RallyIQ

Game plan

Cameron Norrie v Ugo Humbert

Every number combines what Cameron Norrie does well with what Ugo Humbert 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 28%90%: 7%–64% · best of 5: 23%
Serve points won 67.4% / 72.4% Cameron / Ugo · tour 65.7%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 30%serve 67.6% / 72.1%

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 Cameron Norrie's record against Ugo Humbert's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −2.2 on serve, −3.2 on return vs expectation (287 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

CareerCameronUgo
Direction choice−0.04 ±0.08
better than 46%
−0.09 ±0.06
better than 34%
Shot selection+0.49 ±0.17
better than 92%
−0.20 ±0.13
better than 30%
Execution+0.02 ±0.39
better than 69%
+0.66 ±0.45
better than 87%
Points left on the table2.83 ±0.14
lower than 28%
2.97 ±0.12
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.

Structural compatibility

Expected edge per 100 rally shots from style alone: Cameron Norrie +0.90, Ugo Humbert +0.95. 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.

Cameron Norrie serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowCameron winsv UgoMatchupOptimal
Wide37%70%73%69.9%±4.651% ▲
Body9%63%65%65.1%±9.29%
T53%67%75%67.8%±4.440% ▼

Optimal v Ugo Humbert: +0.5±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowCameron winsv UgoMatchupOptimal
Wide62%71%79%77.7%±3.857% ▼
Body8%64%68%68.9%±9.40% ▼
T30%79%73%79.1%±4.243% ▲

Optimal v Ugo Humbert: +0.8±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +1.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ugo Humbert serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowUgo winsv CameronMatchupOptimal
Wide45%78%75%79.1%±3.758% ▲
Body5%64%62%63.3%±9.70% ▼
T49%70%79%74.4%±4.142% ▼

Optimal v Cameron Norrie: +0.6±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowUgo winsv CameronMatchupOptimal
Wide53%72%79%77.9%±3.766% ▲
Body5%59%63%58.2%±10.70% ▼
T42%81%69%77.9%±4.234% ▼

Optimal v Cameron Norrie: +0.6±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +1.1 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 UgoValue
FH through the middle42%+4.3−0.2+2.7+6.8±2.2
FH crosscourt23%+5.5+2.4−3.9+4.0±4.1
FH slice through the middle13%−4.2−0.8+1.5−3.5±2.1
FH down the line12%+1.7−2.2+4.9+4.4±4.2
FH slice crosscourt6%−4.3+0.3−0.6−4.6±2.8

Lean FH through the middle: +3.4±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (709 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv UgoValue
BH through the middle48%+6.4+0.7+4.5+11.6±1.7
BH crosscourt35%+8.8−0.8−1.3+6.7±2.8
BH down the line8%+4.2−0.4+5.3+9.1±4.2
BH slice through the middle5%−4.2+0.8+2.1−1.3±2.3
BH slice down the line2%−8.4−0.4+5.2−3.6±3.3

Lean BH through the middle: +3.1±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (862 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv UgoValue
FH through the middle47%−3.5−0.5−0.2−4.2±2.6
FH crosscourt43%−0.2+0.8+0.6+1.2±4.2
FH down the line10%−1.8−2.7−0.2−4.7±4.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.1±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (263 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv UgoValue
BH crosscourt44%+1.0−0.7+1.2+1.5±2.8
BH through the middle31%−2.9+1.5+1.2−0.2±1.9
FH inside-in10%+0.6−0.1+0.6+1.1±4.4
FH through the middle8%−2.9+0.8−0.2−2.4±2.3
BH down the line4%−0.2−0.9−0.1−1.2±4.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.0±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (490 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Ugo Humbert returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
FH through the middle41%+4.3+1.8±0.0+6.1±2.2
FH crosscourt22%+5.5+2.7−1.9+6.4±4.1
FH down the line20%+1.7+3.4+2.8+8.0±4.0
FH slice through the middle12%−4.2+0.4−1.2−5.1±2.3
FH slice crosscourt2%−4.3−1.1−0.6−6.0±2.5

Lean FH down the line: +3.2±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (698 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
BH through the middle45%+6.4+2.6+2.7+11.7±1.6
BH down the line16%+4.2+4.7+4.3+13.2±3.8
BH crosscourt15%+8.8+1.8−1.5+9.1±3.1
BH slice through the middle13%−4.2−1.2+2.2−3.2±2.2
BH slice down the line5%−8.4+0.6+2.1−5.7±3.5

Lean BH down the line: +5.5±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (963 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
FH through the middle58%−3.5+0.6−0.5−3.4±2.2
FH crosscourt21%−0.2−2.0−1.4−3.7±4.3
FH down the line19%−1.8−2.9+1.5−3.2±4.5
BH through the middle3%+0.1+0.6+1.5+2.3±1.5

Lean FH down the line: +0.1±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (339 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CameronValue
BH through the middle58%−2.9+2.5+1.5+1.1±1.8
BH crosscourt21%+1.0+0.6+0.9+2.5±3.1
BH down the line20%−0.2+2.7±0.0+2.6±4.4
BH slice through the middle1%−11.3±0.0+0.2−11.1±1.9

Lean BH down the line: +1.0±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (503 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 grass. Each player's grass record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Cameron Norrie

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to their backhand · rally+6.7±3.5+4.2+2.5
BH to their forehand · rally+5.3±5.0+1.1+4.2
BH to the middle · return+4.6±3.2+1.9+2.7
BH to their forehand · return +1+4.1±6.2+3.3+0.8
FH slice to the middle · return+3.4±3.3+1.2+2.2
FH to their backhand · return+3.3±5.1−1.5+4.8

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return−15.6±6.2−9.6−6.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1−5.9±4.8−2.8−3.1
BH to their backhand · return−5.3±4.1−1.5−3.8
FH to their forehand · rally−5.2±4.7−1.4−3.8
BH slice to their backhand · rally−3.0±3.4+0.1−3.1

Ugo Humbert

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally+7.7±6.1+3.7+4.0
FH to their forehand · serve +1+6.3±5.0+1.1+5.2
FH volley to their backhand · rally+5.6±7.0+2.6+3.0
BH to their backhand · return+5.0±4.6+1.2+3.8
BH to the middle · return+4.8±3.2+0.1+4.7
BH to their forehand · return+2.8±5.6+3.0−0.2

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · return +1−8.0±4.8−6.1−1.9
FH to their forehand · return +1−6.0±5.8−6.3+0.2
FH to their forehand · return−4.5±6.0−3.5−1.0
FH slice to the middle · rally−3.9±2.8−4.5+0.6
FH to the middle · rally−3.4±3.3−3.1−0.2

Against Ugo Humbert-like opponents

Cameron Norrie vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–62.6%33.9%
Players most similar to Ugo Humbert3 59.9%31.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Rafael Jodar, Learner Tien, Joao Fonseca, Hubert Hurkacz, Sebastian Korda, Alexei Popyrin, Laslo Djere, Gregoire Barrere, Fernando Verdasco, Denis Istomin. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.