RallyIQ

Game plan

Daniel Altmaier v Benjamin Bonzi

Every number combines what Daniel Altmaier does well with what Benjamin Bonzi allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Daniel Altmaier wins, best of 3 46%90%: 14%–81% · best of 5: 44%
Serve points won 61.6% / 62.5% Daniel / Benjamin · tour 61.3%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 46%serve 62.0% / 62.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Daniel Altmaier's record against Benjamin Bonzi's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −8.8 on serve, +5.5 on return vs expectation (148 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

CareerDanielBenjamin
Direction choice−0.17 ±0.12
better than 18%
+0.02 ±0.09
better than 61%
Shot selection−0.98 ±0.22
better than 3%
−0.12 ±0.18
better than 36%
Execution+0.23 ±0.64
better than 77%
−0.84 ±0.55
better than 30%
Points left on the table3.13 ±0.20
lower than 14%
2.35 ±0.11
lower than 77%

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.

Daniel Altmaier serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowDaniel winsv BenjaminMatchupOptimal
Wide44%69%73%69.0%±7.034% ▼
Body3%60%57%53.6%±16.10% ▼
T53%75%83%82.5%±6.166% ▲

Optimal v Benjamin Bonzi: +0.4±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +6.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowDaniel winsv BenjaminMatchupOptimal
Wide57%71%79%77.9%±6.670% ▲
Body4%62%70%69.5%±13.90% ▼
T39%67%73%67.8%±7.930% ▼

Optimal v Benjamin Bonzi: +0.1±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Benjamin Bonzi serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowBenjamin winsv DanielMatchupOptimal
Wide42%72%76%75.1%±6.555% ▲
Body8%67%68%71.3%±12.70% ▼
T50%75%77%77.3%±6.545% ▼

Optimal v Daniel Altmaier: +0.6±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowBenjamin winsv DanielMatchupOptimal
Wide45%71%78%76.6%±7.043% ▼
Body10%60%60%57.5%±14.50% ▼
T44%73%75%75.9%±6.957% ▲

Optimal v Daniel Altmaier: +0.7±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.3 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.

Daniel Altmaier returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenjaminValue
FH through the middle31%+4.3+1.2−0.4+5.0±2.9
FH slice through the middle31%−4.2−0.3−1.2−5.7±2.2
FH slice down the line15%−4.3+0.8±0.0−3.5±2.3
FH down the line12%+1.7−3.3+3.7+2.2±4.5
FH crosscourt7%+5.5−4.2−1.5−0.2±4.4

Lean FH through the middle: +5.7±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (398 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenjaminValue
BH slice through the middle43%−4.2+1.5−2.0−4.7±2.4
BH slice crosscourt24%+0.5−1.6−2.1−3.1±2.7
BH through the middle12%+6.4+0.1+0.7+7.3±2.8
BH slice down the line8%−8.4+0.3+1.6−6.5±3.1
BH crosscourt8%+8.8−2.8−0.3+5.7±3.5

Lean BH through the middle: +9.0±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (327 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenjaminValue
FH through the middle52%−3.5−0.3−1.2−4.9±2.9
FH down the line23%−1.8+1.2−2.0−2.6±4.2
FH crosscourt19%−0.2−0.2−2.6−3.0±4.1
FH slice through the middle6%−12.7+0.9±0.0−11.8±1.1

Lean FH down the line: +1.8±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (114 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv BenjaminValue
BH through the middle40%−2.9+0.9−0.5−2.4±2.3
BH crosscourt25%+1.0+0.1−1.8−0.7±3.3
BH down the line13%−0.2−1.2+0.8−0.6±4.9
FH through the middle9%−2.9−0.3−1.2−4.3±2.4
FH inside-out7%+1.0−0.1−2.0−1.1±3.2

Lean BH down the line: +1.5±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (257 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Benjamin Bonzi returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
FH slice through the middle41%−4.2−0.4+1.7−2.9±2.2
FH through the middle21%+4.3+2.2+0.7+7.2±2.8
FH slice crosscourt16%−4.3+0.8+0.6−2.9±2.4
FH slice down the line9%−4.3+0.8+1.5−2.0±2.6
FH down the line6%+1.7+0.7+1.2+3.6±4.1

Lean FH through the middle: +6.8±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (225 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
BH through the middle52%+6.4+0.8+1.4+8.6±2.6
BH crosscourt22%+8.8−1.1−0.1+7.6±3.4
BH down the line10%+4.2−1.7+2.8+5.3±4.3
BH slice through the middle8%−4.2±0.0±0.0−4.2±2.3
BH slice crosscourt4%+0.5−2.2−0.2−1.9±2.5

Lean BH through the middle: +2.8±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (159 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
FH through the middle38%−3.5−0.4+0.4−3.5±2.8
FH crosscourt35%−0.2+1.6+0.7+2.0±4.3
FH down the line17%−1.8+1.5−0.9−1.2±4.3
FH slice through the middle10%−12.7+0.1±0.0−12.6±1.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.1±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (81 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
BH through the middle51%−2.9−0.3+1.2−1.9±2.4
BH crosscourt38%+1.0−3.1+1.2−0.9±3.1
BH down the line11%−0.2−1.3−1.6−3.0±4.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +0.8±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (116 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 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.

Daniel Altmaier

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · return +1+3.3±3.1+0.3+2.9
FH to their backhand · rally+3.2±3.1+1.8+1.4
FH to their forehand · return +1+3.0±5.4+1.4+1.5
BH slice to their backhand · rally+2.6±3.1+1.1+1.6
FH to their forehand · serve +1+2.4±5.1+3.5−1.1
FH to the middle · rally+2.3±2.5+2.7−0.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return−6.3±5.7−4.0−2.3
BH to their backhand · serve +1−4.5±3.8−0.7−3.8
BH to their backhand · return−3.9±4.2−2.3−1.6
BH to the middle · return−2.4±3.0−1.2−1.2
BH to their backhand · return +1−1.8±3.9−1.6−0.2

Benjamin Bonzi

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · rally+1.7±2.3+1.4+0.3
BH to their backhand · return +1+1.2±3.7−0.3+1.5
BH to the middle · serve +1+1.1±3.2+0.6+0.5
FH to their backhand · rally+1.1±3.9+3.1−2.0
BH to the middle · return+0.4±2.9−1.1+1.5
BH to their forehand · rally+0.1±4.9+4.3−4.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · rally−6.5±3.8−5.5−1.0
BH to their backhand · return−3.3±3.7−3.5+0.2
FH to their forehand · serve +1−3.1±4.2−1.1−2.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1−3.1±4.0+0.8−3.8
BH to their backhand · rally−1.8±3.0−0.4−1.5

Against Benjamin Bonzi-like opponents

Daniel Altmaier vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–61.2%32.8%
Players most similar to Benjamin Bonzi1 53.9%35.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Learner Tien, Tomas Machac, Hubert Hurkacz, Karen Khachanov, Laslo Djere, Fabio Fognini, Richard Gasquet, Borna Coric, Kei Nishikori, Denis Istomin. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.