Game plan

Filip Krajinovic v Nicolas Jarry

Every number combines what Filip Krajinovic does well with what Nicolas Jarry allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Filip Krajinovic wins, best of 3 38%90%: 22%–57% · best of 5: 36%

Serve points won 67.5% / 70.0% Filip / Nicolas · tour 63.8%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 43%serve 67.6% / 69.1%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Filip Krajinovic's record against Nicolas Jarry's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −1.7 on serve, −12.9 on return vs expectation (259 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	Filip	Nicolas
Direction choice	−0.18 ±0.13 better than 17%	−0.23 ±0.09 better than 9%
Shot selection	+0.05 ±0.15 better than 59%	+0.02 ±0.14 better than 54%
Execution	+0.56 ±0.59 better than 85%	−0.45 ±0.54 better than 46%
Points left on the table	2.78 ±0.29 lower than 32%	3.09 ±0.16 lower than 16%

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.

Filip Krajinovic serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Filip wins	v Nicolas	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	42%	70%	76%	72.6%±5.3	55% ▲
Body	7%	53%	67%	57.4%±11.2	0% ▼
T	51%	69%	73%	66.8%±5.6	45% ▼

Optimal v Nicolas Jarry: +0.9±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +4.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Filip wins	v Nicolas	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	53%	71%	76%	74.5%±5.1	66% ▲
Body	5%	63%	68%	67.4%±11.8	0% ▼
T	42%	69%	76%	73.8%±5.7	34% ▼

Optimal v Nicolas Jarry: +0.4±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +0.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Nicolas Jarry serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Nicolas wins	v Filip	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	43%	74%	77%	78.2%±4.8	56% ▲
Body	6%	64%	60%	60.3%±12.3	0% ▼
T	51%	74%	78%	77.2%±5.1	44% ▼

Optimal v Filip Krajinovic: +0.7±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +1.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Nicolas wins	v Filip	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	55%	75%	79%	80.5%±4.5	68% ▲
Body	8%	67%	59%	63.8%±12.6	0% ▼
T	38%	75%	78%	79.8%±5.3	32% ▼

Optimal v Filip Krajinovic: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.5 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.

Filip Krajinovic returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nicolas	Value
FH through the middle	53%	+4.3	+1.5	+2.6	+8.4±2.5
FH down the line	20%	+1.7	+0.4	−1.6	+0.5±4.5
FH crosscourt	12%	+5.5	−0.8	−0.7	+4.0±4.3
FH slice through the middle	12%	−4.2	+1.3	+1.5	−1.5±2.1
FH slice down the line	2%	−4.3	+1.3	+1.6	−1.4±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +3.6±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (257 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nicolas	Value
BH through the middle	46%	+6.4	+2.2	+3.5	+12.1±2.2
BH crosscourt	17%	+8.8	−0.8	+1.5	+9.4±3.3
BH slice through the middle	14%	−4.2	+0.1	+1.2	−2.9±2.3
BH slice crosscourt	11%	+0.5	−0.8	−0.4	−0.7±3.0
BH down the line	10%	+4.2	+3.0	+6.3	+13.6±4.5

Lean BH down the line: +5.9±4.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (256 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nicolas	Value
FH through the middle	66%	−3.5	+1.4	+0.1	−2.0±2.6
FH crosscourt	14%	−0.2	±0.0	−0.8	−1.0±4.0
FH down the line	14%	−1.8	−1.1	+3.7	+0.9±4.3
BH through the middle	6%	+0.1	+0.5	+2.0	+2.6±1.3

Lean FH through the middle: −0.8±1.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (95 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nicolas	Value
BH through the middle	56%	−2.9	+1.3	+2.0	+0.4±2.0
BH crosscourt	29%	+1.0	+2.0	−0.2	+2.8±2.9
BH down the line	13%	−0.2	+1.0	+4.2	+5.0±4.9
BH slice through the middle	3%	−11.3	−0.2	−0.5	−11.9±1.9

Lean BH down the line: +3.7±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (212 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Nicolas Jarry returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Filip	Value
FH through the middle	61%	+4.3	+3.0	+1.5	+8.7±2.3
FH crosscourt	20%	+5.5	+3.0	+1.0	+9.5±4.2
FH down the line	13%	+1.7	+0.2	+0.7	+2.6±4.5
FH slice through the middle	5%	−4.2	−0.3	+1.7	−2.8±2.3
BH through the middle	1%	+6.6	+0.6	+1.5	+8.7±1.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.0±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (680 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Filip	Value
BH through the middle	51%	+6.4	+2.5	+1.5	+10.5±2.0
BH crosscourt	28%	+8.8	+0.9	+1.7	+11.3±3.1
BH slice through the middle	9%	−4.2	−0.9	+0.8	−4.3±2.4
BH down the line	7%	+4.2	+6.5	+7.0	+17.8±4.6
BH slice crosscourt	3%	+0.5	+0.3	+3.4	+4.3±2.9

Lean BH down the line: +8.3±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (773 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Filip	Value
FH through the middle	65%	−3.5	−0.7	−0.2	−4.3±2.8
FH crosscourt	23%	−0.2	+2.1	+1.5	+3.4±4.4
FH down the line	12%	−1.8	−3.0	+3.3	−1.5±4.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.6±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (149 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Filip	Value
BH through the middle	57%	−2.9	−2.0	+1.0	−3.9±1.9
BH crosscourt	30%	+1.0	+0.7	+0.8	+2.5±3.0
BH down the line	5%	−0.2	+0.1	−1.5	−1.6±4.9
FH through the middle	5%	−2.9	+0.1	−0.2	−3.0±2.4
FH inside-in	2%	+0.6	+0.5	+1.5	+2.6±4.1

Lean FH inside-in: +4.2±4.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (617 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.

Filip Krajinovic

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return	+12.9±6.4	+5.1	+7.7
BH to their backhand · serve +1	+8.4±4.2	+3.2	+5.1
BH to the middle · return	+5.7±2.3	+1.3	+4.4
FH to their forehand · return +1	+3.9±6.0	+3.9	±0.0
FH to the middle · return	+3.6±2.9	+1.1	+2.5
FH to their backhand · return	+2.8±5.9	−1.8	+4.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return +1	−5.6±5.7	−4.3	−1.4
FH to their backhand · serve +1	−3.6±4.2	−1.1	−2.5
BH slice to the middle · rally	−3.1±3.0	−0.1	−3.0
FH to the middle · serve +1	−2.8±3.2	−0.5	−2.3
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−2.4±6.3	−0.9	−1.5

Nicolas Jarry

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return	+13.5±6.4	+10.2	+3.4
FH to their forehand · return	+6.3±5.9	+5.1	+1.2
BH to their backhand · return	+3.6±3.7	+1.3	+2.2
FH to the middle · return	+2.4±2.8	+1.9	+0.5
BH to the middle · return	+1.1±2.2	−0.1	+1.2
BH slice to the middle · return	+0.1±3.4	+0.1	±0.0

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to the middle · return +1	−9.5±3.5	−8.3	−1.2
BH to the middle · serve +1	−8.7±3.4	−8.1	−0.7
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−8.4±3.3	−7.7	−0.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	−7.5±5.1	−5.9	−1.6
FH to the middle · rally	−6.4±2.5	−7.2	+0.8

Against Nicolas Jarry-like opponents

Filip Krajinovic v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	62.2%	32.9%
Players most similar to Nicolas Jarry	2	62.8%	20.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Jiri Lehecka, Arthur Rinderknech, Denis Shapovalov, Zizou Bergs, Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard, Reilly Opelka, Gabriel Diallo, Aslan Karatsev, Vasek Pospisil, Sam Querrey. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.