Game plan

Katie Volynets v Iga Swiatek

Every number combines what Katie Volynets does well with what Iga Swiatek allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Katie Volynets wins, best of 3 6%90%: 2%–19% · best of 5: 3%

Serve points won 49.6% / 61.0% Katie / Iga · tour 56.7%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 6%serve 49.6% / 61.0%

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. Both were charted enough in the last three seasons, so those carry the most weight. The result is then nudged by Katie Volynets's record against Iga Swiatek'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

Career	Katie	Iga
Direction choice	−0.17 ±0.13 better than 23%	+0.17 ±0.03 better than 82%
Shot selection	±0.00 ±0.15 better than 45%	+0.32 ±0.04 better than 81%
Execution	+1.57 ±0.45 better than 97%	+0.91 ±0.19 better than 89%
Points left on the table	2.59 ±0.19 lower than 53%	2.13 ±0.04 lower than 96%

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: Katie Volynets +0.60, Iga Swiatek +2.29. 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.

Katie Volynets serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Katie wins	v Iga	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	64%	60%	58.8%±4.9	62% ▲
Body	29%	52%	51%	45.7%±6.2	13% ▼
T	24%	58%	61%	50.9%±6.8	25%

Optimal v Iga Swiatek: +1.1±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +5.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Katie wins	v Iga	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	28%	68%	62%	64.7%±6.6	43% ▲
Body	22%	54%	51%	48.4%±7.0	7% ▼
T	50%	59%	59%	53.5%±5.1	50%

Optimal v Iga Swiatek: +0.8±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +9.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Iga Swiatek serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Iga wins	v Katie	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	40%	69%	66%	69.5%±4.8	55% ▲
Body	28%	64%	57%	63.8%±6.7	12% ▼
T	32%	73%	63%	67.8%±6.2	33%

Optimal v Katie Volynets: +0.3±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Iga wins	v Katie	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	38%	72%	62%	68.3%±5.2	37%
Body	29%	63%	52%	58.1%±7.7	14% ▼
T	33%	68%	64%	68.0%±5.5	49% ▲

Optimal v Katie Volynets: +0.8±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.1 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.

Katie Volynets returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Iga	Value
FH through the middle	49%	+4.2	+1.6	−1.2	+4.6±2.0
FH crosscourt	32%	+5.3	+1.3	−0.6	+6.0±3.2
FH down the line	11%	+1.5	−2.2	−3.6	−4.3±3.7
FH slice through the middle	5%	−6.7	−0.3	−0.9	−7.9±2.1
FH slice crosscourt	2%	−6.6	±0.0	−0.3	−6.9±2.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.1±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (372 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Iga	Value
BH through the middle	49%	+6.0	+1.5	−1.3	+6.2±1.9
BH crosscourt	25%	+7.7	+4.0	−1.2	+10.6±2.8
BH down the line	12%	+2.2	+1.4	−2.7	+0.9±3.7
BH slice through the middle	8%	−6.2	±0.0	−0.8	−7.0±2.3
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	+0.5	−5.0	−8.7±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.0±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (294 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Iga	Value
FH through the middle	54%	−3.2	+2.6	−0.4	−0.9±2.5
FH crosscourt	35%	+0.5	+1.2	−2.3	−0.6±3.6
FH down the line	11%	−0.6	−2.5	−0.2	−3.3±3.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +0.5±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (83 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Iga	Value
BH through the middle	48%	−2.6	+1.4	±0.0	−1.2±2.1
BH crosscourt	32%	+1.5	+3.5	−0.9	+4.1±2.8
BH down the line	20%	−0.5	−0.3	−0.8	−1.6±4.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.7±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (125 returns charted)

Iga Swiatek returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Katie	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.2	+0.8	+1.9	+6.8±1.7
FH crosscourt	25%	+5.3	+0.1	+3.9	+9.3±2.9
FH down the line	15%	+1.5	−2.7	+1.9	+0.8±3.6
FH slice through the middle	6%	−6.7	−0.5	−0.5	−7.7±2.3
FH slice crosscourt	3%	−6.6	−3.5	−0.2	−10.3±2.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.3±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (3485 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Katie	Value
BH through the middle	50%	+6.0	+0.4	+1.6	+8.1±1.8
BH crosscourt	32%	+7.7	+0.7	+2.6	+11.0±2.6
BH down the line	10%	+2.2	+2.9	+1.3	+6.4±4.1
BH slice through the middle	4%	−6.2	−0.6	+0.7	−6.2±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	−3.2	−0.7	−8.1±2.7

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.6±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (3016 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Katie	Value
FH through the middle	41%	−3.2	+1.2	+2.0	±0.0±2.5
FH crosscourt	40%	+0.5	−0.6	+0.2	+0.2±3.7
FH down the line	17%	−0.6	−1.4	+2.7	+0.7±4.8
FH slice through the middle	1%	−15.2	±0.0	±0.0	−15.2±1.6
FH slice crosscourt	1%	−14.9	−0.1	±0.0	−15.0±1.5

Lean FH down the line: +0.9±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (1030 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Katie	Value
BH crosscourt	47%	+1.5	+1.2	+1.0	+3.7±2.9
BH through the middle	33%	−2.6	+0.2	+0.5	−1.9±2.3
BH down the line	19%	−0.5	+4.4	+2.3	+6.2±4.2
FH inside-in	1%	+0.7	−3.3	+0.2	−2.4±4.3
FH through the middle	0%	−2.7	−1.1	+2.0	−1.8±2.2

Lean BH down the line: +4.0±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (1717 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 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.

Katie Volynets

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return	+4.1±3.2	+5.4	−1.3
FH to their forehand · return	+3.5±3.6	+3.9	−0.4
BH to their backhand · return +1	+3.4±3.5	+3.5	±0.0
BH to their forehand · return +1	+3.4±5.3	+4.6	−1.1
BH to their backhand · serve +1	+3.4±3.6	+3.4	−0.1
BH to the middle · rally	+3.3±1.4	+2.9	+0.3

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	−4.2±4.7	−2.6	−1.6
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−3.3±4.7	+1.2	−4.5
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−1.9±3.5	−0.1	−1.8
BH to their forehand · return	−1.8±4.3	+0.1	−2.0
FH to their backhand · rally	−0.7±2.4	+1.0	−1.7

Iga Swiatek

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return	+7.6±5.0	+3.5	+4.1
BH to their forehand · return +1	+6.0±5.3	+4.9	+1.1
FH to their forehand · return +1	+5.5±3.3	+1.9	+3.6
BH to their backhand · return	+5.3±3.1	+1.2	+4.1
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+5.1±5.3	+4.6	+0.5
FH to their forehand · return	+5.0±3.3	+0.1	+5.0

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−4.7±3.8	−4.3	−0.4
BH slice to the middle · rally	−4.2±3.2	−2.1	−2.1
FH to the middle · serve +1	−0.6±2.2	−0.3	−0.3
FH to their backhand · serve +1	−0.1±3.5	+2.2	−2.3
FH to their forehand · rally	+0.1±1.7	+0.5	−0.4

Against Iga Swiatek-like opponents

Katie Volynets v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	55.8%	44.0%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Anastasia Potapova, Karolina Pliskova, Anna Kalinskaya, Anna Blinkova, Ekaterina Alexandrova, Sorana Cirstea, Shuai Zhang, Varvara Gracheva, Anett Kontaveit, Eugenie Bouchard. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.