RallyIQ

Game plan

Chris Evert v Agnieszka Radwanska

Every number combines what Chris Evert does well with what Agnieszka Radwanska allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Chris Evert wins, best of 3 74%90%: 35%–95% · best of 5: 79%
Serve points won 56.6% / 51.7% Chris / Agnieszka · tour 55.0%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 74%serve 56.6% / 51.7%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Chris Evert's record against Agnieszka Radwanska'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

CareerChrisAgnieszka
Direction choice−0.03 ±0.13
better than 50%
+0.03 ±0.09
better than 57%
Shot selection−0.21 ±0.17
better than 28%
−0.08 ±0.09
better than 36%
Execution+0.63 ±0.33
better than 83%
+1.79 ±0.28
better than 98%
Points left on the table2.87 ±0.24
lower than 19%
2.59 ±0.12
lower than 53%

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.

Chris Evert serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowChris winsv AgnieszkaMatchupOptimal
Wide50%58%69%61.9%±5.451%
Body23%60%57%60.2%±7.38% ▼
T26%68%66%66.5%±6.741% ▲

Optimal v Agnieszka Radwanska: +0.8±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowChris winsv AgnieszkaMatchupOptimal
Wide55%58%63%55.4%±5.943% ▼
Body21%61%52%57.9%±7.818% ▼
T24%65%64%64.6%±6.839% ▲

Optimal v Agnieszka Radwanska: +0.6±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +6.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Agnieszka Radwanska serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowAgnieszka winsv ChrisMatchupOptimal
Wide43%61%63%58.9%±5.942%
Body18%57%55%54.4%±8.53% ▼
T40%71%64%67.1%±6.255% ▲

Optimal v Chris Evert: +0.6±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +5.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowAgnieszka winsv ChrisMatchupOptimal
Wide36%70%63%67.9%±5.951% ▲
Body17%58%60%61.7%±8.62% ▼
T47%60%62%57.6%±6.947%

Optimal v Chris Evert: +0.4±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +5.9 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.

Chris Evert returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AgnieszkaValue
FH through the middle35%+4.2+0.4+0.7+5.3±2.4
FH down the line23%+1.5−1.3+3.6+3.8±4.2
FH crosscourt21%+5.3+2.7+2.5+10.6±3.7
FH slice down the line10%−10.5+1.9+5.4−3.2±3.2
FH slice through the middle10%−6.7−0.8+1.1−6.4±2.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.6±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (353 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AgnieszkaValue
BH through the middle32%+6.0−4.4+1.1+2.7±2.2
BH down the line19%+2.2+2.3+3.2+7.7±4.3
BH crosscourt19%+7.7−0.4−0.8+6.5±3.3
BH slice through the middle12%−6.2−0.7−3.0−9.9±2.5
BH slice crosscourt9%−4.2+4.0−0.1−0.3±3.0

Lean BH down the line: +6.0±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (418 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AgnieszkaValue
FH crosscourt44%+0.5+1.4+3.8+5.7±4.1
FH through the middle36%−3.2+0.4+0.3−2.5±2.9
FH down the line20%−0.6+1.9+4.7+6.1±4.9

Lean FH down the line: +3.2±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (153 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv AgnieszkaValue
BH through the middle46%−2.6+1.5+0.4−0.7±2.4
BH crosscourt27%+1.5+4.4+3.5+9.4±3.2
BH down the line19%−0.5−1.5+8.2+6.1±4.9
FH through the middle6%−2.7+0.8+0.3−1.6±2.2
FH inside-out3%+1.4−1.2+4.7+4.8±3.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.0±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (236 returns charted)

Agnieszka Radwanska returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ChrisValue
FH through the middle44%+4.2+2.5−1.1+5.6±2.5
FH down the line22%+1.5+3.6+2.3+7.4±4.2
FH crosscourt16%+5.3+2.3+1.5+9.1±4.1
FH slice through the middle11%−6.7+0.9−0.2−6.1±2.5
FH slice crosscourt5%−6.6−1.2+2.8−5.0±2.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.6±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (762 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ChrisValue
BH through the middle44%+6.0+2.4−0.6+7.9±2.6
BH crosscourt27%+7.7+3.1−0.8+10.0±3.3
BH slice through the middle12%−6.2+1.5+7.1+2.4±2.1
BH down the line8%+2.2+0.9+2.3+5.3±4.6
BH slice crosscourt5%−4.2+1.0+8.2+4.9±2.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.9±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (669 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ChrisValue
FH through the middle36%−3.2+0.2−2.6−5.6±3.1
FH down the line34%−0.6+2.0+0.2+1.7±5.2
FH crosscourt24%+0.5−0.6−0.3−0.4±4.4
FH slice through the middle3%−15.2−1.0+1.4−14.8±1.6
FH slice crosscourt3%−14.9−0.9±0.0−15.8±1.3

Lean FH down the line: +4.2±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (204 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ChrisValue
BH crosscourt36%+1.5+3.6+0.5+5.6±3.0
BH through the middle34%−2.6+2.0+0.6±0.0±2.4
BH down the line28%−0.5+3.8±0.0+3.2±3.6
FH inside-out3%+1.4−1.6+0.2−0.1±3.7

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.7±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (297 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 on clay. Each player's clay record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Chris Evert

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return+13.3±5.4+7.4+5.9
BH to their forehand · return +1+11.3±5.9+5.2+6.1
FH to their backhand · return+7.8±4.9+0.9+6.9
FH to their backhand · return +1+4.7±4.1+3.1+1.6
FH to their forehand · rally+4.5±3.8+0.6+4.0
BH to their forehand · serve +1+4.5±5.4+1.7+2.7

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to the middle · return−2.6±2.5±0.0−2.5
FH to the middle · rally−2.0±2.9−3.0+1.1
FH to their forehand · serve +1−1.3±4.9−2.1+0.9
BH to their backhand · rally−0.5±3.2−1.3+0.9
BH to the middle · rally+0.2±2.5−2.0+2.1

Agnieszka Radwanska

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to the middle · return+12.4±2.5+2.0+10.4
BH slice to their forehand · rally+8.6±3.7+2.5+6.1
BH to their backhand · return +1+7.6±4.4+3.5+4.1
BH slice to the middle · rally+7.5±2.4+3.0+4.5
BH slice to their backhand · rally+6.2±2.4+1.0+5.1
FH to their forehand · serve +1+5.7±4.9+4.6+1.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · rally−1.6±5.1−1.1−0.5
FH to their backhand · return+0.1±4.8−0.2+0.3
BH to the middle · rally+0.4±2.7+2.5−2.2
FH to their backhand · return +1+0.8±4.2−0.4+1.2
FH to their forehand · return +1+1.3±4.9+3.4−2.1

Against Agnieszka Radwanska-like opponents

Chris Evert vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–58.1%45.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Mirra Andreeva, Marie Bouzkova, Elise Mertens, Daria Kasatkina, Linda Fruhvirtova, Caroline Wozniacki, Alize Cornet, Simona Halep, Saisai Zheng, Elena Dementieva. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.