Game plan

Carla Suarez Navarro v Emma Navarro

Every number combines what Carla Suarez Navarro does well with what Emma Navarro allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Carla Suarez Navarro wins, best of 3 41%90%: 17%–69% · best of 5: 39%

Serve points won 55.2% / 56.8% Carla / Emma · tour 56.3%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 41%serve 55.2% / 56.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Carla Suarez Navarro's record against Emma Navarro's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads. 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	Carla	Emma
Direction choice	−0.14 ±0.09 better than 28%	−0.07 ±0.08 better than 40%
Shot selection	−0.42 ±0.14 better than 16%	−0.14 ±0.13 better than 33%
Execution	+0.22 ±0.49 better than 69%	+0.65 ±0.53 better than 84%
Points left on the table	2.63 ±0.13 lower than 46%	2.56 ±0.11 lower than 58%

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.

Carla Suarez Navarro serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Carla wins	v Emma	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	42%	62%	60%	56.0%±6.4	27% ▼
Body	28%	54%	58%	55.5%±7.3	28%
T	30%	65%	69%	66.3%±7.1	45% ▲

Optimal v Emma Navarro: +0.4±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +7.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Carla wins	v Emma	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	23%	63%	62%	58.5%±7.7	38% ▲
Body	35%	57%	64%	65.2%±7.6	34%
T	43%	56%	70%	62.3%±6.7	28% ▼

Optimal v Emma Navarro: +0.5±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +2.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Emma Navarro serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Emma wins	v Carla	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	46%	61%	69%	64.1%±5.9	30% ▼
Body	25%	60%	62%	64.1%±7.9	36% ▲
T	29%	65%	70%	67.5%±6.6	34% ▲

Optimal v Carla Suarez Navarro: +0.2±0.9 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	Emma wins	v Carla	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	41%	64%	65%	62.7%±6.5	41%
Body	21%	58%	59%	60.6%±8.8	6% ▼
T	38%	60%	71%	67.0%±6.3	53% ▲

Optimal v Carla Suarez Navarro: +0.6±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.1 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.

Carla Suarez Navarro returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Emma	Value
FH through the middle	50%	+4.2	+0.2	+0.9	+5.3±2.3
FH crosscourt	18%	+5.3	−3.5	+3.8	+5.6±4.1
FH down the line	13%	+1.5	+1.8	+1.3	+4.7±4.5
FH slice through the middle	12%	−6.7	+0.1	−0.3	−6.9±2.5
FH slice crosscourt	3%	−6.6	+1.5	−0.3	−5.4±2.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.7±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (555 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Emma	Value
BH through the middle	37%	+6.0	+0.3	±0.0	+6.3±2.2
BH slice through the middle	21%	−6.2	−0.2	+1.5	−4.9±2.5
BH crosscourt	18%	+7.7	−1.5	+0.7	+6.9±3.4
BH down the line	10%	+2.2	−3.4	+2.2	+1.0±4.6
BH slice crosscourt	9%	−4.2	+0.6	−0.9	−4.5±2.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.2±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (567 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Emma	Value
FH through the middle	48%	−3.2	+1.2	+1.2	−0.7±3.0
FH down the line	27%	−0.6	−3.4	+1.8	−2.1±5.1
FH crosscourt	21%	+0.5	±0.0	+3.4	+4.0±4.3
FH slice through the middle	4%	−15.2	+0.2	±0.0	−15.0±1.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.7±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (120 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Emma	Value
BH through the middle	37%	−2.6	+0.3	−1.3	−3.5±2.5
BH crosscourt	27%	+1.5	−1.4	+2.1	+2.2±3.4
BH down the line	10%	−0.5	+0.6	+5.3	+5.4±5.2
FH through the middle	8%	−2.7	−0.6	+1.2	−2.0±2.5
FH inside-in	7%	+0.7	+2.0	+3.4	+6.2±4.5

Lean FH inside-in: +6.9±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (345 returns charted)

Emma Navarro returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Carla	Value
FH through the middle	43%	+4.2	+1.2	+1.6	+7.0±2.3
FH crosscourt	29%	+5.3	+2.7	+3.9	+11.8±3.8
FH down the line	18%	+1.5	+0.5	+0.7	+2.7±4.4
FH slice through the middle	7%	−6.7	−0.9	+0.2	−7.5±2.5
FH slice down the line	2%	−10.5	−0.6	+0.4	−10.7±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.7±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (421 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Carla	Value
BH through the middle	47%	+6.0	+2.5	±0.0	+8.5±2.2
BH crosscourt	28%	+7.7	+0.4	−3.5	+4.6±3.3
BH down the line	10%	+2.2	+1.5	+0.5	+4.1±4.5
BH slice through the middle	9%	−6.2	+3.9	+1.0	−1.3±2.5
BH slice crosscourt	4%	−4.2	−0.5	−1.1	−5.8±2.7

Lean BH through the middle: +3.4±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (370 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Carla	Value
FH through the middle	49%	−3.2	+2.9	−0.4	−0.7±2.9
FH crosscourt	28%	+0.5	+1.3	+1.2	+3.1±4.3
FH down the line	24%	−0.6	−1.0	+0.5	−1.0±5.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.8±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (119 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Carla	Value
BH crosscourt	47%	+1.5	−1.1	−2.5	−2.1±3.4
BH through the middle	40%	−2.6	+0.5	−0.6	−2.7±2.6
BH down the line	13%	−0.5	+3.5	+2.1	+5.0±5.1

Lean BH down the line: +6.4±4.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (174 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.

Carla Suarez Navarro

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · return +1	+3.7±3.2	+1.6	+2.1
FH to the middle · serve +1	+3.3±2.2	+3.2	+0.1
FH to their forehand · return	+2.7±3.6	−1.7	+4.4
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+2.2±3.0	+1.0	+1.2
FH to the middle · return +1	+2.2±2.4	+0.5	+1.7
FH to their backhand · return	+2.0±3.6	+0.2	+1.8

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−5.5±4.6	−5.2	−0.3
BH to the middle · return +1	−1.6±2.2	−1.7	+0.1
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−1.5±2.6	−0.4	−1.1
FH to their backhand · rally	−1.2±2.3	−0.2	−1.0
BH to their backhand · return +1	−1.2±3.0	−1.9	+0.6

Emma Navarro

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · return	+5.1±3.5	+1.7	+3.4
BH to their forehand · return +1	+3.3±4.6	+3.9	−0.6
BH to their backhand · return +1	+3.2±3.0	+2.5	+0.7
FH to the middle · return	+3.1±1.9	+1.6	+1.5
FH to their backhand · rally	+2.2±2.3	+1.8	+0.4
FH to the middle · rally	+2.2±1.6	+1.8	+0.4

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return	−3.4±2.7	+0.1	−3.6
BH to their backhand · serve +1	−2.2±2.9	−1.5	−0.6
BH to the middle · serve +1	−1.9±2.1	−1.2	−0.7
BH to the middle · return +1	−1.0±2.2	−1.2	+0.2
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−0.8±2.7	+0.8	−1.6

Against Emma Navarro-like opponents

Carla Suarez Navarro v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	54.2%	40.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Coco Gauff, Iva Jovic, Anastasia Potapova, Anna Blinkova, Kimberly Birrell, Emma Raducanu, Yafan Wang, Nao Hibino, Lin Zhu, R. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.