Game plan

Karen Khachanov v Jarkko Nieminen

Every number combines what Karen Khachanov does well with what Jarkko Nieminen allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Karen Khachanov wins, best of 3 82%90%: 64%–93% · best of 5: 88%

Serve points won 67.7% / 60.3% Karen / Jarkko · tour 63.8%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 85%serve 67.8% / 59.7%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Karen Khachanov's record against Jarkko Nieminen's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −0.5 on serve, −2.9 on return vs expectation (797 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	Karen	Jarkko
Direction choice	+0.01 ±0.06 better than 59%	−0.26 ±0.13 better than 8%
Shot selection	−0.28 ±0.08 better than 25%	−0.02 ±0.27 better than 51%
Execution	+0.50 ±0.28 better than 84%	+0.34 ±0.76 better than 80%
Points left on the table	2.41 ±0.10 lower than 72%	3.24 ±0.24 lower than 12%

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.

Karen Khachanov serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Karen wins	v Jarkko	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	50%	73%	71%	71.4%±6.4	42% ▼
Body	5%	63%	61%	60.8%±12.4	0% ▼
T	45%	73%	81%	79.7%±6.7	58% ▲

Optimal v Jarkko Nieminen: +0.4±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +5.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Karen wins	v Jarkko	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	52%	74%	78%	78.6%±6.5	65% ▲
Body	6%	61%	67%	64.8%±11.6	0% ▼
T	42%	69%	77%	74.1%±7.5	35% ▼

Optimal v Jarkko Nieminen: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Jarkko Nieminen serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Jarkko wins	v Karen	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	41%	62%	74%	63.9%±8.0	42%
Body	18%	58%	64%	58.7%±10.3	5% ▼
T	40%	65%	76%	66.2%±7.3	53% ▲

Optimal v Karen Khachanov: +0.5±0.9 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	Jarkko wins	v Karen	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	52%	59%	76%	63.1%±6.8	50% ▼
Body	11%	64%	65%	66.0%±11.3	0% ▼
T	37%	69%	72%	68.3%±8.0	50% ▲

Optimal v Karen Khachanov: +0.3±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.0 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.

Karen Khachanov returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jarkko	Value
FH through the middle	36%	+4.3	+0.6	−1.3	+3.5±2.5
FH slice through the middle	27%	−4.2	−0.9	+1.8	−3.2±1.8
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.5	+0.4	+1.9	+7.8±4.0
FH down the line	11%	+1.7	+1.1	−5.3	−2.6±4.2
FH slice down the line	7%	−4.3	−0.5	±0.0	−4.7±2.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.1±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1496 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jarkko	Value
BH through the middle	46%	+6.4	+0.5	+1.9	+8.8±2.3
BH crosscourt	32%	+8.8	+1.1	+2.6	+12.5±3.0
BH down the line	8%	+4.2	+4.2	+1.3	+9.6±4.5
BH slice through the middle	8%	−4.2	−0.6	+2.1	−2.7±2.5
BH slice crosscourt	4%	+0.5	−2.2	+1.5	−0.2±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.2±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (1202 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jarkko	Value
FH through the middle	53%	−3.5	−1.0	−1.8	−6.2±2.6
FH crosscourt	26%	−0.2	+0.6	+0.7	+1.1±4.2
FH down the line	18%	−1.8	−0.4	−0.8	−3.0±4.6
FH slice through the middle	3%	−12.7	−2.1	±0.0	−14.8±1.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.1±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (443 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jarkko	Value
BH crosscourt	49%	+1.0	+1.1	−2.3	−0.2±2.6
BH through the middle	37%	−2.9	+2.3	−0.2	−0.8±2.1
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	+2.3	+1.6	+3.7±4.5
FH through the middle	5%	−2.9	+0.9	−1.8	−3.8±2.4
FH inside-out	2%	+1.0	−0.2	−0.8	−0.1±3.5

Lean BH down the line: +4.0±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (854 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Jarkko Nieminen returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
FH through the middle	46%	+4.3	−3.4	+1.3	+2.1±2.4
FH down the line	20%	+1.7	+1.5	+0.9	+4.1±3.7
FH crosscourt	16%	+5.5	−1.8	+1.9	+5.5±3.7
FH slice through the middle	13%	−4.2	+0.1	+0.1	−4.0±2.0
FH slice down the line	4%	−4.3	+0.7	−0.3	−3.9±2.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.5±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (123 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
BH through the middle	36%	+6.4	+0.1	+1.7	+8.2±2.3
BH slice through the middle	20%	−4.2	+0.5	+0.6	−3.2±2.1
BH crosscourt	20%	+8.8	−2.0	+0.4	+7.2±3.4
BH slice down the line	9%	−8.4	+0.1	+1.5	−6.9±3.0
BH down the line	8%	+4.2	+3.1	+0.3	+7.6±3.6

Lean BH through the middle: +4.5±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (153 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
FH through the middle	44%	−3.5	−0.5	±0.0	−3.9±2.4
FH crosscourt	28%	−0.2	+0.8	+0.6	+1.1±3.8
FH down the line	28%	−1.8	+1.6	+2.3	+2.1±4.1

Lean FH down the line: +3.0±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (54 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
BH through the middle	51%	−2.9	+1.7	+0.6	−0.6±2.1
BH crosscourt	32%	+1.0	−1.1	−1.8	−1.9±3.1
BH down the line	10%	−0.2	±0.0	−0.8	−1.0±3.4
FH through the middle	7%	−2.9	+0.2	±0.0	−2.7±1.6

Lean BH through the middle: +0.6±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (101 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 hard. Each player's hard record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Karen Khachanov

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+7.7±4.1	−0.1	+7.8
FH to their backhand · rally	+5.8±2.5	−0.5	+6.3
FH to their backhand · return +1	+5.7±4.5	−0.1	+5.8
BH to their forehand · return	+5.5±5.6	+4.0	+1.6
FH to their forehand · return +1	+5.5±5.2	−0.1	+5.6
BH to the middle · return	+5.3±2.9	+2.0	+3.3

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · rally	−3.1±3.1	−0.2	−2.9
FH to the middle · return	−2.8±2.9	−1.2	−1.6
BH to the middle · rally	−2.8±2.6	+0.9	−3.7
FH to their forehand · return	−2.7±5.5	+2.8	−5.5
FH to the middle · rally	+0.2±2.7	+0.8	−0.6

Jarkko Nieminen

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+3.3±4.5	+1.0	+2.3
BH to the middle · return	+2.9±2.5	+2.3	+0.6
FH to their backhand · rally	+2.8±3.0	+1.6	+1.3
FH to the middle · rally	+2.4±2.5	+1.4	+1.0
BH to the middle · serve +1	+1.6±3.2	+1.8	−0.2
FH to their forehand · rally	+0.7±3.1	+0.1	+0.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1	−4.2±3.9	−4.0	−0.2
FH to the middle · return	−3.4±2.8	−4.5	+1.1
BH to the middle · rally	−2.5±2.2	−2.6	+0.1
BH to their backhand · serve +1	−2.4±3.8	−1.3	−1.1
BH to their backhand · rally	−1.4±2.7	−0.9	−0.5

Against Jarkko Nieminen-like opponents

Karen Khachanov v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	64.5%	35.6%
Players most similar to Jarkko Nieminen	5	59.8%	30.8%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Learner Tien, Valentin Vacherot, Novak Djokovic, Alex Michelsen, Kei Nishikori, Mikhail Kukushkin, Denis Istomin, Viktor Troicki, Nikolay Davydenko. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.