Game plan

Ernests Gulbis v Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard

Every number combines what Ernests Gulbis does well with what Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Ernests Gulbis wins, best of 3 76%90%: 57%–90% · best of 5: 81%

Serve points won 76.9% / 70.5% Ernests / Giovanni · tour 65.7%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 76%serve 76.9% / 70.5%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Ernests Gulbis's record against Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard'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	Ernests	Giovanni
Direction choice	−0.01 ±0.09 better than 55%	−0.26 ±0.07 better than 9%
Shot selection	−0.56 ±0.20 better than 9%	−0.11 ±0.24 better than 38%
Execution	−0.24 ±0.49 better than 55%	+0.77 ±0.79 better than 90%
Points left on the table	2.41 ±0.12 lower than 71%	3.39 ±0.12 lower than 10%

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.

Ernests Gulbis serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Ernests wins	v Giovanni	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	46%	79%	83%	87.0%±3.8	59% ▲
Body	11%	70%	69%	75.0%±10.3	0% ▼
T	44%	77%	81%	82.9%±4.5	41% ▼

Optimal v Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard: +1.2±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Ernests wins	v Giovanni	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	49%	74%	79%	80.2%±5.1	46% ▼
Body	10%	59%	67%	63.2%±13.4	0% ▼
T	41%	79%	78%	83.3%±4.8	54% ▲

Optimal v Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard: +1.3±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Giovanni wins	v Ernests	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	45%	79%	71%	77.5%±5.0	58% ▲
Body	8%	62%	65%	64.1%±10.8	0% ▼
T	47%	79%	75%	79.6%±4.9	42% ▼

Optimal v Ernests Gulbis: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +2.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Giovanni wins	v Ernests	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	54%	82%	74%	82.6%±4.6	67% ▲
Body	5%	61%	65%	62.8%±11.8	0% ▼
T	41%	77%	66%	72.6%±6.1	33% ▼

Optimal v Ernests Gulbis: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +5.1 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.

Ernests Gulbis returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Giovanni	Value
FH through the middle	40%	+4.3	−1.9	+0.7	+3.1±2.6
FH crosscourt	29%	+5.5	−0.5	+0.6	+5.6±4.3
FH down the line	20%	+1.7	−1.3	−2.2	−1.8±4.3
FH slice through the middle	6%	−4.2	−1.2	+0.8	−4.5±2.3
FH slice down the line	3%	−4.3	+0.8	+1.6	−1.9±2.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.5±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (354 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Giovanni	Value
BH through the middle	50%	+6.4	+1.1	+0.5	+8.1±2.4
BH crosscourt	23%	+8.8	−1.6	−2.2	+5.0±3.3
BH down the line	13%	+4.2	−0.6	−0.6	+3.1±4.6
BH slice through the middle	7%	−4.2	−3.2	+1.1	−6.3±2.4
BH slice crosscourt	4%	+0.5	+0.1	+0.5	+1.2±2.7

Lean BH through the middle: +3.1±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (311 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Giovanni	Value
FH through the middle	53%	−3.5	−1.7	±0.0	−5.2±2.7
FH crosscourt	28%	−0.2	−1.3	+3.1	+1.6±4.3
FH down the line	11%	−1.8	−0.7	−1.4	−3.9±4.0
FH slice through the middle	8%	−12.7	−0.4	−0.3	−13.4±1.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.4±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (79 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Giovanni	Value
BH through the middle	46%	−2.9	+1.3	+1.6	±0.0±2.5
BH crosscourt	35%	+1.0	−3.4	−0.4	−2.8±3.3
BH down the line	20%	−0.2	−3.4	+0.3	−3.3±4.9

Lean BH through the middle: +1.6±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (184 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ernests	Value
FH through the middle	36%	+4.3	+1.8	−0.9	+5.1±2.7
FH slice through the middle	21%	−4.2	+1.4	+0.2	−2.6±2.3
FH down the line	20%	+1.7	−0.5	−3.9	−2.7±4.4
FH crosscourt	9%	+5.5	−2.0	−4.6	−1.1±4.4
FH slice down the line	8%	−4.3	+2.2	+1.3	−0.7±2.8

Lean FH through the middle: +4.7±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (466 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ernests	Value
BH through the middle	29%	+6.4	+0.9	−0.6	+6.6±2.6
BH slice through the middle	25%	−4.2	+2.9	−1.4	−2.7±2.4
BH slice crosscourt	17%	+0.5	+1.4	−1.6	+0.3±3.0
BH crosscourt	11%	+8.8	+1.6	−2.4	+8.0±3.6
BH down the line	10%	+4.2	−3.5	−1.8	−1.1±4.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.2±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (551 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ernests	Value
FH through the middle	45%	−3.5	−1.8	−0.9	−6.2±2.8
FH down the line	34%	−1.8	−5.4	−3.7	−10.8±4.7
FH crosscourt	12%	−0.2	−0.8	−6.6	−7.6±4.1
FH slice through the middle	5%	−12.7	−0.2	±0.0	−12.9±1.1
FH slice down the line	4%	−9.4	−0.8	±0.0	−10.3±1.4

Lean FH through the middle: +2.3±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (139 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Ernests	Value
BH through the middle	34%	−2.9	−1.8	−0.4	−5.1±2.3
BH down the line	20%	−0.2	−0.1	−6.4	−6.7±4.9
BH crosscourt	15%	+1.0	−4.5	−2.3	−5.7±3.3
BH slice through the middle	8%	−11.3	−0.5	−1.0	−12.8±2.1
BH slice crosscourt	8%	−4.0	−1.4	−0.1	−5.5±2.5

Lean BH through the middle: +1.3±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (384 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

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 grass. Each player's grass record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Ernests Gulbis

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	+4.7±5.1	+0.1	+4.6
BH to their backhand · rally	+3.9±3.1	±0.0	+3.9
BH to the middle · return	+2.7±2.8	+0.8	+1.9
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+2.6±5.8	+0.9	+1.7
BH to the middle · return +1	+2.4±3.2	−0.1	+2.5
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+0.7±4.2	−2.9	+3.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return	−5.9±4.0	−2.8	−3.1
BH to their forehand · return	−5.0±5.8	−2.7	−2.3
FH to their backhand · return	−4.7±4.8	−0.9	−3.8
FH to their forehand · return +1	−4.0±5.4	−5.1	+1.1
FH to their backhand · return +1	−4.0±5.4	−1.2	−2.8

Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to the middle · serve +1	+2.2±3.4	+2.4	−0.2
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+1.2±6.0	+2.7	−1.5
BH slice to their backhand · return	+0.3±3.6	+1.7	−1.4
FH to the middle · return	+0.1±3.0	+2.1	−2.0
BH slice to the middle · return	−0.1±2.9	+1.4	−1.6
BH to their backhand · return +1	−0.6±4.6	+0.3	−0.9

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · return	−15.0±5.9	−6.6	−8.3
BH to their forehand · return	−10.3±5.6	−4.1	−6.1
BH to their forehand · rally	−7.5±5.2	−6.0	−1.5
FH to their backhand · return	−7.3±4.8	−2.5	−4.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	−5.3±5.4	−5.3	±0.0

Against Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard-like opponents

Ernests Gulbis v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	67.1%	35.5%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Jiri Lehecka, Ben Shelton, Denis Shapovalov, Alexei Popyrin, Reilly Opelka, Gabriel Diallo, Christopher Eubanks, Tim Van Rijthoven, Vasek Pospisil, Jo Wilfried Tsonga. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.