RallyIQ

Game plan

Elena Dementieva v Elise Mertens

Every number combines what Elena Dementieva does well with what Elise Mertens allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Elena Dementieva wins, best of 3 72%90%: 55%–84% · best of 5: 76%
Serve points won 57.3% / 53.1% Elena / Elise · tour 56.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 68%serve 57.1% / 53.6%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Elena Dementieva's record against Elise Mertens's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +7.3 on serve, +16.7 on return vs expectation (99 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

CareerElenaElise
Direction choice+0.08 ±0.05
better than 69%
+0.04 ±0.07
better than 61%
Shot selection+0.16 ±0.09
better than 61%
−0.32 ±0.13
better than 21%
Execution+0.58 ±0.32
better than 81%
+0.47 ±0.40
better than 78%
Points left on the table2.45 ±0.08
lower than 69%
2.47 ±0.09
lower than 67%

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.

Elena Dementieva serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowElena winsv EliseMatchupOptimal
Wide57%64%68%66.2%±4.654% ▼
Body12%65%63%69.7%±7.113% ▲
T32%71%69%71.8%±5.333% ▲

Optimal v Elise Mertens: ±0.0±0.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowElena winsv EliseMatchupOptimal
Wide42%61%63%58.5%±6.053% ▲
Body21%54%56%53.9%±7.46% ▼
T37%63%64%62.2%±5.341% ▲

Optimal v Elise Mertens: +0.5±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Elise Mertens serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowElise winsv ElenaMatchupOptimal
Wide46%67%65%66.5%±4.861% ▲
Body23%57%60%59.8%±7.218% ▼
T31%71%61%65.2%±6.021% ▼

Optimal v Elena Dementieva: +0.4±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowElise winsv ElenaMatchupOptimal
Wide35%72%60%66.9%±5.534%
Body23%58%55%56.9%±8.38% ▼
T42%67%62%65.0%±5.658% ▲

Optimal v Elena Dementieva: +0.5±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.1 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.

Elena Dementieva returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EliseValue
FH through the middle43%+4.2−0.5+1.3+5.0±2.1
FH down the line35%+1.5−1.0−0.5+0.1±3.8
FH crosscourt19%+5.3−0.4−0.4+4.6±3.8
BH through the middle1%+5.2+0.3+0.3+5.9±2.1
FH slice through the middle1%−6.7−0.3−0.9−8.0±2.2

Lean FH through the middle: +2.1±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (811 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EliseValue
BH through the middle49%+6.0−1.2+0.3+5.2±1.8
BH crosscourt25%+7.7−2.0−3.3+2.4±3.0
BH down the line16%+2.2−1.0−2.9−1.7±4.1
BH slice through the middle5%−6.2−4.2−1.6−12.0±2.5
BH slice crosscourt2%−4.2−3.2−4.4−11.7±2.8

Lean BH through the middle: +3.3±1.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (1084 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EliseValue
FH down the line36%−0.6−1.1+0.2−1.5±5.0
FH crosscourt35%+0.5+2.7+1.1+4.3±4.2
FH through the middle29%−3.2+0.2−1.1−4.1±2.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.5±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (286 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EliseValue
BH through the middle45%−2.6−0.4+1.5−1.4±2.0
BH crosscourt32%+1.5+0.9+0.5+2.9±3.1
BH down the line11%−0.5+1.5−3.2−2.2±5.0
FH through the middle6%−2.7−0.4−1.1−4.2±2.5
FH inside-out3%+1.4−0.8+0.2+0.7±4.0
FH inside-in3%+0.7+2.2+1.1+4.0±4.3

Lean FH inside-in: +4.0±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (601 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Elise Mertens returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ElenaValue
FH through the middle45%+4.2+2.0+1.6+7.8±1.9
FH down the line20%+1.5+3.3+0.7+5.6±3.6
FH crosscourt14%+5.3−2.2−1.0+2.1±3.6
FH slice through the middle12%−6.7−0.3+1.0−6.0±2.5
FH slice crosscourt6%−6.6−1.4+1.5−6.5±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +4.1±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (749 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ElenaValue
BH through the middle43%+6.0+0.6−0.2+6.4±2.0
BH crosscourt25%+7.7+1.7−0.8+8.7±3.0
BH down the line12%+2.2+5.0+0.2+7.4±4.5
BH slice through the middle11%−6.2+1.0−0.6−5.8±2.5
BH slice crosscourt5%−4.2−1.7−1.2−7.1±3.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.3±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (530 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ElenaValue
FH through the middle43%−3.2−1.6+2.3−2.5±2.7
FH crosscourt30%+0.5−0.5+2.3+2.3±3.9
FH down the line24%−0.6−1.8−1.1−3.5±4.6
FH slice through the middle4%−15.2+0.5±0.0−14.7±1.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.1±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (200 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ElenaValue
BH through the middle43%−2.6−0.5+0.1−3.0±2.5
BH crosscourt40%+1.5−0.4−0.7+0.4±3.4
BH down the line16%−0.5+4.3+2.6+6.4±5.3

Lean BH down the line: +6.5±4.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (290 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.

Elena Dementieva

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally+5.4±8.5+3.7+1.7
BH to their forehand · serve +1+3.8±4.8+0.9+2.9
FH to their forehand · rally+3.3±2.0+1.0+2.3
FH to their backhand · rally+3.0±2.7+2.4+0.6
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.0±3.3+1.4+1.6
FH to their forehand · serve +1+3.0±3.3+1.4+1.5

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return−7.4±4.3−3.1−4.3
BH to their backhand · return−1.5±3.0+0.7−2.2
FH to their forehand · return +1−1.5±3.8−1.3−0.2
BH to their forehand · rally−1.4±3.3−1.6+0.2
FH to their backhand · return−1.3±4.1−1.6+0.4

Elise Mertens

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return+4.9±5.1+3.2+1.7
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.6±3.3+1.8+1.8
FH to the middle · return+3.3±1.9+1.1+2.2
BH slice to the middle · rally+2.9±2.8+1.9+1.0
BH to their forehand · rally+2.8±3.0+3.4−0.6
BH to the middle · return +1+2.1±2.6+1.3+0.8

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return +1−5.8±4.0−1.8−4.0
BH slice to their backhand · rally−5.7±3.5−2.7−3.0
BH to their forehand · return +1−5.1±5.1−0.8−4.2
FH to their forehand · return−3.6±3.9−3.9+0.2
BH to their backhand · return +1−1.5±3.0+1.1−2.6

Against Elise Mertens-like opponents

Elena Dementieva vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–55.9%46.4%
Players most similar to Elise Mertens1 62.0%63.3%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Coco Gauff, Mirra Andreeva, Anastasia Potapova, Karolina Pliskova, Belinda Bencic, Sorana Cirstea, Victoria Azarenka, Shelby Rogers, Christina Mchale. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.