Game plan

Daniel Evans v Andrei Medvedev

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

Forecast

Daniel Evans wins, best of 3 68%90%: 35%–91% · best of 5: 72%

Serve points won 65.0% / 61.2% Daniel / Andrei · tour 65.7%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 68%serve 65.0% / 61.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Evans's record against Andrei Medvedev'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	Daniel	Andrei
Direction choice	−0.03 ±0.17 better than 48%	−0.19 ±0.15 better than 16%
Shot selection	−1.18 ±0.22 better than 1%	−0.13 ±0.26 better than 35%
Execution	+0.37 ±0.40 better than 81%	−0.34 ±0.63 better than 52%
Points left on the table	3.06 ±0.27 lower than 17%	3.04 ±0.22 lower than 18%

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 Evans serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Daniel wins	v Andrei	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	31%	74%	82%	83.2%±5.5	44% ▲
Body	12%	62%	72%	70.7%±10.8	12%
T	57%	73%	68%	65.6%±7.6	44% ▼

Optimal v Andrei Medvedev: +0.8±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +11.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Daniel wins	v Andrei	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	56%	73%	67%	66.8%±7.5	69% ▲
Body	9%	57%	64%	57.5%±12.5	0% ▼
T	34%	67%	72%	67.2%±8.6	31% ▼

Optimal v Andrei Medvedev: +0.4±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Andrei Medvedev serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Andrei wins	v Daniel	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	55%	67%	71%	64.9%±6.9	48% ▼
Body	6%	66%	63%	66.0%±12.9	0% ▼
T	39%	79%	73%	77.6%±7.0	52% ▲

Optimal v Daniel Evans: +0.2±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +7.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Andrei wins	v Daniel	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	64%	69%	70%	66.3%±6.9	77% ▲
Body	7%	64%	66%	67.4%±12.3	7%
T	29%	68%	65%	61.0%±9.7	16% ▼

Optimal v Daniel Evans: +0.4±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +2.6 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 Evans returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Andrei	Value
FH through the middle	41%	+4.3	+1.7	−0.9	+5.1±2.7
FH down the line	24%	+1.7	+1.8	−0.7	+2.7±4.4
FH slice through the middle	14%	−4.2	+0.2	−0.4	−4.3±2.2
FH crosscourt	13%	+5.5	−1.0	−0.3	+4.2±4.4
FH slice down the line	6%	−4.3	+1.8	±0.0	−2.5±2.2

Lean FH through the middle: +2.6±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (455 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Andrei	Value
BH slice through the middle	43%	−4.2	+0.5	+1.2	−2.5±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	27%	+0.5	+1.6	+0.6	+2.8±2.8
BH through the middle	12%	+6.4	+0.9	−0.9	+6.4±2.8
BH slice down the line	7%	−8.4	+0.3	+0.8	−7.3±3.2
BH crosscourt	6%	+8.8	−0.6	−0.5	+7.7±3.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.3±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (580 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Andrei	Value
FH through the middle	51%	−3.5	−0.4	−0.8	−4.6±2.8
FH down the line	32%	−1.8	+0.9	+2.4	+1.5±4.7
FH crosscourt	17%	−0.2	+3.4	+2.6	+5.7±4.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.7±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (103 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Andrei	Value
BH slice crosscourt	35%	−4.0	−2.1	−0.3	−6.4±2.4
BH slice through the middle	25%	−11.3	−1.2	−0.6	−13.0±2.2
BH through the middle	10%	−2.9	+0.5	+0.8	−1.5±2.6
FH through the middle	9%	−2.9	−0.5	−0.8	−4.2±2.4
FH inside-out	8%	+1.0	+1.1	+2.4	+4.4±3.7

Lean FH inside-out: +10.3±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (442 returns charted)

Andrei Medvedev returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Daniel	Value
FH through the middle	55%	+4.3	−3.6	+0.9	+1.5±2.6
FH down the line	22%	+1.7	+1.2	+5.9	+8.8±4.4
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.5	+0.1	±0.0	+5.6±4.2
FH slice through the middle	7%	−4.2	−0.7	−0.3	−5.3±2.1
BH through the middle	3%	+6.6	−0.5	+1.5	+7.5±1.8

Lean FH down the line: +5.4±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (183 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Daniel	Value
BH through the middle	40%	+6.4	−0.6	+1.5	+7.3±2.4
BH crosscourt	33%	+8.8	+1.3	+1.0	+11.1±3.2
BH down the line	14%	+4.2	−3.0	+3.0	+4.2±4.5
BH slice through the middle	7%	−4.2	+1.0	+0.1	−3.1±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	3%	+0.5	−0.5	−2.1	−2.0±2.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.3±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (206 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Daniel	Value
FH through the middle	52%	−3.5	−0.2	−0.2	−3.9±2.7
FH crosscourt	29%	−0.2	−2.4	+2.1	−0.5±4.2
FH down the line	20%	−1.8	+0.2	+0.4	−1.2±4.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.9±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (66 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Daniel	Value
BH through the middle	53%	−2.9	+0.2	+0.5	−2.1±2.3
BH crosscourt	32%	+1.0	−0.6	+1.0	+1.5±3.0
BH down the line	14%	−0.2	−0.6	+5.3	+4.5±4.6

Lean BH down the line: +4.5±4.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (105 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 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.

Daniel Evans

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return +1	+9.1±4.9	+5.1	+3.9
FH to their backhand · rally	+5.2±3.8	+4.2	+1.0
FH to their forehand · return	+4.7±4.4	+3.5	+1.2
FH to the middle · return +1	+3.1±2.7	+2.4	+0.7
FH to their forehand · return +1	+3.0±4.9	+4.5	−1.5
FH to the middle · serve +1	+2.2±3.2	+2.0	+0.3

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−5.3±4.7	−2.7	−2.6
BH to their backhand · rally	−2.7±3.2	−1.5	−1.2
BH slice to their backhand · return	−2.6±3.2	−2.2	−0.3
BH slice to the middle · return	−2.1±2.8	−2.5	+0.4
FH to the middle · return	−2.1±3.1	−0.6	−1.5

Andrei Medvedev

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	+6.2±4.8	+0.6	+5.5
BH to their forehand · return	+3.5±5.5	+0.2	+3.3
BH to their backhand · return +1	+2.7±3.1	+3.6	−0.9
FH to the middle · return +1	+0.6±3.3	+0.7	−0.1
FH to the middle · serve +1	+0.2±2.6	−0.6	+0.9
BH to their backhand · return	+0.1±4.0	−1.0	+1.1

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · rally	−8.3±3.9	−3.1	−5.3
FH to their backhand · return +1	−6.1±4.8	−0.4	−5.7
FH to their forehand · return +1	−3.4±5.1	±0.0	−3.4
BH to their forehand · rally	−3.2±3.5	−1.8	−1.4
BH to the middle · rally	−2.6±2.4	−0.3	−2.3

Against Andrei Medvedev-like opponents

Daniel Evans v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	62.1%	37.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Jannik Sinner, Thomaz Bellucci, Egor Gerasimov, Tennys Sandgren, Paul Henri Mathieu, Ivan Ljubicic, Andrei Pavel, Jiri Novak, Marcelo Rios, Sergi Bruguera. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.