RallyIQ

Game plan

Daniel Altmaier v Tomas Machac

Every number combines what Daniel Altmaier does well with what Tomas Machac 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 21%90%: 5%–53% · best of 5: 16%
Serve points won 56.8% / 63.0% Daniel / Tomas · tour 61.5%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 22%serve 57.2% / 63.3%

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 Daniel Altmaier's record against Tomas Machac'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

CareerDanielTomas
Direction choice−0.17 ±0.12
better than 18%
+0.12 ±0.07
better than 83%
Shot selection−0.98 ±0.22
better than 3%
+0.08 ±0.15
better than 63%
Execution+0.23 ±0.64
better than 77%
+0.15 ±0.51
better than 75%
Points left on the table3.13 ±0.20
lower than 14%
2.35 ±0.10
lower than 79%

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: Daniel Altmaier +0.37, Tomas Machac −0.20. 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.

Daniel Altmaier serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowDaniel winsv TomasMatchupOptimal
Wide44%69%74%70.1%±5.858% ▲
Body3%60%66%62.7%±14.30% ▼
T53%75%78%77.9%±5.042% ▼

Optimal v Tomas Machac: +0.1±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowDaniel winsv TomasMatchupOptimal
Wide57%71%71%69.0%±5.870% ▲
Body4%62%60%58.9%±15.10% ▼
T39%67%68%62.0%±7.130% ▼

Optimal v Tomas Machac: +0.3±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Tomas Machac serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowTomas winsv DanielMatchupOptimal
Wide44%67%76%70.2%±5.838% ▼
Body6%62%68%67.0%±12.50% ▼
T49%74%77%76.2%±5.562% ▲

Optimal v Daniel Altmaier: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowTomas winsv DanielMatchupOptimal
Wide46%70%78%75.0%±5.841% ▼
Body8%64%60%60.8%±12.90% ▼
T46%72%75%74.9%±5.559% ▲

Optimal v Daniel Altmaier: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. 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.

Daniel Altmaier returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TomasValue
FH through the middle31%+4.3+1.2+1.3+6.7±2.5
FH slice through the middle31%−4.2−0.3−0.2−4.7±2.2
FH slice down the line15%−4.3+0.8+1.8−1.7±3.1
FH down the line12%+1.7−3.3+2.9+1.3±4.4
FH crosscourt7%+5.5−4.2+4.9+6.2±4.2

Lean FH through the middle: +5.9±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (398 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TomasValue
BH slice through the middle43%−4.2+1.5±0.0−2.7±2.3
BH slice crosscourt24%+0.5−1.6+0.3−0.7±3.0
BH through the middle12%+6.4+0.1+1.8+8.3±2.5
BH slice down the line8%−8.4+0.3+0.7−7.4±3.3
BH crosscourt8%+8.8−2.8+2.2+8.2±3.3

Lean BH through the middle: +8.2±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (327 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TomasValue
FH through the middle52%−3.5−0.3+1.0−2.8±2.7
FH down the line23%−1.8+1.2+2.2+1.6±4.6
FH crosscourt19%−0.2−0.2+1.6+1.2±4.0
FH slice through the middle6%−12.7+0.9+0.3−11.5±1.5

Lean FH down the line: +3.2±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (114 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TomasValue
BH through the middle40%−2.9+0.9−1.2−3.1±2.2
BH crosscourt25%+1.0+0.1+1.4+2.5±3.0
BH down the line13%−0.2−1.2+2.0+0.7±4.9
FH through the middle9%−2.9−0.3+1.0−2.2±2.2
FH inside-out7%+1.0−0.1+2.2+3.1±3.5

Lean FH inside-out: +4.1±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (257 returns charted)

Tomas Machac returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
FH through the middle48%+4.3+2.7+0.7+7.6±2.5
FH down the line27%+1.7+1.7+1.2+4.6±4.3
FH crosscourt17%+5.5+3.2+1.8+10.4±4.2
FH slice through the middle6%−4.2−1.2+1.7−3.8±2.2
FH slice down the line3%−4.3+1.3+1.5−1.5±2.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.0±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (465 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
BH through the middle37%+6.4+1.1+1.4+8.9±2.3
BH crosscourt31%+8.8+3.1−0.1+11.8±3.2
BH slice through the middle13%−4.2+2.1±0.0−2.1±2.5
BH down the line9%+4.2+2.2+2.8+9.2±4.6
BH slice crosscourt6%+0.5−0.5−0.2−0.2±3.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.9±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (508 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
FH through the middle39%−3.5+1.7+0.4−1.3±2.8
FH down the line33%−1.8−0.2−0.9−2.9±4.7
FH crosscourt24%−0.2+2.3+0.7+2.8±4.4
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7−0.5±0.0−13.2±1.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.1±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (163 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DanielValue
BH crosscourt51%+1.0+1.0+1.2+3.3±2.9
BH through the middle37%−2.9+0.5+1.2−1.2±2.2
BH down the line9%−0.2−1.1−1.6−2.9±4.9
FH through the middle3%−2.9+0.4+0.4−2.0±2.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.3±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (339 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.

Daniel Altmaier

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1+6.8±5.1+3.5+3.3
BH slice to their backhand · rally+4.0±3.4+1.1+3.0
FH to the middle · rally+3.6±2.8+2.7+0.9
BH to the middle · rally+3.5±2.5+1.8+1.7
FH to the middle · return+3.3±3.0+1.6+1.7
BH slice to the middle · return+2.5±2.7+1.9+0.6

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return +1−4.9±5.1−2.0−2.9
FH to the middle · return +1−2.2±3.7+0.4−2.6
BH to their backhand · return +1−1.9±4.2−1.6−0.2
BH to their backhand · rally−1.8±2.8−0.9−0.9
BH to their backhand · return−1.2±4.0−2.3+1.1

Tomas Machac

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return+9.3±5.5+6.6+2.7
BH to their forehand · return +1+7.6±6.7+3.6+4.0
BH to the middle · return+4.7±2.7+3.2+1.5
BH to their forehand · return+4.3±6.1+3.9+0.3
FH to their backhand · return+3.1±4.9+1.6+1.5
BH to the middle · serve +1+2.6±3.5+2.0+0.5

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return +1−7.8±5.3−0.8−7.1
FH to their backhand · serve +1−7.7±4.2−3.9−3.8
FH to their forehand · serve +1−5.1±4.8−3.1−2.0
BH to their forehand · rally−4.3±5.3±0.0−4.3
FH to their backhand · rally−3.2±3.7−1.1−2.0

Against Tomas Machac-like opponents

Daniel Altmaier vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–61.2%32.8%
Players most similar to Tomas Machac1 53.9%35.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Hubert Hurkacz, Sebastian Korda, Zhizhen Zhang, Karen Khachanov, Laslo Djere, Benjamin Bonzi, Fabio Fognini, Borna Coric, Kei Nishikori, Viktor Troicki. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.