Game plan
Daniel Gimeno Traver v Alex Molcan
Every number combines what Daniel Gimeno Traver does well with what Alex Molcan allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective
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 Gimeno Traver serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Daniel wins | v Alex | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 44% | 73% | 71% | 71.0%±10.6 | 44% |
| Body | 15% | 53% | 51% | 40.8%±16.3 | 2% ▼ |
| T | 41% | 74% | 81% | 80.2%±9.2 | 54% ▲ |
Optimal v Alex Molcan: +1.4±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +10.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Daniel wins | v Alex | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 41% | 76% | 77% | 80.1%±9.5 | 54% ▲ |
| Body | 11% | 66% | 63% | 66.2%±16.2 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 48% | 70% | 73% | 71.6%±10.3 | 46% ▼ |
Optimal v Alex Molcan: +0.5±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +5.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Alex Molcan serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Alex wins | v Daniel | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 28% | 72% | 76% | 75.0%±11.1 | 41% ▲ |
| Body | 19% | 61% | 70% | 67.2%±13.7 | 6% ▼ |
| T | 52% | 66% | 73% | 63.9%±11.8 | 53% |
Optimal v Daniel Gimeno Traver: +0.6±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +7.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Alex wins | v Daniel | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 42% | 68% | 71% | 66.0%±11.2 | 42% |
| Body | 13% | 59% | 63% | 58.7%±16.2 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 45% | 71% | 78% | 77.1%±11.9 | 58% ▲ |
Optimal v Daniel Gimeno Traver: +0.9±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +7.1 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 Gimeno Traver returning
Not enough charted returns.
Alex Molcan returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Daniel | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 34% | +4.3 | ±0.0 | −0.5 | +3.8±3.0 |
| FH slice through the middle | 27% | −4.2 | −0.8 | ±0.0 | −5.0±1.7 |
| FH crosscourt | 19% | +5.5 | +0.7 | −0.5 | +5.7±3.6 |
| FH down the line | 10% | +1.7 | −1.2 | ±0.0 | +0.5±2.8 |
| FH slice crosscourt | 6% | −4.3 | +0.8 | ±0.0 | −3.6±1.6 |
Lean FH crosscourt: +5.0±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (177 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Daniel | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 46% | +6.4 | +1.1 | +1.0 | +8.5±2.6 |
| BH crosscourt | 14% | +8.8 | −2.6 | +2.6 | +8.8±3.4 |
| BH slice through the middle | 14% | −4.2 | −0.4 | −0.1 | −4.7±2.1 |
| BH down the line | 11% | +4.2 | +2.8 | −0.7 | +6.4±3.9 |
| BH slice down the line | 10% | −8.4 | −0.7 | −0.8 | −9.9±2.8 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +4.5±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (290 returns charted)
2nd serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Daniel | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 50% | −0.2 | −0.8 | ±0.0 | −1.0±3.1 |
| FH through the middle | 38% | −3.5 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −3.5±2.0 |
| FH down the line | 12% | −1.8 | +1.1 | ±0.0 | −0.6±2.5 |
Lean FH crosscourt: +0.9±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (86 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Daniel | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 66% | −2.9 | +2.5 | +0.3 | −0.1±2.5 |
| BH crosscourt | 23% | +1.0 | +1.8 | +1.5 | +4.3±3.0 |
| BH down the line | 11% | −0.2 | +2.1 | −0.3 | +1.5±4.4 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +3.2±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (137 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 hard. Each player's hard record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.
Daniel Gimeno Traver
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their backhand · rally | +2.0±3.1 | +0.4 | +1.6 |
| BH to the middle · rally | −0.8±2.3 | −2.5 | +1.7 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | −2.9±3.9 | −0.7 | −2.2 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | −3.4±3.7 | −2.5 | −0.9 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their forehand · rally | −3.4±3.7 | −2.5 | −0.9 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | −2.9±3.9 | −0.7 | −2.2 |
| BH to the middle · rally | −0.8±2.3 | −2.5 | +1.7 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | +2.0±3.1 | +0.4 | +1.6 |
Alex Molcan
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their forehand · rally | +3.2±4.2 | +1.9 | +1.2 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | +3.1±2.9 | +3.0 | +0.1 |
| BH to the middle · rally | −0.1±2.3 | +0.2 | −0.4 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | −2.0±3.1 | −2.3 | +0.3 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their backhand · rally | −2.0±3.1 | −2.3 | +0.3 |
| BH to the middle · rally | −0.1±2.3 | +0.2 | −0.4 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | +3.1±2.9 | +3.0 | +0.1 |
| BH to their forehand · rally | +3.2±4.2 | +1.9 | +1.2 |
Against Alex Molcan-like opponents
| Daniel Gimeno Traver v | Matches | Serve pts won | Return pts won |
|---|---|---|---|
| All charted opponents | – | 60.9% | 33.2% |
| Players most similar to Alex Molcan | 1 | 56.1% | 29.7% |
Similar by tactical fingerprint: Learner Tien, Gael Monfils, Miomir Kecmanovic, Yoshihito Nishioka, Albert Ramos, Emil Ruusuvuori, Jiri Vesely, Juan Martin Del Potro, Guido Pella, Nikolay Davydenko. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.