RallyIQ

Game plan

Jaqueline Cristian v Linda Fruhvirtova

Every number combines what Jaqueline Cristian does well with what Linda Fruhvirtova allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Jaqueline Cristian wins, best of 3 35%90%: 7%–77% · best of 5: 31%
Serve points won 59.9% / 62.9% Jaqueline / Linda · tour 58.1%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 35%serve 59.9% / 62.9%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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

CareerJaquelineLinda
Direction choice−0.15 ±0.12
better than 25%
+0.10 ±0.09
better than 72%
Shot selection−0.05 ±0.12
better than 41%
−0.11 ±0.11
better than 35%
Execution−0.25 ±0.59
better than 46%
+1.26 ±0.49
better than 95%
Points left on the table2.61 ±0.17
lower than 51%
2.35 ±0.12
lower than 81%

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.

Structural compatibility

Expected edge per 100 rally shots from style alone: Jaqueline Cristian +1.03, Linda Fruhvirtova +2.01. Each player's shot mix weighted by their own skill with each shot and by how much the other gives up against it. This is why some rankings gaps don't hold in a given matchup.

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.

Jaqueline Cristian serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowJaqueline winsv LindaMatchupOptimal
Wide33%58%68%60.4%±8.033%
Body25%57%52%51.6%±9.110% ▼
T42%69%72%73.2%±7.257% ▲

Optimal v Linda Fruhvirtova: +0.7±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +9.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowJaqueline winsv LindaMatchupOptimal
Wide37%63%63%60.4%±8.338%
Body21%54%58%56.4%±10.55% ▼
T42%65%65%65.1%±7.557% ▲

Optimal v Linda Fruhvirtova: +0.9±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Linda Fruhvirtova serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowLinda winsv JaquelineMatchupOptimal
Wide39%67%72%73.1%±6.454% ▲
Body14%63%58%63.9%±9.90% ▼
T47%71%70%73.5%±6.946% ▼

Optimal v Jaqueline Cristian: +1.0±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowLinda winsv JaquelineMatchupOptimal
Wide39%68%74%76.3%±6.754% ▲
Body16%52%55%51.2%±10.71% ▼
T45%64%68%67.2%±7.445%

Optimal v Jaqueline Cristian: +1.3±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +8.2 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.

Jaqueline Cristian returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LindaValue
FH through the middle53%+4.2+1.3−1.1+4.4±2.7
FH crosscourt22%+5.3+2.9+2.3+10.6±4.2
FH slice through the middle10%−6.7−1.3+0.4−7.6±2.5
FH down the line9%+1.5−1.4±0.0+0.1±4.6
FH slice crosscourt4%−6.6+0.6−0.5−6.6±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.0±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (313 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LindaValue
BH through the middle42%+6.0+0.4+0.7+7.0±2.5
BH crosscourt23%+7.7−0.2−2.9+4.6±3.6
BH down the line14%+2.2−2.8+3.4+2.7±4.7
BH slice through the middle11%−6.2−0.6−0.1−7.0±2.4
BH slice crosscourt5%−4.2+0.1−0.7−4.8±2.5

Lean BH through the middle: +4.3±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (285 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LindaValue
FH through the middle53%−3.2−0.1−0.1−3.3±3.0
FH crosscourt38%+0.5+1.3+6.4+8.2±4.2
FH down the line9%−0.6+1.9−3.8−2.5±4.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.1±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (58 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LindaValue
BH through the middle44%−2.6+1.4+1.5+0.2±2.7
BH crosscourt25%+1.5+0.2−0.8+0.9±3.7
FH inside-out11%+1.4+0.7−3.8−1.7±4.1
BH down the line8%−0.5−1.9+1.9−0.5±4.8
FH through the middle7%−2.7+1.0−0.1−1.8±2.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +0.6±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (167 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Linda Fruhvirtova returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JaquelineValue
FH through the middle54%+4.2+3.1+0.3+7.6±2.6
FH crosscourt23%+5.3+2.7+0.3+8.3±4.3
FH down the line19%+1.5+1.3−2.7+0.2±4.7
FH slice through the middle2%−6.7+0.5+0.3−5.9±2.2
FH slice crosscourt2%−6.6+0.6+1.2−4.8±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.5±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (331 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JaquelineValue
BH crosscourt43%+7.7+1.5+3.3+12.6±3.5
BH through the middle42%+6.0+1.6−0.1+7.5±2.6
BH down the line8%+2.2−2.2−1.7−1.7±4.5
BH slice through the middle4%−6.2+0.2+0.2−5.8±2.1
BH slice crosscourt2%−4.2+0.1±0.0−4.0±1.2

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.4±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (272 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JaquelineValue
FH through the middle44%−3.2+2.1+1.3+0.2±3.0
FH crosscourt35%+0.5±0.0+3.8+4.4±4.4
FH down the line21%−0.6+2.1−0.5+1.0±5.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.5±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (95 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JaquelineValue
BH through the middle44%−2.6+0.9−1.5−3.2±2.7
BH crosscourt41%+1.5−0.3+1.3+2.6±3.6
BH down the line15%−0.5−0.2−1.5−2.3±5.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.2±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (119 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 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.

Jaqueline Cristian

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return+6.8±4.8+1.7+5.0
BH to the middle · return +1+4.4±2.4+1.4+3.0
FH to their forehand · rally+3.9±4.7+2.3+1.5
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.8±3.5+1.9+1.8
FH to their forehand · serve +1+2.4±5.1−2.5+4.9
BH to their forehand · return+2.3±4.3−1.3+3.6

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return−4.3±4.1−1.7−2.6
BH to their backhand · return−4.0±4.2−1.7−2.3
FH to the middle · rally−3.3±2.6−2.2−1.0
BH to the middle · serve +1−3.1±3.0−4.5+1.4
BH to their forehand · return +1−2.4±4.8−3.2+0.9

Linda Fruhvirtova

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · return+6.1±3.9+1.7+4.4
FH to their backhand · serve +1+5.5±4.7+3.0+2.5
BH to their backhand · rally+4.4±3.1+2.2+2.2
FH to their forehand · return+4.2±4.0+1.9+2.3
FH to the middle · serve +1+4.1±3.1+2.9+1.2
FH to their forehand · serve +1+3.6±3.6+1.6+2.0

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return−4.2±5.1+0.7−4.9
BH to the middle · serve +1−2.4±3.0−1.5−0.9
FH to their backhand · return−1.5±5.3+2.2−3.7
BH to their forehand · serve +1−1.3±4.8+2.0−3.3
FH to their backhand · return +1−1.0±5.0+3.3−4.2

Against Linda Fruhvirtova-like opponents

Jaqueline Cristian vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–54.7%38.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Magdalena Frech, Victoria Azarenka, Caroline Wozniacki, Qiang Wang, Simona Halep, Tsvetana Pironkova, Vera Zvonareva, Agnieszka Radwanska, Dinara Safina. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.