Game plan

Jim Courier v James Blake

Every number combines what Jim Courier does well with what James Blake allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Jim Courier wins, best of 3 62%90%: 32%–86% · best of 5: 65%

Serve points won 65.2% / 62.7% Jim / James · tour 65.7%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 65%serve 65.4% / 62.3%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Jim Courier's record against James Blake's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −5.0 on serve, −12.6 on return vs expectation (99 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	Jim	James
Direction choice	+0.04 ±0.08 better than 69%	+0.08 ±0.07 better than 78%
Shot selection	−0.25 ±0.19 better than 28%	+0.03 ±0.12 better than 56%
Execution	+0.69 ±0.34 better than 89%	−0.86 ±0.36 better than 30%
Points left on the table	3.00 ±0.17 lower than 20%	2.49 ±0.14 lower than 62%

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.

Jim Courier serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Jim wins	v James	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	46%	72%	76%	74.9%±4.2	59% ▲
Body	11%	65%	58%	59.3%±8.0	0% ▼
T	43%	77%	76%	78.4%±3.8	41% ▼

Optimal v James Blake: +0.9±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Jim wins	v James	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	70%	69%	66.2%±4.5	44% ▼
Body	10%	62%	59%	58.5%±9.2	0% ▼
T	43%	75%	72%	75.1%±4.5	56% ▲

Optimal v James Blake: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

James Blake serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	James wins	v Jim	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	39%	68%	75%	70.1%±4.6	52% ▲
Body	13%	64%	61%	61.8%±7.5	0% ▼
T	49%	75%	73%	72.5%±4.5	48%

Optimal v Jim Courier: +0.1±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	James wins	v Jim	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	51%	71%	72%	69.9%±4.5	46% ▼
Body	8%	58%	62%	56.3%±9.9	0% ▼
T	41%	70%	75%	73.0%±4.8	54% ▲

Optimal v Jim Courier: +0.6±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.9 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.

Jim Courier returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v James	Value
FH through the middle	49%	+4.3	−1.0	±0.0	+3.2±2.1
FH crosscourt	29%	+5.5	+1.8	−3.0	+4.3±3.7
FH down the line	19%	+1.7	+1.0	+0.8	+3.5±3.8
BH through the middle	1%	+6.6	−0.8	+0.6	+6.4±2.1
BH inside-in	1%	+7.7	−2.4	−1.2	+4.2±3.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +0.7±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (855 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v James	Value
BH through the middle	36%	+6.4	−0.8	+0.6	+6.3±2.0
BH crosscourt	36%	+8.8	+2.5	−1.2	+10.1±2.7
BH slice through the middle	9%	−4.2	+0.5	+0.3	−3.3±2.2
BH down the line	8%	+4.2	−1.3	+0.1	+3.0±4.5
BH slice crosscourt	7%	+0.5	±0.0	+2.9	+3.5±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.1±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1149 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v James	Value
FH through the middle	45%	−3.5	−0.3	+0.2	−3.5±2.5
FH crosscourt	34%	−0.2	−1.8	+6.0	+3.9±4.1
FH down the line	17%	−1.8	−3.0	+3.0	−1.8±4.4
BH through the middle	2%	+0.1	+0.7	−0.8	+0.1±1.5
BH inside-out	1%	+0.9	−1.0	−1.6	−1.7±3.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.5±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (355 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v James	Value
BH crosscourt	39%	+1.0	+3.0	−0.6	+3.5±2.3
BH through the middle	31%	−2.9	−0.3	−0.8	−4.0±1.9
FH through the middle	8%	−2.9	−0.3	+0.2	−2.9±2.2
BH down the line	7%	−0.2	+0.6	−1.6	−1.2±4.8
FH inside-in	6%	+0.6	+1.6	+6.0	+8.1±4.3

Lean FH inside-in: +7.9±4.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (953 returns charted)

James Blake returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jim	Value
FH crosscourt	38%	+5.5	+0.1	−1.1	+4.6±3.5
FH through the middle	34%	+4.3	−2.7	−0.8	+0.8±2.1
FH down the line	22%	+1.7	−0.6	+1.9	+3.0±3.6
FH slice through the middle	4%	−4.2	−0.6	+0.8	−4.0±2.2
FH slice crosscourt	1%	−4.3	+0.1	+3.6	−0.6±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.1±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (587 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jim	Value
BH slice through the middle	25%	−4.2	+3.0	+1.3	+0.1±1.8
BH through the middle	25%	+6.4	−2.0	−2.8	+1.5±2.1
BH slice crosscourt	17%	+0.5	+4.2	+3.5	+8.2±2.4
BH crosscourt	16%	+8.8	−1.4	−2.6	+4.9±2.9
BH down the line	11%	+4.2	−0.1	−2.8	+1.3±4.5

Lean BH slice crosscourt: +5.7±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (875 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jim	Value
FH through the middle	33%	−3.5	+0.9	+0.6	−2.0±2.6
FH crosscourt	31%	−0.2	+1.6	−1.8	−0.4±4.3
FH down the line	26%	−1.8	−0.5	+0.2	−2.1±4.1
FH slice through the middle	6%	−12.7	+1.1	+2.6	−9.0±1.8
FH slice down the line	3%	−9.4	−2.1	+1.2	−10.3±2.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.8±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (159 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jim	Value
BH crosscourt	35%	+1.0	−3.3	−1.7	−3.9±2.4
BH through the middle	31%	−2.9	−0.2	−0.4	−3.5±2.0
BH down the line	17%	−0.2	+0.5	+1.0	+1.3±4.8
BH slice crosscourt	6%	−4.0	+0.4	−0.4	−4.0±2.3
BH slice through the middle	4%	−11.3	+0.4	−0.2	−11.1±2.2

Lean BH down the line: +4.3±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (545 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.

Jim Courier

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return	+6.0±4.4	+6.6	−0.6
FH to their forehand · return +1	+4.8±5.8	+1.7	+3.0
BH to their forehand · return	+3.8±5.8	+0.6	+3.2
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1	+3.4±4.0	+2.6	+0.8
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+3.3±4.5	+2.6	+0.6
BH to their forehand · return +1	+2.9±6.7	+0.9	+2.0

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally	−8.6±7.0	−3.0	−5.6
FH to their forehand · rally	−6.1±4.6	−2.2	−3.9
FH to the middle · return +1	−4.8±2.5	−2.8	−2.0
BH to their backhand · rally	−2.9±3.8	−1.9	−1.1
FH to the middle · return	−2.8±3.4	−0.7	−2.1

James Blake

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their backhand · return	+6.0±3.6	+4.8	+1.2
BH to their forehand · rally	+4.9±5.4	+5.9	−1.0
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+4.8±4.4	−0.9	+5.8
BH volley to their backhand · rally	+4.8±6.4	−0.1	+4.9
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+3.7±4.7	−1.8	+5.5
BH slice to their backhand · return +1	+3.2±3.8	−0.6	+3.9

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return +1	−6.7±6.6	−4.0	−2.8
FH to the middle · rally	−6.4±3.3	−3.3	−3.1
BH to their backhand · rally	−5.8±3.6	−3.9	−1.9
BH to their backhand · return	−5.6±4.6	−1.6	−4.0
FH to their forehand · return +1	−4.7±5.6	−2.5	−2.2

Against James Blake-like opponents

Jim Courier v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	65.3%	36.6%
Players most similar to James Blake	1	61.7%	25.0%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Stefanos Tsitsipas, Alexei Popyrin, Lucas Pouille, Kyle Edmund, Jo Wilfried Tsonga, Roger Federer, Philipp Kohlschreiber, Tommy Haas, Sebastien Grosjean. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.