RallyIQ

Game plan

Jerzy Janowicz v Hamad Medjedovic

Every number combines what Jerzy Janowicz does well with what Hamad Medjedovic allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Jerzy Janowicz wins, best of 3 66%90%: 36%–88% · best of 5: 70%
Serve points won 69.0% / 65.6% Jerzy / Hamad · tour 63.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 64%serve 68.5% / 65.5%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Jerzy Janowicz's record against Hamad Medjedovic's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +7.2 on serve, −2.0 on return vs expectation (212 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

CareerJerzyHamad
Direction choice−0.09 ±0.21
better than 33%
+0.03 ±0.10
better than 65%
Shot selection+0.27 ±0.07
better than 77%
−0.06 ±0.26
better than 46%
Execution−1.30 ±0.85
better than 15%
−1.65 ±0.69
better than 7%

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.

Jerzy Janowicz serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowJerzy winsv HamadMatchupOptimal
Wide43%68%80%76.2%±8.143%
Body20%70%73%78.5%±10.97% ▼
T37%85%82%89.9%±5.250% ▲

Optimal v Hamad Medjedovic: +0.8±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +8.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowJerzy winsv HamadMatchupOptimal
Wide37%74%75%76.4%±8.650% ▲
Body22%63%68%68.3%±13.29% ▼
T41%72%78%77.9%±8.541%

Optimal v Hamad Medjedovic: +0.7±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Hamad Medjedovic serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowHamad winsv JerzyMatchupOptimal
Wide44%73%77%77.7%±7.740% ▼
Body9%68%73%77.5%±10.90% ▼
T47%79%76%80.6%±7.360% ▲

Optimal v Jerzy Janowicz: +0.4±0.8 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 serveNowHamad winsv JerzyMatchupOptimal
Wide33%73%74%73.4%±9.844% ▲
Body6%62%61%59.8%±15.10% ▼
T61%71%72%71.5%±8.356% ▼

Optimal v Jerzy Janowicz: +0.4±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.0 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.

Jerzy Janowicz returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv HamadValue
FH through the middle52%+4.3+0.2−1.4+3.0±3.0
FH down the line27%+1.7+3.8−1.2+4.3±4.5
FH crosscourt21%+5.5±0.0−2.2+3.3±4.3

Lean FH down the line: +0.9±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (148 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv HamadValue
BH through the middle42%+6.4+0.1−1.8+4.6±2.9
BH crosscourt29%+8.8−1.8+0.9+7.9±3.5
BH down the line13%+4.2+1.1−0.6+4.7±4.0
BH slice through the middle9%−4.2−0.3−0.6−5.1±2.2
BH slice crosscourt7%+0.5+0.9+0.5+1.9±2.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.3±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (112 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv HamadValue
BH through the middle55%−2.9−0.8−1.1−4.8±2.5
BH crosscourt33%+1.0−1.6+3.2+2.7±3.2
BH down the line12%−0.2−2.5−1.1−3.8±4.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.8±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (66 returns charted)

Hamad Medjedovic returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JerzyValue
FH through the middle51%+4.3−2.0+1.3+3.5±3.1
FH crosscourt23%+5.5−1.5−1.0+2.9±4.2
FH down the line23%+1.7+0.2+3.0+4.9±4.2
FH slice through the middle3%−4.2+0.4−0.7−4.5±1.9

Lean FH down the line: +1.5±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (158 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JerzyValue
BH through the middle40%+6.4±0.0−2.6+3.8±2.9
BH crosscourt28%+8.8+0.1+0.5+9.4±3.5
BH down the line20%+4.2+0.2−1.9+2.5±4.1
BH slice through the middle8%−4.2−1.2+1.1−4.3±2.2
BH slice down the line4%−8.4−0.4−0.2−9.1±2.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.5±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (167 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JerzyValue
FH through the middle48%−3.5+1.4+0.2−1.9±2.6
FH crosscourt30%−0.2+0.9−1.5−0.9±3.8
FH down the line23%−1.8+0.6−1.7−2.9±3.5

Lean FH through the middle: −0.1±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (40 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JerzyValue
BH through the middle47%−2.9+0.8−3.1−5.2±2.6
BH crosscourt29%+1.0−0.7+2.3+2.7±3.2
BH down the line20%−0.2−0.1+1.0+0.6±4.1
FH inside-in5%+0.6+0.5−1.5−0.5±3.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.2±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (101 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.

Jerzy Janowicz

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.1±3.8+0.7+0.3
BH to their backhand · return+0.7±3.4−2.1+2.8
FH to their forehand · rally+0.6±3.6+0.6±0.0
BH to their backhand · rally−0.8±2.9−1.0+0.2
FH to the middle · return−0.9±2.7+0.4−1.3
FH to their forehand · serve +1−1.3±4.2−5.4+4.2

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · return−2.7±2.5−0.6−2.1
FH to their backhand · rally−2.6±3.5−2.6±0.0
FH to their backhand · return−1.9±4.1+0.9−2.7
FH to their forehand · serve +1−1.3±4.2−5.4+4.2
FH to the middle · return−0.9±2.7+0.4−1.3

Hamad Medjedovic

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1+1.7±4.2−2.1+3.9
FH to the middle · return−0.3±2.8−1.7+1.4
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.4±3.9−2.1+1.7
FH to their backhand · rally−0.5±3.7−4.3+3.8
BH to their backhand · return−0.6±3.4−2.2+1.6
BH to their backhand · rally−0.8±2.7−0.8−0.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · rally−4.1±3.7−4.8+0.7
BH to the middle · return−3.9±2.5+0.2−4.0
BH to their backhand · rally−0.8±2.7−0.8−0.1
BH to their backhand · return−0.6±3.4−2.2+1.6
FH to their backhand · rally−0.5±3.7−4.3+3.8

Against Hamad Medjedovic-like opponents

Jerzy Janowicz vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–63.8%29.9%
Players most similar to Hamad Medjedovic1 74.3%27.3%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Fabian Marozsan, Frances Tiafoe, Zhizhen Zhang, Quentin Halys, Matteo Arnaldi, Otto Virtanen, Nick Kyrgios, Lucas Pouille, Martin Klizan. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.