RallyIQ

Game plan

Gilles Muller v Tim Henman

Every number combines what Gilles Muller does well with what Tim Henman allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Gilles Muller wins, best of 3 52%90%: 19%–84% · best of 5: 53%
Serve points won 63.2% / 62.7% Gilles / Tim · tour 61.3%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 52%serve 63.2% / 62.7%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Gilles Muller's record against Tim Henman'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

CareerGillesTim
Direction choice+0.24 ±0.16
better than 96%
+0.09 ±0.11
better than 80%
Shot selection+0.37 ±0.36
better than 85%
+0.03 ±0.21
better than 56%
Execution−0.84 ±0.63
better than 31%
−1.47 ±0.39
better than 10%
Points left on the table3.21 ±0.28
lower than 12%
3.76 ±0.27
lower than 5%

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.

Gilles Muller serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowGilles winsv TimMatchupOptimal
Wide41%77%76%79.5%±5.332% ▼
Body4%62%65%63.6%±12.60% ▼
T55%76%79%80.3%±4.968% ▲

Optimal v Tim Henman: +0.2±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowGilles winsv TimMatchupOptimal
Wide49%81%76%83.0%±4.762% ▲
Body9%72%70%78.3%±9.00% ▼
T42%78%75%81.2%±5.338% ▼

Optimal v Tim Henman: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +1.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Tim Henman serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowTim winsv GillesMatchupOptimal
Wide45%76%76%79.3%±5.143% ▼
Body11%64%70%69.8%±10.50% ▼
T44%77%80%82.4%±5.157% ▲

Optimal v Gilles Muller: +1.0±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +2.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowTim winsv GillesMatchupOptimal
Wide47%73%79%78.7%±5.547%
Body15%62%62%61.6%±11.62% ▼
T38%73%80%81.4%±5.651% ▲

Optimal v Gilles Muller: +1.2±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +4.3 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.

Gilles Muller returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
FH through the middle36%+4.3+1.2−5.1+0.4±2.6
FH crosscourt22%+5.5−0.5+2.7+7.7±3.9
FH down the line20%+1.7+0.9−1.7+0.8±4.2
FH slice through the middle10%−4.2+2.0−0.1−2.3±2.2
FH slice crosscourt8%−4.3+1.2+0.9−2.2±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.3±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (210 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
BH through the middle27%+6.4+0.2−4.7+1.9±2.4
BH slice through the middle23%−4.2+0.3−2.5−6.4±2.4
BH down the line16%+4.2−2.1−0.2+1.9±4.1
BH slice down the line14%−8.4+0.5+0.2−7.7±3.5
BH crosscourt11%+8.8−1.5−4.4+2.9±3.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.0±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (270 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
FH crosscourt40%−0.2−0.3−1.2−1.7±4.3
FH through the middle37%−3.5−1.1+0.2−4.3±2.8
FH down the line23%−1.8±0.0+2.5+0.7±4.5

Lean FH down the line: +2.8±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (95 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
BH through the middle40%−2.9−0.8−0.8−4.5±2.2
BH crosscourt24%+1.0−2.5+2.1+0.6±3.1
BH down the line24%−0.2−2.3+2.0−0.4±4.0
BH slice down the line6%−9.3+0.6+1.1−7.7±3.4
FH inside-in5%+0.6+0.7−1.2±0.0±3.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.8±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (95 returns charted)

Tim Henman returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GillesValue
FH through the middle36%+4.3−0.5−1.2+2.6±2.6
FH down the line31%+1.7+3.3−1.7+3.2±4.0
FH crosscourt17%+5.5−3.5+2.1+4.1±4.3
FH slice through the middle9%−4.2+1.5−1.9−4.6±2.2
FH slice down the line5%−4.3+0.8−1.0−4.5±2.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.1±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (666 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GillesValue
BH slice through the middle32%−4.2+0.3+0.8−3.1±2.2
BH slice crosscourt27%+0.5+1.2−0.6+1.1±2.6
BH through the middle16%+6.4−2.1+1.1+5.3±2.7
BH slice down the line10%−8.4−0.9−0.8−10.1±3.5
BH crosscourt9%+8.8−5.3+4.1+7.6±3.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.5±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (792 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GillesValue
FH down the line36%−1.8−0.1+1.0−0.8±4.5
FH through the middle30%−3.5−2.4+2.3−3.5±2.8
FH crosscourt28%−0.2+2.5+2.0+4.2±4.2
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7+1.5−0.1−11.3±1.7
FH slice down the line2%−9.4−0.9±0.0−10.3±1.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.1±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (238 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GillesValue
BH slice crosscourt27%−4.0+0.4−2.2−5.9±2.3
BH through the middle19%−2.9+0.7−0.6−2.8±2.4
BH slice through the middle16%−11.3+0.7−1.7−12.3±2.4
BH crosscourt14%+1.0−2.7−1.0−2.6±3.3
BH slice down the line10%−9.3+2.1−0.8−8.1±4.0
FH inside-out3%+1.0−2.0+1.0+0.1±3.4

Lean FH inside-out: +5.7±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (582 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 clay. Each player's clay record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Gilles Muller

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return+2.1±4.0±0.0+2.2
FH to their forehand · return+1.1±4.7−0.3+1.4
FH to their backhand · rally+0.8±3.7−0.6+1.4
BH to the middle · return−0.5±2.7−0.1−0.5
BH to their backhand · return−0.9±2.7−1.7+0.8
BH slice to the middle · return−1.0±2.3+1.3−2.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · rally−9.8±4.1−4.9−4.8
FH to their forehand · return +1−8.6±4.6−6.4−2.2
BH to their forehand · rally−5.5±5.1−2.8−2.7
BH slice to their backhand · rally−5.3±2.9−3.3−2.0
FH to the middle · return−4.4±2.8−0.8−3.6

Tim Henman

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return+4.5±3.5+1.3+3.2
FH to their forehand · serve +1+3.8±4.6+2.1+1.8
BH to their forehand · return +1+2.1±4.7−3.9+6.0
BH slice to the middle · return+0.9±2.5+1.9−1.0
FH to their forehand · return +1+0.6±4.8+1.9−1.2
FH to the middle · serve +1+0.6±2.7−1.5+2.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · rally−5.2±2.9−4.7−0.5
BH to their backhand · return−3.9±3.0−4.9+1.0
BH to their forehand · rally−3.9±4.3−4.6+0.7
FH to their backhand · rally−3.2±3.7−5.3+2.1
BH to the middle · return−2.7±2.1−2.0−0.7

Against Tim Henman-like opponents

Gilles Muller vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–67.0%26.9%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Greg Rusedski, Mark Philippoussis, Pete Sampras, Patrick Rafter, Todd Martin, Richard Krajicek, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, Brad Gilbert. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.