Game plan

Karen Khachanov v Nikolay Davydenko

Every number combines what Karen Khachanov does well with what Nikolay Davydenko 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 24%90%: 7%–51% · best of 5: 19%

Serve points won 62.0% / 67.8% Karen / Nikolay · tour 65.7%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 28%serve 62.4% / 67.1%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Nikolay Davydenko's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −2.0 on serve, −2.7 on return vs expectation (913 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	Nikolay
Direction choice	+0.01 ±0.06 better than 59%	−0.01 ±0.06 better than 56%
Shot selection	−0.28 ±0.08 better than 25%	+0.02 ±0.07 better than 54%
Execution	+0.50 ±0.28 better than 84%	+0.14 ±0.29 better than 74%
Points left on the table	2.41 ±0.10 lower than 72%	2.24 ±0.09 lower than 89%

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 Nikolay	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	50%	73%	72%	71.8%±3.2	63% ▲
Body	5%	63%	62%	61.9%±8.3	0% ▼
T	45%	73%	73%	70.5%±3.7	37% ▼

Optimal v Nikolay Davydenko: +0.4±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Karen wins	v Nikolay	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	52%	74%	69%	70.0%±3.7	65% ▲
Body	6%	61%	61%	58.8%±9.2	0% ▼
T	42%	69%	69%	65.5%±4.0	35% ▼

Optimal v Nikolay Davydenko: +0.5±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Nikolay Davydenko serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Nikolay wins	v Karen	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	38%	70%	74%	71.5%±3.5	51% ▲
Body	12%	60%	64%	61.1%±6.5	0% ▼
T	51%	71%	76%	71.8%±3.5	49% ▼

Optimal v Karen Khachanov: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +1.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Nikolay wins	v Karen	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	50%	67%	76%	70.2%±3.6	50%
Body	10%	66%	65%	67.9%±7.0	23% ▲
T	40%	68%	72%	68.3%±4.0	27% ▼

Optimal v Karen Khachanov: +0.1±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.0 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 Nikolay	Value
FH through the middle	36%	+4.3	+0.6	+0.4	+5.2±1.7
FH slice through the middle	27%	−4.2	−0.9	+2.2	−2.9±2.0
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.5	+0.4	−0.7	+5.2±3.3
FH down the line	11%	+1.7	+1.1	−1.0	+1.8±3.5
FH slice down the line	7%	−4.3	−0.5	−0.3	−5.0±2.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.8±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (1496 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nikolay	Value
BH through the middle	46%	+6.4	+0.5	+2.6	+9.5±1.5
BH crosscourt	32%	+8.8	+1.1	+0.3	+10.2±2.3
BH down the line	8%	+4.2	+4.2	+1.2	+9.6±4.1
BH slice through the middle	8%	−4.2	−0.6	+2.6	−2.2±2.0
BH slice crosscourt	4%	+0.5	−2.2	+4.8	+3.2±2.7

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.1±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (1202 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nikolay	Value
FH through the middle	53%	−3.5	−1.0	+0.2	−4.2±2.2
FH crosscourt	26%	−0.2	+0.6	−1.9	−1.5±3.8
FH down the line	18%	−1.8	−0.4	−0.1	−2.3±4.3
FH slice through the middle	3%	−12.7	−2.1	+0.4	−14.5±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.9±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (443 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Nikolay	Value
BH crosscourt	49%	+1.0	+1.1	±0.0	+2.1±2.2
BH through the middle	37%	−2.9	+2.3	+1.6	+1.0±1.7
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	+2.3	+1.5	+3.6±4.6
FH through the middle	5%	−2.9	+0.9	+0.2	−1.8±2.1
FH inside-out	2%	+1.0	−0.2	−0.1	+0.6±3.3

Lean BH down the line: +2.1±4.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (854 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Nikolay Davydenko returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
FH through the middle	43%	+4.3	±0.0	+1.3	+5.5±1.6
FH down the line	23%	+1.7	−1.1	+1.9	+2.5±3.3
FH crosscourt	19%	+5.5	−2.3	+0.9	+4.1±3.1
FH slice through the middle	8%	−4.2	−1.2	+0.1	−5.3±2.1
FH slice down the line	3%	−4.3	−0.1	+0.2	−4.2±3.2

Lean FH through the middle: +2.5±1.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (1320 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
BH through the middle	43%	+6.4	+0.5	+1.7	+8.6±1.6
BH crosscourt	21%	+8.8	−0.6	+0.3	+8.5±2.6
BH down the line	15%	+4.2	+3.7	+0.4	+8.3±3.9
BH slice through the middle	11%	−4.2	−1.4	+0.6	−5.1±2.0
BH slice crosscourt	5%	+0.5	−2.2	+1.5	−0.2±2.9

Lean BH through the middle: +2.9±1.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (1258 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
FH through the middle	46%	−3.5	+1.9	±0.0	−1.6±2.1
FH crosscourt	26%	−0.2	−0.2	+2.3	+1.9±4.0
FH down the line	25%	−1.8	−2.6	+0.6	−3.7±4.2
BH through the middle	3%	+0.1	−0.1	+0.6	+0.6±1.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.1±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (437 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karen	Value
BH through the middle	47%	−2.9	+0.9	+0.6	−1.3±1.4
BH crosscourt	36%	+1.0	+0.5	−0.8	+0.7±2.1
BH down the line	17%	−0.2	−0.7	−1.8	−2.7±4.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.5±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (1069 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.

Karen Khachanov

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH slice to the middle · rally	+5.1±2.4	+2.1	+3.1
BH to the middle · return	+4.3±2.4	+1.2	+3.2
BH to their forehand · return	+4.2±4.6	+2.4	+1.8
BH slice to the middle · return	+2.6±2.0	+0.5	+2.1
FH to the middle · return +1	+2.6±2.6	+2.7	−0.1
FH slice to their backhand · rally	+2.5±3.6	+1.1	+1.4

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · return +1	−7.6±4.2	−5.2	−2.4
BH volley to their forehand · rally	−6.8±5.7	−2.7	−4.1
BH to their forehand · return +1	−4.2±5.1	−2.8	−1.4
BH slice to their backhand · return +1	−3.4±2.3	−2.3	−1.1
BH to their backhand · return +1	−3.0±3.7	−0.8	−2.3

Nikolay Davydenko

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally	+5.4±5.3	+1.8	+3.6
FH volley to their backhand · rally	+4.9±5.7	+2.0	+2.9
Smash to their forehand · rally	+3.3±4.4	+0.4	+3.0
BH to the middle · rally	+2.6±2.1	−0.5	+3.1
FH to the middle · return	+2.4±2.6	+1.1	+1.3
BH to the middle · return +1	+1.9±2.5	+1.3	+0.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH slice to the middle · rally	−4.5±2.8	−3.9	−0.6
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−3.8±2.7	−3.3	−0.6
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−3.7±3.1	−4.1	+0.3
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−2.8±4.4	−3.0	+0.1
BH volley to their backhand · rally	−2.7±5.5	−2.8	+0.1

Against Nikolay Davydenko-like opponents

Karen Khachanov v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	64.5%	35.6%
Players most similar to Nikolay Davydenko	7	59.1%	30.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Learner Tien, Alexander Zverev, Novak Djokovic, Borna Coric, Fernando Verdasco, Denis Istomin, Viktor Troicki, David Nalbandian, Juan Carlos Ferrero. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.