RallyIQ

Game plan

Greg Rusedski v Tim Henman

Every number combines what Greg Rusedski 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

Greg Rusedski wins, best of 3 30%90%: 12%–55% · best of 5: 26%
Serve points won 65.9% / 70.3% Greg / Tim · tour 65.7%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 29%serve 65.3% / 69.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Tim Henman's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +1.7 on serve, −1.3 on return vs expectation (1506 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

CareerGregTim
Direction choice−0.26 ±0.08
better than 8%
+0.09 ±0.11
better than 80%
Shot selection+0.04 ±0.27
better than 57%
+0.03 ±0.21
better than 56%
Execution−1.20 ±0.80
better than 19%
−1.47 ±0.39
better than 10%
Points left on the table5.41 ±0.29
lower than 1%
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.

Greg Rusedski serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowGreg winsv TimMatchupOptimal
Wide52%74%76%76.9%±4.858% ▲
Body8%69%65%71.1%±9.50% ▼
T39%72%79%76.7%±5.042% ▲

Optimal v Tim Henman: +0.4±0.5 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.

Ad court

1st serveNowGreg winsv TimMatchupOptimal
Wide51%79%76%81.1%±4.164% ▲
Body9%69%70%75.4%±8.80% ▼
T40%82%75%84.4%±4.436% ▼

Optimal v Tim Henman: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Tim Henman serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowTim winsv GregMatchupOptimal
Wide45%76%78%80.8%±4.158% ▲
Body11%64%72%72.4%±9.70% ▼
T44%77%79%81.0%±4.642% ▼

Optimal v Greg Rusedski: +0.7±0.7 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 serveNowTim winsv GregMatchupOptimal
Wide47%73%83%82.6%±4.660% ▲
Body15%62%61%60.4%±10.12% ▼
T38%73%78%79.3%±4.738%

Optimal v Greg Rusedski: +1.4±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +4.6 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

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
FH through the middle53%+4.3−1.3−5.1−2.2±2.3
FH down the line19%+1.7−8.6−1.7−8.7±4.1
FH crosscourt18%+5.5−1.0+2.7+7.2±3.9
FH slice crosscourt6%−4.3−0.1+0.9−3.5±2.4
FH slice through the middle4%−4.2+1.6−0.1−2.6±2.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +9.1±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (345 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
BH slice through the middle42%−4.2−0.7−2.5−7.5±2.2
BH slice down the line18%−8.4+0.8+0.2−7.4±3.4
BH slice crosscourt17%+0.5−0.1+2.1+2.5±3.0
BH through the middle10%+6.4−2.9−4.7−1.2±2.4
BH down the line8%+4.2−5.1−0.2−1.0±4.1

Lean BH slice crosscourt: +6.7±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (545 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
FH through the middle38%−3.5−2.8+0.2−6.1±2.8
FH down the line26%−1.8−4.4+2.5−3.7±4.6
FH crosscourt22%−0.2−1.1−1.2−2.5±4.3
FH slice crosscourt5%−12.5+0.1±0.0−12.4±1.5
FH slice through the middle5%−12.7+0.5±0.0−12.2±1.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.0±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (133 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
BH slice through the middle36%−11.3+1.0+0.6−9.7±2.3
BH slice down the line28%−9.3+1.2+1.1−7.0±4.0
BH slice crosscourt15%−4.0+0.4+0.8−2.9±2.6
BH through the middle8%−2.9−0.2−0.8−3.9±2.1
BH down the line6%−0.2+2.8+2.0+4.6±4.0

Lean BH down the line: +10.5±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (348 returns charted)

Tim Henman returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GregValue
FH through the middle36%+4.3−0.5−0.7+3.1±2.5
FH down the line31%+1.7+3.3−2.8+2.1±4.1
FH crosscourt17%+5.5−3.5+0.4+2.3±4.1
FH slice through the middle9%−4.2+1.5±0.0−2.7±2.1
FH slice down the line5%−4.3+0.8−1.1−4.5±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +1.4±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (666 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GregValue
BH slice through the middle32%−4.2+0.3−0.2−4.1±2.1
BH slice crosscourt27%+0.5+1.2+2.0+3.7±2.7
BH through the middle16%+6.4−2.1±0.0+4.3±2.6
BH slice down the line10%−8.4−0.9−2.4−11.6±3.5
BH crosscourt9%+8.8−5.3−1.9+1.6±3.5

Lean BH through the middle: +5.0±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (792 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GregValue
FH down the line36%−1.8−0.1−0.8−2.7±4.6
FH through the middle30%−3.5−2.4−1.5−7.3±2.7
FH crosscourt28%−0.2+2.5+2.1+4.4±4.2
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7+1.5±0.0−11.2±1.2
FH slice down the line2%−9.4−0.9±0.0−10.3±1.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.0±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (238 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv GregValue
BH slice crosscourt27%−4.0+0.4−1.2−4.8±2.2
BH through the middle19%−2.9+0.7−1.0−3.1±2.3
BH slice through the middle16%−11.3+0.7+0.3−10.4±2.3
BH crosscourt14%+1.0−2.7−0.9−2.5±3.2
BH slice down the line10%−9.3+2.1−0.7−7.9±4.1
BH down the line9%−0.2−0.5+0.5−0.3±5.0

Lean BH down the line: +4.6±4.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (582 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.

Greg Rusedski

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their forehand · return+7.6±5.1+6.0+1.7
FH to their backhand · rally+5.3±3.6+0.5+4.8
BH to their backhand · return +1+4.2±4.8+4.6−0.4
BH volley to their forehand · rally+3.9±7.5+2.8+1.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.4±4.2+1.4+2.0
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1+1.8±6.9+4.9−3.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to the middle · return−8.2±3.2−4.1−4.1
FH to their forehand · return−8.1±5.7−10.6+2.6
BH to the middle · return−7.9±3.2−3.5−4.4
FH to their forehand · rally−7.5±3.8−3.8−3.7
FH to the middle · return−6.9±3.3−3.5−3.4

Tim Henman

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return +1+5.7±4.9+4.6+1.1
FH to their backhand · return+3.4±4.8+2.4+1.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.3±3.9+3.7−0.4
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1+1.0±7.6−2.5+3.5
FH to their backhand · return +1+0.5±4.7−2.7+3.2
FH volley to their forehand · serve +1−0.1±7.3−2.6+2.5

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · return−8.7±4.7−7.1−1.6
FH to their forehand · return−7.9±6.1−2.0−5.9
FH to their forehand · rally−7.5±3.9−4.7−2.8
BH to their forehand · return−6.0±6.1−2.1−3.9
BH to their forehand · rally−4.9±5.5−5.8+0.9

Against Tim Henman-like opponents

Greg Rusedski vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–66.2%29.0%
Players most similar to Tim Henman8 67.0%27.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Gilles Muller, 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.