Game plan

Dominic Thiem v Fernando Gonzalez

Every number combines what Dominic Thiem does well with what Fernando Gonzalez allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Dominic Thiem wins, best of 3 52%90%: 40%–63% · best of 5: 52%

Serve points won 65.4% / 65.0% Dominic / Fernando · tour 63.8%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 54%serve 65.6% / 64.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Dominic Thiem's record against Fernando Gonzalez's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −0.6 on serve, −0.7 on return vs expectation (1798 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	Dominic	Fernando
Direction choice	+0.12 ±0.03 better than 83%	+0.17 ±0.06 better than 91%
Shot selection	−0.28 ±0.08 better than 25%	−0.36 ±0.12 better than 19%
Execution	+0.04 ±0.20 better than 71%	+0.08 ±0.42 better than 72%
Points left on the table	2.48 ±0.05 lower than 63%	2.62 ±0.11 lower than 47%

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.

Dominic Thiem serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Dominic wins	v Fernando	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	73%	76%	76.2%±3.1	60% ▲
Body	5%	61%	68%	66.0%±6.7	0% ▼
T	48%	74%	70%	69.8%±3.2	40% ▼

Optimal v Fernando Gonzalez: +0.7±0.4 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Dominic wins	v Fernando	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	52%	71%	73%	71.6%±3.1	47% ▼
Body	7%	64%	66%	67.1%±7.3	0% ▼
T	40%	71%	75%	74.3%±3.5	53% ▲

Optimal v Fernando Gonzalez: +0.2±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Fernando Gonzalez serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Fernando wins	v Dominic	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	43%	71%	73%	70.4%±3.2	40% ▼
Body	10%	64%	63%	63.9%±6.1	0% ▼
T	47%	81%	73%	79.0%±3.0	60% ▲

Optimal v Dominic Thiem: +0.7±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Fernando wins	v Dominic	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	56%	71%	72%	69.7%±3.1	48% ▼
Body	5%	63%	65%	65.3%±8.2	0% ▼
T	39%	73%	72%	73.5%±3.6	52% ▲

Optimal v Dominic Thiem: +0.2±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.5 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.

Dominic Thiem returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Fernando	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.3	−1.4	+0.7	+3.5±1.6
FH down the line	22%	+1.7	−1.0	−1.0	−0.3±3.0
FH crosscourt	17%	+5.5	−1.0	+1.2	+5.8±3.1
FH slice through the middle	6%	−4.2	−1.0	+2.4	−2.8±2.1
FH slice down the line	2%	−4.3	−3.2	+0.4	−7.1±3.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.6±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (2907 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Fernando	Value
BH through the middle	34%	+6.4	−1.0	±0.0	+5.4±1.5
BH slice through the middle	18%	−4.2	−2.3	+2.3	−4.2±1.6
BH crosscourt	18%	+8.8	−1.5	+0.3	+7.5±2.1
BH slice crosscourt	13%	+0.5	−2.3	±0.0	−1.8±2.1
BH down the line	12%	+4.2	−4.1	+1.9	+2.1±3.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.6±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (3946 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Fernando	Value
FH through the middle	48%	−3.5	−0.5	+1.1	−2.9±2.0
FH crosscourt	29%	−0.2	+0.8	−0.7	−0.2±3.7
FH down the line	19%	−1.8	−0.8	+1.3	−1.3±3.9
FH slice through the middle	2%	−12.7	−0.5	+1.2	−12.0±2.1
FH slice down the line	1%	−9.4	−0.3	±0.0	−9.7±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.9±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (802 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Fernando	Value
BH through the middle	32%	−2.9	−1.0	+1.4	−2.5±1.5
BH crosscourt	27%	+1.0	+1.2	−0.7	+1.5±2.0
FH through the middle	13%	−2.9	+0.9	+1.1	−0.9±1.7
FH inside-out	9%	+1.0	+0.2	+1.3	+2.5±2.9
BH down the line	8%	−0.2	−5.1	−2.6	−7.9±4.5

Lean FH inside-out: +4.3±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (2564 returns charted)

Fernando Gonzalez returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
FH through the middle	29%	+4.3	−1.9	−1.2	+1.1±1.8
FH crosscourt	22%	+5.5	−5.3	−1.6	−1.4±3.0
FH down the line	19%	+1.7	−0.3	−1.3	+0.1±3.2
FH slice through the middle	17%	−4.2	+1.4	−1.6	−4.4±1.9
FH slice down the line	8%	−4.3	+3.0	+1.2	±0.0±3.2

Lean FH through the middle: +1.9±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (852 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
BH slice through the middle	26%	−4.2	+4.9	−1.9	−1.2±1.6
BH through the middle	23%	+6.4	−0.4	−1.1	+4.8±1.6
BH slice crosscourt	17%	+0.5	+3.9	−1.4	+3.0±2.2
BH down the line	14%	+4.2	−2.8	−4.4	−3.0±3.3
BH crosscourt	12%	+8.8	−1.2	+0.8	+8.4±2.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.7±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (1298 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
FH crosscourt	35%	−0.2	−1.4	−3.1	−4.7±3.5
FH through the middle	28%	−3.5	−1.6	−0.9	−5.9±2.2
FH down the line	18%	−1.8	+3.1	−0.8	+0.6±3.9
FH slice down the line	10%	−9.4	+0.5	−0.1	−9.1±2.6
FH slice through the middle	7%	−12.7	+2.1	+0.7	−9.8±2.1

Lean FH down the line: +5.7±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (314 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
BH slice crosscourt	19%	−4.0	+0.2	−4.1	−8.0±2.4
BH through the middle	17%	−2.9	+0.7	±0.0	−2.2±1.7
FH inside-out	15%	+1.0	+3.7	−0.8	+3.9±2.9
FH through the middle	12%	−2.9	−2.5	−0.9	−6.2±1.8
BH down the line	11%	−0.2	−4.5	−0.4	−5.1±3.9

Lean FH inside-out: +8.0±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (822 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.

Dominic Thiem

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+3.5±4.7	−1.3	+4.8
FH slice to the middle · return	+3.0±2.8	±0.0	+3.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+2.2±2.0	+0.3	+1.9
FH to the middle · return +1	+2.0±2.7	+1.3	+0.7
Smash to their backhand · rally	+1.5±6.5	+2.4	−0.9
BH to the middle · return +1	+1.5±2.2	+1.6	−0.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−5.5±3.9	+0.4	−5.9
FH volley to their forehand · rally	−4.0±6.8	−5.3	+1.2
BH to their forehand · return	−3.3±4.2	−5.4	+2.1
BH slice to their backhand · return	−3.1±2.3	−2.3	−0.9
FH volley to their forehand · serve +1	−2.9±7.8	+1.0	−3.9

Fernando Gonzalez

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their forehand · return	+3.7±4.8	+3.1	+0.6
BH slice to the middle · return +1	+3.0±2.7	+2.7	+0.4
BH slice to the middle · return	+2.6±1.9	+4.3	−1.6
BH lob to the middle · rally	+2.5±4.4	+1.4	+1.0
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+2.4±2.3	+1.2	+1.2
FH slice to the middle · return	+2.3±2.5	+3.0	−0.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−6.5±4.8	−2.8	−3.8
BH to their forehand · return	−6.0±3.5	−4.2	−1.8
BH to their forehand · rally	−5.6±3.0	−2.9	−2.7
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−3.9±3.8	+2.1	−6.0
FH to their forehand · return	−3.7±3.4	−2.0	−1.7

Against Fernando Gonzalez-like opponents

Dominic Thiem v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	64.6%	36.3%
Players most similar to Fernando Gonzalez	12	63.3%	31.9%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Joao Fonseca, Lorenzo Musetti, Grigor Dimitrov, Alexei Popyrin, Jeremy Chardy, Steve Johnson, Jo Wilfried Tsonga, Roger Federer, James Blake. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.