0.5+2.0±0.0+1.4±3.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.5±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (834 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.

Bibiane Schoofs

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return+2.1±2.3+0.7+1.4
BH slice to their backhand · rally+1.5±2.4+1.1+0.4
FH to the middle · rally+0.9±2.0+0.6+0.3
FH to their forehand · serve +1+0.7±3.2−0.3+1.1
BH to their backhand · rally−0.1±2.7−0.7+0.6
BH to the middle · rally−0.8±1.9−2.3+1.5

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · rally−3.7±2.6−4.0+0.3
FH to their backhand · rally−2.2±2.8−3.7+1.4
BH to the middle · rally−0.8±1.9−2.3+1.5
BH to their backhand · rally−0.1±2.7−0.7+0.6
FH to their forehand · serve +1+0.7±3.2−0.3+1.1

Caroline Wozniacki

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return+5.7±2.2+4.2+1.5
FH to the middle · rally+4.9±1.9+2.9+1.9
BH to the middle · return+4.4±2.1+2.6+1.8
BH to their backhand · rally+3.7±2.6+2.7+0.9
FH to their backhand · rally+2.5±3.0+2.9−0.3
BH to the middle · rally+2.3±1.8+2.8−0.5

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · rally+1.0±2.6+1.7−0.7
BH to the middle · rally+2.3±1.8+2.8−0.5
FH to their backhand · rally+2.5±3.0+2.9−0.3
BH to their backhand · rally+3.7±2.6+2.7+0.9
BH to the middle · return+4.4±2.1+2.6+1.8

Against Caroline Wozniacki-like opponents

Bibiane Schoofs vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–47.9%40.4%
Players most similar to Caroline Wozniacki1 41.2%25.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Marie Bouzkova, Daria Kasatkina, Emma Navarro, Emma Raducanu, Victoria Azarenka, Linda Fruhvirtova, Anna Karolina Schmiedlova, Alize Cornet, Alison Riske Amritraj, Agnieszka Radwanska. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.