Game plan

David Nalbandian v Yevgeny Kafelnikov

Every number combines what David Nalbandian does well with what Yevgeny Kafelnikov allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

David Nalbandian wins, best of 3 64%90%: 38%–84% · best of 5: 67%

Serve points won 62.9% / 60.2% David / Yevgeny · tour 63.4%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 62%serve 62.3% / 59.9%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 David Nalbandian's record against Yevgeny Kafelnikov's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +3.3 on serve, −1.5 on return vs expectation (617 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

Career	David	Yevgeny
Direction choice	+0.26 ±0.05 better than 97%	+0.30 ±0.06 better than 98%
Shot selection	−0.29 ±0.09 better than 24%	−0.27 ±0.14 better than 26%
Execution	+0.33 ±0.30 better than 79%	−0.55 ±0.29 better than 42%
Points left on the table	2.02 ±0.09 lower than 99%	2.43 ±0.15 lower than 70%

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.

David Nalbandian serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	David wins	v Yevgeny	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	40%	69%	76%	71.5%±4.0	53% ▲
Body	13%	63%	60%	60.2%±8.3	0% ▼
T	48%	71%	79%	75.0%±3.8	47%

Optimal v Yevgeny Kafelnikov: +1.0±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	David wins	v Yevgeny	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	54%	64%	75%	65.9%±4.1	67% ▲
Body	5%	63%	62%	62.1%±10.5	0% ▼
T	41%	70%	72%	70.9%±4.3	33% ▼

Optimal v Yevgeny Kafelnikov: +0.2±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Yevgeny Kafelnikov serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Yevgeny wins	v David	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	51%	72%	73%	72.2%±3.6	64% ▲
Body	7%	66%	76%	78.0%±7.3	7%
T	42%	76%	75%	76.2%±3.8	29% ▼

Optimal v David Nalbandian: +0.2±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +3.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Yevgeny wins	v David	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	50%	73%	71%	71.4%±4.0	37% ▼
Body	6%	63%	60%	59.7%±10.3	7%
T	43%	69%	74%	71.6%±4.3	56% ▲

Optimal v David Nalbandian: +0.6±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +0.9 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.

David Nalbandian returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Yevgeny	Value
FH through the middle	38%	+4.3	−0.4	−0.1	+3.7±1.8
FH crosscourt	30%	+5.5	−3.1	−1.9	+0.6±3.2
FH slice through the middle	11%	−4.2	−0.6	+0.5	−4.3±2.3
FH down the line	10%	+1.7	−3.4	−0.4	−2.1±3.8
FH slice down the line	6%	−4.3	+0.2	−2.1	−6.2±3.0

Lean FH through the middle: +3.4±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (933 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Yevgeny	Value
BH crosscourt	32%	+8.8	+1.0	−3.6	+6.2±2.7
BH through the middle	26%	+6.4	+0.9	−2.0	+5.3±2.0
BH slice through the middle	18%	−4.2	−0.6	+0.6	−4.2±1.9
BH slice crosscourt	14%	+0.5	+0.8	+0.4	+1.7±2.6
BH down the line	6%	+4.2	+1.8	+2.2	+8.2±4.5

Lean BH down the line: +5.2±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (915 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Yevgeny	Value
FH crosscourt	40%	−0.2	+0.5	+1.2	+1.5±3.9
FH through the middle	35%	−3.5	−1.9	±0.0	−5.4±2.4
FH down the line	16%	−1.8	−0.4	−0.1	−2.3±4.3
FH slice through the middle	3%	−12.7	−0.1	+1.1	−11.6±1.8
FH slice down the line	2%	−9.4	+0.9	+0.3	−8.2±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.7±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (324 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Yevgeny	Value
BH crosscourt	60%	+1.0	+0.7	−0.6	+1.2±2.0
BH through the middle	22%	−2.9	+0.1	+0.1	−2.7±1.8
BH down the line	12%	−0.2	+1.7	−2.8	−1.3±4.4
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.0	−2.3	+0.3	−6.0±2.2
FH through the middle	2%	−2.9	−0.4	±0.0	−3.2±1.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.6±1.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (792 returns charted)

Yevgeny Kafelnikov returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
FH through the middle	46%	+4.3	−1.0	+0.8	+4.1±1.9
FH down the line	28%	+1.7	+1.7	+2.9	+6.2±3.3
FH crosscourt	25%	+5.5	−0.6	−0.5	+4.4±3.4
BH through the middle	1%	+6.6	−0.1	+1.6	+8.0±1.9

Lean FH down the line: +1.4±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (998 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
BH through the middle	28%	+6.4	−1.2	+1.6	+6.8±1.9
BH crosscourt	25%	+8.8	−2.0	+2.6	+9.4±2.4
BH slice through the middle	18%	−4.2	−0.2	+1.7	−2.7±2.0
BH slice crosscourt	12%	+0.5	+0.4	+2.3	+3.2±2.7
BH down the line	10%	+4.2	−0.6	+5.8	+9.4±4.2

Lean BH down the line: +4.7±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1105 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
FH down the line	34%	−1.8	−0.4	−1.4	−3.6±4.1
FH through the middle	34%	−3.5	−0.1	+1.1	−2.5±2.4
FH crosscourt	29%	−0.2	−4.3	+3.3	−1.2±4.1
BH through the middle	2%	+0.1	+1.3	+0.7	+2.0±1.5
BH inside-out	1%	+0.9	−1.2	+0.3	±0.0±3.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.2±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (473 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
BH crosscourt	44%	+1.0	−1.3	−1.7	−2.1±2.1
BH through the middle	25%	−2.9	−1.3	+0.7	−3.5±1.8
BH down the line	17%	−0.2	+2.1	+0.3	+2.2±4.1
BH slice crosscourt	5%	−4.0	−1.5	+1.8	−3.6±2.6
BH slice through the middle	4%	−11.3	−1.7	+1.5	−11.5±2.4

Lean BH down the line: +4.4±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1049 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.

David Nalbandian

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally	+4.3±5.7	+1.0	+3.3
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+2.9±3.4	−0.1	+3.0
FH to the middle · serve +1	+2.4±2.2	+2.3	+0.1
BH volley to their backhand · rally	+2.0±5.6	+2.9	−0.9
BH to the middle · return +1	+1.9±2.0	+1.7	+0.2
BH to their backhand · return +1	+1.3±2.0	+0.9	+0.4

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally	−7.8±5.7	−4.7	−3.1
FH to their backhand · return	−3.5±2.9	−3.2	−0.3
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−2.2±2.4	−0.6	−1.7
BH to their backhand · return	−2.0±1.7	+0.6	−2.6
BH to the middle · return	−1.9±1.4	±0.0	−2.0

Yevgeny Kafelnikov

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to the middle · serve +1	+2.6±2.0	+0.4	+2.2
BH to their forehand · return	+2.5±3.1	−0.6	+3.1
Smash to their forehand · rally	+2.3±4.4	±0.0	+2.3
BH slice to their backhand · return	+2.3±2.3	−0.1	+2.4
FH to their backhand · return	+2.2±2.5	+0.4	+1.7
BH volley to their backhand · rally	+1.5±5.5	−0.6	+2.0

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	−6.7±2.4	−3.6	−3.1
FH volley to their backhand · rally	−5.6±5.8	−5.5	−0.1
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−4.2±3.5	−2.2	−2.0
BH to their forehand · return +1	−3.3±3.9	+0.4	−3.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	−3.0±2.9	−0.6	−2.4

Against Yevgeny Kafelnikov-like opponents

David Nalbandian v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	61.7%	37.5%
Players most similar to Yevgeny Kafelnikov	4	65.4%	36.1%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Richard Gasquet, Tomas Berdych, Ivan Ljubicic, Nicolas Kiefer, Andre Agassi, Arnaud Clement, Thomas Johansson, Wayne Ferreira, Thomas Enqvist. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.