RallyIQ

Game plan

Cameron Norrie v Jimmy Connors

Every number combines what Cameron Norrie does well with what Jimmy Connors allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Cameron Norrie wins, best of 3 55%90%: 29%–78% · best of 5: 56%
Serve points won 61.6% / 60.7% Cameron / Jimmy · tour 63.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 60%serve 62.5% / 60.6%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Cameron Norrie's record against Jimmy Connors's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −5.7 on serve, −0.8 on return vs expectation (547 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

CareerCameronJimmy
Direction choice−0.04 ±0.08
better than 46%
±0.00 ±0.09
better than 56%
Shot selection+0.49 ±0.17
better than 92%
−0.39 ±0.17
better than 17%
Execution+0.02 ±0.39
better than 69%
+0.08 ±0.41
better than 72%
Points left on the table2.83 ±0.14
lower than 28%
2.88 ±0.22
lower than 26%

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.

Cameron Norrie serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowCameron winsv JimmyMatchupOptimal
Wide37%70%70%67.1%±5.038%
Body9%63%59%58.6%±9.70% ▼
T53%67%71%63.3%±5.162% ▲

Optimal v Jimmy Connors: ±0.0±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowCameron winsv JimmyMatchupOptimal
Wide62%71%73%71.2%±4.457% ▼
Body8%64%56%57.2%±9.90% ▼
T30%79%70%76.9%±4.743% ▲

Optimal v Jimmy Connors: +1.0±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Jimmy Connors serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowJimmy winsv CameronMatchupOptimal
Wide26%62%75%64.1%±5.339% ▲
Body15%57%62%55.6%±8.42% ▼
T60%59%79%64.2%±4.759%

Optimal v Cameron Norrie: +0.6±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowJimmy winsv CameronMatchupOptimal
Wide55%64%79%71.1%±4.468% ▲
Body15%59%63%58.9%±9.12% ▼
T30%67%69%63.4%±5.930%

Optimal v Cameron Norrie: +0.4±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.1 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.

Cameron Norrie returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JimmyValue
FH through the middle42%+4.3−0.2+0.6+4.7±2.0
FH crosscourt23%+5.5+2.4−0.4+7.5±3.7
FH slice through the middle13%−4.2−0.8+4.2−0.9±2.3
FH down the line12%+1.7−2.2+5.3+4.8±3.9
FH slice crosscourt6%−4.3+0.3+1.8−2.2±2.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.6±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (709 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JimmyValue
BH through the middle48%+6.4+0.7+1.3+8.4±1.8
BH crosscourt35%+8.8−0.8−0.8+7.1±2.9
BH down the line8%+4.2−0.4+4.5+8.3±4.1
BH slice through the middle5%−4.2+0.8+4.8+1.4±2.1
BH slice down the line2%−8.4−0.4+9.0+0.2±3.0

Lean BH through the middle: +1.1±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (862 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JimmyValue
FH through the middle47%−3.5−0.5+1.0−3.0±2.5
FH crosscourt43%−0.2+0.8−0.8−0.2±4.0
FH down the line10%−1.8−2.7+5.2+0.8±4.4

Lean FH down the line: +2.2±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (263 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JimmyValue
BH crosscourt44%+1.0−0.7+2.2+2.4±3.0
BH through the middle31%−2.9+1.5+2.4+1.0±2.2
FH inside-in10%+0.6−0.1−0.8−0.3±4.2
FH through the middle8%−2.9+0.8+1.0−1.1±2.2
BH down the line4%−0.2−0.9+2.5+1.4±4.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.0±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (490 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Jimmy Connors returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
FH through the middle49%+4.3−2.8±0.0+1.5±2.1
FH crosscourt33%+5.5+2.3−1.9+5.9±4.0
FH down the line16%+1.7−2.6+2.8+1.9±4.2
BH through the middle1%+6.6+1.2+2.7+10.4±1.7
FH slice through the middle1%−4.2−2.3−1.2−7.8±2.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.9±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (612 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
BH through the middle43%+6.4−1.7+2.7+7.4±1.7
BH down the line22%+4.2+5.3+4.3+13.9±3.7
BH crosscourt15%+8.8−1.5−1.5+5.8±3.1
BH slice through the middle9%−4.2−4.1+2.2−6.1±2.3
BH slice crosscourt6%+0.5+3.9−2.2+2.3±3.1

Lean BH down the line: +7.4±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (866 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
FH crosscourt47%−0.2+2.0−1.4+0.4±3.9
FH through the middle37%−3.5+0.7−0.5−3.3±2.3
FH down the line12%−1.8+1.4+1.5+1.1±4.5
BH through the middle2%+0.1+0.9+1.5+2.5±1.5
BH inside-in1%+2.5−0.5+0.9+3.0±2.8

Lean FH down the line: +2.0±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (417 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
BH crosscourt41%+1.0+3.9+0.9+5.9±2.9
BH through the middle32%−2.9+2.6+1.5+1.3±2.0
BH down the line14%−0.2+7.0±0.0+6.8±4.5
BH slice crosscourt6%−4.0+0.4±0.0−3.6±1.8
BH slice through the middle3%−11.3+1.9+0.2−9.2±2.1

Lean BH down the line: +3.5±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (512 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.

Cameron Norrie

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return+6.9±2.7+0.6+6.3
BH to the middle · return+6.1±1.5+2.9+3.2
BH to their forehand · return+6.0±2.8+1.3+4.6
BH slice to the middle · rally+5.4±1.8+0.4+5.0
BH to their forehand · rally+5.0±2.0+1.6+3.5
FH slice to the middle · return+4.6±2.3+0.3+4.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return−6.3±3.6−5.5−0.8
BH to their backhand · serve +1−4.7±3.2+0.1−4.8
Smash to their forehand · rally−3.1±4.4+0.1−3.2
FH to their forehand · serve +1−2.4±2.8−0.1−2.3
FH volley to their backhand · rally−2.1±5.8±0.0−2.0

Jimmy Connors

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally+8.7±5.7+4.7+4.0
BH to their forehand · return+7.3±2.8+4.6+2.7
FH to their backhand · return+5.6±2.8+3.4+2.2
BH to their forehand · return +1+4.2±3.5+2.2+2.0
BH to the middle · return+4.0±1.3+0.7+3.3
BH to their backhand · return+3.8±2.5+3.4+0.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally−11.0±5.2−6.8−4.2
FH to their forehand · return−4.9±3.7−2.4−2.5
FH to their forehand · rally−3.3±1.7−3.6+0.3
FH to the middle · return−2.5±1.6−1.6−0.9
BH to their backhand · return +1−2.3±2.9−1.1−1.2

Against Jimmy Connors-like opponents

Cameron Norrie vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–62.6%33.9%
Players most similar to Jimmy Connors3 56.9%34.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Yoshihito Nishioka, Albert Ramos, Rafael Nadal, Jiri Vesely, Fernando Verdasco, Nikolay Davydenko, David Nalbandian, Thomas Muster, Juan Carlos Ferrero. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.