Game plan

Botic Van De Zandschulp v Pedro Martinez

Every number combines what Botic Van De Zandschulp does well with what Pedro Martinez allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Botic Van De Zandschulp wins, best of 3 87%90%: 62%–97% · best of 5: 92%

Serve points won 66.0% / 57.1% Botic / Pedro · tour 63.5%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 87%serve 66.2% / 57.4%

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. Both were charted enough in the last three seasons, so those carry the most weight. The result is then nudged by Botic Van De Zandschulp's record against Pedro Martinez's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −0.7 on serve, +1.4 on return vs expectation (772 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	Botic	Pedro
Direction choice	−0.09 ±0.03 better than 32%	−0.06 ±0.08 better than 43%
Shot selection	+0.08 ±0.08 better than 62%	−0.06 ±0.23 better than 46%
Execution	−1.07 ±0.25 better than 23%	+0.23 ±0.43 better than 77%
Points left on the table	2.53 ±0.06 lower than 58%	2.66 ±0.12 lower than 43%

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: Botic Van De Zandschulp +0.76, Pedro Martinez +0.54. 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.

Botic Van De Zandschulp serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Botic wins	v Pedro	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	41%	72%	75%	74.6%±4.1	40% ▼
Body	12%	63%	70%	69.7%±7.9	0% ▼
T	47%	77%	76%	78.0%±3.9	60% ▲

Optimal v Pedro Martinez: +0.5±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Botic wins	v Pedro	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	37%	72%	71%	71.0%±4.7	37%
Body	15%	58%	56%	50.7%±8.8	2% ▼
T	47%	70%	73%	71.5%±4.8	61% ▲

Optimal v Pedro Martinez: +1.4±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Pedro Martinez serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Pedro wins	v Botic	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	41%	65%	72%	63.8%±4.8	32% ▼
Body	11%	59%	63%	59.1%±7.7	17% ▲
T	48%	68%	70%	62.5%±4.7	51% ▲

Optimal v Botic Van De Zandschulp: ±0.0±0.4 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Pedro wins	v Botic	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	54%	63%	71%	60.6%±4.6	41% ▼
Body	16%	59%	64%	59.9%±7.3	29% ▲
T	30%	62%	69%	59.2%±5.8	30%

Optimal v Botic Van De Zandschulp: +0.1±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +0.5 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.

Botic Van De Zandschulp returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Pedro	Value
FH through the middle	48%	+4.3	+1.5	+1.7	+7.4±1.8
FH crosscourt	22%	+5.5	−3.9	+6.1	+7.7±3.4
FH down the line	16%	+1.7	−1.6	+1.6	+1.7±3.7
FH slice through the middle	9%	−4.2	−1.9	+1.7	−4.4±2.1
FH slice down the line	3%	−4.3	−4.2	+0.8	−7.6±2.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.9±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (2055 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Pedro	Value
BH through the middle	42%	+6.4	−0.3	+1.6	+7.7±1.6
BH crosscourt	28%	+8.8	−2.7	+1.7	+7.8±2.2
BH slice through the middle	14%	−4.2	−1.4	−1.4	−7.0±2.2
BH down the line	8%	+4.2	−0.9	+4.4	+7.7±4.2
BH slice crosscourt	6%	+0.5	−3.3	−2.2	−4.9±2.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.2±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (2166 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Pedro	Value
FH through the middle	53%	−3.5	−0.4	+1.2	−2.6±2.4
FH crosscourt	31%	−0.2	−1.8	−1.6	−3.6±4.1
FH down the line	14%	−1.8	−5.4	−1.7	−8.9±4.7
FH slice through the middle	2%	−12.7	−1.2	−0.5	−14.4±1.6

Lean FH through the middle: +1.4±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (449 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Pedro	Value
BH through the middle	48%	−2.9	−2.0	+1.0	−3.9±1.9
BH crosscourt	41%	+1.0	−4.5	+1.2	−2.3±2.4
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	+0.3	−0.8	−0.7±5.0
FH through the middle	2%	−2.9	−0.4	+1.2	−2.0±2.2
FH inside-out	1%	+1.0	−1.9	−1.7	−2.6±3.3

Lean BH down the line: +2.3±4.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1291 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Pedro Martinez returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Botic	Value
FH through the middle	43%	+4.3	+2.1	−0.1	+6.3±2.0
FH crosscourt	21%	+5.5	+1.1	−3.5	+3.2±3.6
FH slice through the middle	13%	−4.2	+1.7	−1.6	−4.1±2.0
FH down the line	12%	+1.7	+1.9	−2.1	+1.5±3.8
FH slice crosscourt	8%	−4.3	+0.6	−2.3	−6.0±2.8

Lean FH through the middle: +4.0±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (426 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Botic	Value
BH through the middle	41%	+6.4	+2.2	+0.6	+9.2±1.8
BH crosscourt	27%	+8.8	−3.4	−2.8	+2.7±2.6
BH down the line	13%	+4.2	−0.4	−5.8	−2.0±4.2
BH slice through the middle	12%	−4.2	−1.5	−2.8	−8.5±2.1
BH slice crosscourt	4%	+0.5	−1.5	−4.7	−5.7±2.6

Lean BH through the middle: +6.6±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (517 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Botic	Value
FH through the middle	52%	−3.5	+1.2	+0.7	−1.6±2.3
FH crosscourt	37%	−0.2	−0.4	−2.5	−3.1±3.8
FH down the line	10%	−1.8	+0.6	−0.4	−1.6±3.3

Lean FH through the middle: +0.6±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (107 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Botic	Value
BH through the middle	41%	−2.9	−0.2	+0.8	−2.3±1.9
BH crosscourt	30%	+1.0	±0.0	−1.6	−0.6±2.7
BH down the line	14%	−0.2	+5.2	−0.1	+5.0±4.6
FH inside-out	7%	+1.0	−0.7	−0.4	−0.1±3.0
FH through the middle	5%	−2.9	−0.7	+0.7	−2.9±1.7

Lean BH down the line: +5.7±4.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (340 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.

Botic Van De Zandschulp

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return +1	+7.3±4.2	−0.2	+7.5
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+5.1±4.2	+0.3	+4.8
BH slice to their forehand · rally	+4.5±3.0	+1.1	+3.5
FH volley to their forehand · rally	+3.6±5.1	+0.2	+3.4
FH to the middle · return +1	+3.4±2.1	+2.0	+1.4
FH to the middle · return	+3.2±1.5	+1.3	+2.0

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH slice to the middle · rally	−4.1±2.6	−0.9	−3.3
BH to their backhand · serve +1	−2.8±2.4	−1.3	−1.5
FH to their backhand · return	−2.6±2.9	−2.9	+0.3
BH slice to their backhand · return +1	−1.2±2.4	+0.5	−1.6
FH to their backhand · rally	−0.6±1.5	−1.3	+0.7

Pedro Martinez

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to the middle · return +1	+5.4±2.1	+3.1	+2.3
FH to the middle · rally	+4.3±1.3	+3.5	+0.7
FH to the middle · serve +1	+3.4±1.8	+2.2	+1.2
BH to the middle · serve +1	+3.0±1.9	+2.3	+0.7
BH to their forehand · rally	+2.8±2.7	+3.9	−1.1
BH to the middle · rally	+2.7±1.2	+2.2	+0.5

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH drop shot to their backhand · rally	−10.1±5.1	−5.1	−5.0
BH volley to their forehand · rally	−4.1±5.5	−0.4	−3.7
FH to their forehand · return	−3.4±3.2	±0.0	−3.4
BH slice to the middle · return	−2.9±2.1	−0.7	−2.2
BH to their forehand · return	−2.5±3.6	+0.8	−3.3

Against Pedro Martinez-like opponents

Botic Van De Zandschulp v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	62.1%	37.2%
Players most similar to Pedro Martinez	5	58.4%	37.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Lorenzo Musetti, Novak Djokovic, Marton Fucsovics, Roberto Bautista Agut, Nuno Borges, Robin Haase, Pablo Andujar, Filip Krajinovic, Philipp Kohlschreiber, Gaston Gaudio. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.