Game plan

Greg Rusedski v Patrick Rafter

Every number combines what Greg Rusedski does well with what Patrick Rafter allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Greg Rusedski wins, best of 3 34%90%: 15%–57% · best of 5: 30%

Serve points won 66.4% / 69.9% Greg / Patrick · tour 63.4%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 35%serve 65.9% / 69.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Greg Rusedski's record against Patrick Rafter's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +4.8 on serve, −3.1 on return vs expectation (812 points); head-to-head: −7.4 on serve, −1.2 on return vs expectation (231 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	Greg	Patrick
Direction choice	−0.26 ±0.08 better than 8%	+0.05 ±0.14 better than 70%
Shot selection	+0.04 ±0.27 better than 57%	+0.32 ±0.13 better than 81%
Execution	−1.20 ±0.80 better than 19%	−1.03 ±0.40 better than 24%
Points left on the table	5.41 ±0.29 lower than 1%	4.17 ±0.28 lower than 3%

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.

Greg Rusedski serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Greg wins	v Patrick	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	52%	74%	73%	74.3%±4.9	48% ▼
Body	8%	69%	69%	74.7%±8.5	0% ▼
T	39%	72%	79%	75.9%±4.7	52% ▲

Optimal v Patrick Rafter: +0.5±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 serve	Now	Greg wins	v Patrick	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	51%	79%	74%	80.2%±4.0	64% ▲
Body	9%	69%	66%	71.6%±9.4	0% ▼
T	40%	82%	70%	80.4%±5.0	36% ▼

Optimal v Patrick Rafter: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +0.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Patrick Rafter serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Patrick wins	v Greg	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	82%	78%	85.4%±3.2	57% ▲
Body	12%	67%	72%	74.9%±8.8	0% ▼
T	44%	76%	79%	79.8%±4.6	43% ▼

Optimal v Greg Rusedski: +1.3±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Patrick wins	v Greg	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	48%	71%	83%	81.5%±4.6	48%
Body	17%	67%	61%	64.8%±9.2	4% ▼
T	35%	73%	78%	78.7%±4.6	48% ▲

Optimal v Greg Rusedski: +1.0±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.8 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.

Greg Rusedski returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Patrick	Value
FH through the middle	53%	+4.3	−1.3	−3.3	−0.4±2.3
FH down the line	19%	+1.7	−8.6	+1.4	−5.6±4.0
FH crosscourt	18%	+5.5	−1.0	+2.0	+6.5±3.8
FH slice crosscourt	6%	−4.3	−0.1	+1.1	−3.3±2.6
FH slice through the middle	4%	−4.2	+1.6	−2.6	−5.2±2.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.1±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (345 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Patrick	Value
BH slice through the middle	42%	−4.2	−0.7	−2.8	−7.8±2.0
BH slice down the line	18%	−8.4	+0.8	−2.9	−10.5±3.2
BH slice crosscourt	17%	+0.5	−0.1	+0.6	+1.1±3.0
BH through the middle	10%	+6.4	−2.9	−4.3	−0.8±2.3
BH down the line	8%	+4.2	−5.1	−0.5	−1.3±4.0
BH crosscourt	4%	+8.8	−1.9	−2.5	+4.4±3.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +9.4±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (545 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Patrick	Value
FH through the middle	38%	−3.5	−2.8	−3.6	−9.9±2.7
FH down the line	26%	−1.8	−4.4	+0.6	−5.6±4.6
FH crosscourt	22%	−0.2	−1.1	+3.1	+1.8±4.2
FH slice crosscourt	5%	−12.5	+0.1	+0.2	−12.1±2.2
FH slice through the middle	5%	−12.7	+0.5	−0.7	−12.9±1.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +8.4±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (133 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Patrick	Value
BH slice through the middle	36%	−11.3	+1.0	+0.4	−9.8±2.3
BH slice down the line	28%	−9.3	+1.2	−3.2	−11.3±4.2
BH slice crosscourt	15%	−4.0	+0.4	−3.5	−7.1±2.5
BH through the middle	8%	−2.9	−0.2	−2.6	−5.7±2.1
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	+2.8	+2.7	+5.3±3.9

Lean BH down the line: +13.3±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (348 returns charted)

Patrick Rafter returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Greg	Value
FH through the middle	38%	+4.3	−1.3	−0.7	+2.3±2.4
FH crosscourt	25%	+5.5	−1.4	+0.4	+4.5±3.7
FH down the line	17%	+1.7	±0.0	−2.8	−1.1±4.2
FH slice through the middle	12%	−4.2	+3.3	±0.0	−0.9±2.0
FH slice down the line	4%	−4.3	+0.4	−1.1	−4.9±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.1±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (938 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Greg	Value
BH slice crosscourt	36%	+0.5	+3.0	+2.0	+5.5±2.5
BH slice through the middle	36%	−4.2	+0.5	−0.2	−3.9±2.0
BH slice down the line	13%	−8.4	+1.7	−2.4	−9.0±3.3
BH crosscourt	7%	+8.8	−1.4	−1.9	+5.5±3.5
BH through the middle	7%	+6.4	−5.7	±0.0	+0.6±2.7

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.8±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (1133 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Greg	Value
FH through the middle	27%	−3.5	−0.3	−1.5	−5.2±2.7
FH slice through the middle	20%	−12.7	+3.6	±0.0	−9.0±1.7
FH crosscourt	18%	−0.2	−2.1	+2.1	−0.2±4.2
FH down the line	18%	−1.8	+0.5	−0.8	−2.1±4.7
FH slice down the line	12%	−9.4	+2.8	±0.0	−6.7±2.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.5±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (257 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Greg	Value
BH slice crosscourt	34%	−4.0	+2.3	−1.2	−2.9±2.1
BH slice through the middle	23%	−11.3	+3.2	+0.3	−7.8±2.2
BH through the middle	13%	−2.9	−1.8	−1.0	−5.6±2.3
BH crosscourt	11%	+1.0	+1.9	−0.9	+2.0±3.2
BH slice down the line	9%	−9.3	+1.1	−0.7	−8.9±4.1
BH down the line	4%	−0.2	+5.2	+0.5	+5.5±4.9

Lean BH down the line: +9.5±4.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (778 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.

Greg Rusedski

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return +1	+6.4±3.2	+2.0	+4.4
BH to their forehand · return +1	+3.9±4.4	−2.0	+5.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	+3.2±3.6	+2.7	+0.4
BH slice to their forehand · return	+2.9±3.2	+4.1	−1.2
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1	+2.1±5.1	+3.1	−1.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+1.2±3.2	+1.4	−0.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their backhand · return	−7.9±2.3	−4.5	−3.4
FH to their forehand · return	−6.3±3.8	−8.0	+1.6
FH to the middle · return	−6.0±1.9	−2.7	−3.3
FH to their forehand · rally	−5.3±3.0	−3.8	−1.5
BH to the middle · return	−5.0±2.1	−1.7	−3.3

Patrick Rafter

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their forehand · return	+3.7±3.1	+2.6	+1.1
BH to their forehand · return +1	+2.1±4.6	−2.2	+4.3
FH volley to their forehand · serve +1	+1.6±4.7	+0.7	+0.9
FH to their backhand · return +1	+1.6±3.7	−1.6	+3.2
BH to their backhand · return +1	+1.2±3.1	−0.4	+1.6
FH to their backhand · return	+1.1±3.1	−0.1	+1.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to the middle · return	−6.5±2.0	−5.5	−1.1
BH volley to their backhand · serve +1	−4.9±3.8	+1.2	−6.1
BH to their forehand · return	−3.7±4.2	−1.9	−1.8
FH to the middle · return	−3.0±1.9	−0.9	−2.1
BH to their backhand · return	−2.7±3.0	−0.2	−2.5

Against Patrick Rafter-like opponents

Greg Rusedski v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	66.2%	29.0%
Players most similar to Patrick Rafter	4	69.9%	27.4%
Patrick Rafter (charted head-to-head)	1	58.5%	29.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Stefan Edberg, Tim Henman, Max Mirnyi, Mark Philippoussis, Richard Krajicek, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, John Mcenroe, Pat Cash. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head

Patrick Rafter v Greg Rusedski US Open F · Hard · 7 Sep 1997