Game plan

Dominic Thiem v Goran Ivanisevic

Every number combines what Dominic Thiem does well with what Goran Ivanisevic 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 50%90%: 29%–71% · best of 5: 50%

Serve points won 67.1% / 67.1% Dominic / Goran · tour 63.4%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 50%serve 67.1% / 67.1%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Goran Ivanisevic'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	Dominic	Goran
Direction choice	+0.12 ±0.03 better than 83%	−0.30 ±0.08 better than 5%
Shot selection	−0.28 ±0.08 better than 25%	+0.24 ±0.16 better than 75%
Execution	+0.04 ±0.20 better than 71%	−0.76 ±0.38 better than 34%
Points left on the table	2.48 ±0.05 lower than 63%	4.76 ±0.30 lower than 1%

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 Goran	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	73%	79%	79.2%±2.4	60% ▲
Body	5%	61%	68%	65.5%±6.7	0% ▼
T	48%	74%	84%	83.8%±2.6	40% ▼

Optimal v Goran Ivanisevic: +0.5±0.4 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 serve	Now	Dominic wins	v Goran	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	52%	71%	78%	76.8%±3.0	65% ▲
Body	7%	64%	63%	63.5%±6.3	0% ▼
T	40%	71%	78%	77.4%±2.9	35% ▼

Optimal v Goran Ivanisevic: +0.6±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +1.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Goran Ivanisevic serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Goran wins	v Dominic	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	43%	82%	73%	81.8%±2.7	34% ▼
Body	5%	63%	63%	62.6%±7.8	0% ▼
T	53%	81%	73%	79.1%±2.6	66% ▲

Optimal v Dominic Thiem: +0.6±0.4 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Goran wins	v Dominic	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	54%	81%	72%	80.0%±2.4	44% ▼
Body	3%	66%	65%	68.2%±8.8	0% ▼
T	43%	88%	72%	88.1%±2.2	56% ▲

Optimal v Dominic Thiem: +0.5±0.4 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.0 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 Goran	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.3	−1.4	−1.9	+1.0±1.7
FH down the line	22%	+1.7	−1.0	−4.4	−3.7±3.5
FH crosscourt	17%	+5.5	−1.0	+1.8	+6.4±3.1
FH slice through the middle	6%	−4.2	−1.0	−3.2	−8.4±2.1
FH slice down the line	2%	−4.3	−3.2	−0.4	−7.9±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.4±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (2907 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Goran	Value
BH through the middle	34%	+6.4	−1.0	−2.0	+3.4±1.6
BH slice through the middle	18%	−4.2	−2.3	−2.0	−8.5±1.5
BH crosscourt	18%	+8.8	−1.5	−1.2	+6.0±2.6
BH slice crosscourt	13%	+0.5	−2.3	+6.7	+4.9±2.3
BH down the line	12%	+4.2	−4.1	−4.7	−4.6±3.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.0±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (3946 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Goran	Value
FH through the middle	48%	−3.5	−0.5	−2.8	−6.8±1.9
FH crosscourt	29%	−0.2	+0.8	+0.6	+1.2±3.3
FH down the line	19%	−1.8	−0.8	−6.2	−8.8±4.2
FH slice through the middle	2%	−12.7	−0.5	+1.0	−12.2±1.8
FH slice down the line	1%	−9.4	−0.3	±0.0	−9.7±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.2±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (802 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Goran	Value
BH through the middle	32%	−2.9	−1.0	−1.1	−4.9±1.3
BH crosscourt	27%	+1.0	+1.2	−0.5	+1.7±2.2
FH through the middle	13%	−2.9	+0.9	−2.8	−4.8±1.7
FH inside-out	9%	+1.0	+0.2	−6.2	−5.0±3.2
BH down the line	8%	−0.2	−5.1	+1.6	−3.7±3.8
FH inside-in	4%	+0.6	+0.8	+0.6	+2.0±3.7

Lean FH inside-in: +5.4±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (2564 returns charted)

Goran Ivanisevic returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.3	−3.9	−1.2	−0.9±1.5
FH down the line	25%	+1.7	−3.1	−1.6	−2.9±3.0
FH crosscourt	22%	+5.5	+0.8	−1.3	+5.0±3.0
BH slice through the middle	1%	−1.6	−0.2	−1.9	−3.8±1.4
BH inside-in	1%	+7.7	±0.0	−4.4	+3.3±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.1±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (827 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
BH slice through the middle	27%	−4.2	−1.7	−1.9	−7.9±1.5
BH through the middle	23%	+6.4	−6.1	−1.1	−0.8±1.5
BH down the line	16%	+4.2	−6.9	+0.8	−1.9±2.7
BH slice crosscourt	12%	+0.5	−2.2	+0.2	−1.5±2.7
BH slice down the line	11%	−8.4	+2.6	−1.4	−7.2±2.7
FH through the middle	1%	+7.7	−3.1	−1.2	+3.4±1.7

Lean FH through the middle: +6.9±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1565 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
FH through the middle	48%	−3.5	−1.3	−0.9	−5.6±2.0
FH crosscourt	35%	−0.2	+2.9	−0.8	+1.9±3.4
FH down the line	16%	−1.8	+3.8	−3.1	−1.1±4.0
BH inside-in	1%	+2.5	−0.6	−0.4	+1.5±2.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.1±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (355 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Dominic	Value
BH through the middle	48%	−2.9	−1.7	±0.0	−4.6±1.2
BH down the line	21%	−0.2	+1.4	±0.0	+1.2±3.0
BH crosscourt	20%	+1.0	−3.6	−0.4	−2.9±2.3
FH through the middle	3%	−2.9	−0.4	−0.9	−4.2±1.9
BH slice through the middle	3%	−11.3	−0.5	−2.7	−14.5±2.4
FH inside-out	2%	+1.0	+4.6	−3.1	+2.4±3.0

Lean FH inside-out: +5.7±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (1106 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.

Dominic Thiem

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally	+10.9±5.1	+3.2	+7.7
FH volley to their backhand · rally	+7.9±5.1	+2.3	+5.6
BH slice to their forehand · rally	+4.7±2.6	+0.3	+4.4
Smash to their backhand · rally	+4.2±4.5	+3.4	+0.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	+3.3±2.4	+1.1	+2.2
FH to their forehand · return +1	+2.7±2.8	+1.3	+1.4

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally	−11.7±4.7	−2.7	−9.1
FH to their forehand · return	−7.1±3.1	±0.0	−7.1
BH to their forehand · return	−5.9±2.7	−4.4	−1.5
BH volley to the middle · rally	−5.8±5.6	−2.8	−3.0
BH slice to their backhand · return	−5.4±1.9	−1.8	−3.6

Goran Ivanisevic

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally	+9.4±4.9	+10.7	−1.2
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1	+6.8±4.9	+5.4	+1.4
BH slice to their forehand · return	+4.6±3.1	+5.2	−0.6
FH volley to their backhand · rally	+2.6±5.2	+4.6	−1.9
BH to the middle · serve +1	+1.9±2.1	+1.2	+0.7
BH slice to the middle · return +1	+1.6±2.0	+1.8	−0.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH volley to the middle · rally	−11.0±5.8	−5.6	−5.4
BH volley to their backhand · serve +1	−8.2±4.1	−5.4	−2.8
FH to their forehand · rally	−7.8±2.1	−6.0	−1.8
FH to their forehand · return +1	−7.7±2.6	−6.8	−0.9
FH volley to their forehand · serve +1	−7.0±4.5	−8.3	+1.3

Against Goran Ivanisevic-like opponents

Dominic Thiem v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	64.6%	36.3%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Mardy Fish, Andrei Pavel, Mark Philippoussis, Todd Martin, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, Malivai Washington, Guy Forget, David Wheaton, John Mcenroe. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.