RallyIQ

Game plan

Kiki Bertens v Marta Kostyuk

Every number combines what Kiki Bertens does well with what Marta Kostyuk allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Kiki Bertens wins, best of 3 43%90%: 30%–57% · best of 5: 42%
Serve points won 58.1% / 59.4% Kiki / Marta · tour 56.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 47%serve 57.9% / 58.5%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Kiki Bertens's record against Marta Kostyuk's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +2.1 on serve, −3.3 on return vs expectation (452 points); head-to-head: −0.2 on serve, −10.6 on return vs expectation (144 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

CareerKikiMarta
Direction choice+0.08 ±0.04
better than 70%
−0.06 ±0.05
better than 43%
Shot selection−0.41 ±0.09
better than 17%
+0.13 ±0.09
better than 60%
Execution−0.19 ±0.21
better than 50%
−0.34 ±0.29
better than 41%
Points left on the table2.67 ±0.06
lower than 38%
2.69 ±0.07
lower than 36%

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.

Kiki Bertens serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowKiki winsv MartaMatchupOptimal
Wide49%71%63%68.8%±3.446% ▼
Body9%62%57%61.2%±6.10% ▼
T42%70%68%70.7%±3.854% ▲

Optimal v Marta Kostyuk: +0.2±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowKiki winsv MartaMatchupOptimal
Wide56%70%64%68.5%±3.771% ▲
Body5%50%58%52.0%±7.70% ▼
T39%68%61%64.6%±3.929% ▼

Optimal v Marta Kostyuk: +0.4±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Marta Kostyuk serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowMarta winsv KikiMatchupOptimal
Wide36%70%66%70.6%±3.651% ▲
Body24%60%59%61.5%±4.99% ▼
T40%72%64%68.6%±4.040%

Optimal v Kiki Bertens: +1.1±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowMarta winsv KikiMatchupOptimal
Wide47%73%63%70.2%±3.762% ▲
Body26%58%58%59.8%±5.111% ▼
T27%64%64%64.0%±4.727%

Optimal v Kiki Bertens: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.3 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.

Kiki Bertens returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MartaValue
FH through the middle46%+4.2+1.8+0.7+6.7±1.6
FH crosscourt16%+5.3+0.4−3.9+1.8±3.2
FH slice through the middle15%−6.7−4.0−0.7−11.4±2.1
FH down the line12%+1.5−1.2−2.7−2.4±3.7
FH slice crosscourt10%−6.6+1.5−3.3−8.4±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +6.3±1.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (1802 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MartaValue
BH through the middle43%+6.0±0.0−0.2+5.9±1.4
BH crosscourt18%+7.7+0.2−1.5+6.5±2.4
BH slice through the middle15%−6.2−0.2−2.3−8.7±2.1
BH down the line14%+2.2−2.0−2.8−2.6±3.5
BH slice crosscourt5%−4.2−0.9−3.6−8.6±3.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.5±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (2080 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MartaValue
FH through the middle45%−3.2+1.1+0.3−1.8±2.2
FH crosscourt35%+0.5−1.1−2.3−2.8±3.4
FH down the line15%−0.6−0.8−2.4−3.7±4.7
FH slice through the middle3%−15.2+0.2+0.3−14.7±2.1
FH slice crosscourt1%−14.9+0.9−1.3−15.3±2.0

Lean FH through the middle: +1.2±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (483 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MartaValue
BH through the middle40%−2.6−0.4−0.1−3.1±1.9
BH crosscourt32%+1.5−0.4−2.8−1.7±2.7
FH through the middle9%−2.7−0.4+0.3−2.7±2.1
FH inside-in8%+0.7+1.3−2.3−0.3±4.0
BH down the line7%−0.5−2.9−1.3−4.7±5.1

Lean FH inside-in: +2.2±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1083 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Marta Kostyuk returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv KikiValue
FH through the middle41%+4.2+0.6−1.0+3.7±1.6
FH crosscourt19%+5.3+0.5+0.5+6.3±3.1
FH slice through the middle17%−6.7+1.4−0.7−6.0±1.9
FH down the line12%+1.5+4.8−3.8+2.5±3.7
FH slice crosscourt8%−6.6+0.9−0.3−6.0±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.1±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (1346 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv KikiValue
BH through the middle52%+6.0−0.2−0.8+5.0±1.5
BH crosscourt29%+7.7−2.1−2.2+3.4±2.4
BH down the line10%+2.2−1.1−4.8−3.7±4.0
BH slice through the middle4%−6.2−0.1−0.4−6.6±2.2
BH slice crosscourt3%−4.2−0.7−3.0−7.8±2.8

Lean BH through the middle: +2.5±1.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (969 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv KikiValue
FH through the middle41%−3.2+1.5+0.1−1.6±2.3
FH crosscourt28%+0.5−1.0−4.5−5.0±3.8
FH down the line25%−0.6+0.7−2.3−2.2±4.4
FH slice through the middle4%−15.2+0.6−0.4−15.0±2.2
FH slice crosscourt2%−14.9+0.6−0.8−15.1±2.1

Lean FH through the middle: +1.9±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (362 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv KikiValue
BH through the middle46%−2.6−2.6−0.9−6.1±1.8
BH crosscourt30%+1.5−1.1−2.1−1.8±2.7
BH down the line19%−0.5+1.0−2.9−2.4±4.4
FH inside-out2%+1.4±0.0−2.3−1.0±3.1
FH through the middle1%−2.7−0.2+0.1−2.8±1.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.1±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (471 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.

Kiki Bertens

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to their backhand · rally+7.1±8.2+4.7+2.4
BH to the middle · return +1+2.7±2.0+0.9+1.7
BH to the middle · serve +1+2.1±2.0+1.4+0.6
BH to the middle · return+1.3±1.5−0.1+1.4
BH volley to their backhand · rally+1.1±8.6+2.8−1.8
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.0±2.6+1.0±0.0

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return−8.0±3.5−3.4−4.6
BH to their forehand · return−7.7±4.0−3.9−3.9
FH to their forehand · return−6.8±3.0−2.8−4.0
BH to their forehand · serve +1−6.1±4.7−4.0−2.1
FH slice to the middle · rally−5.9±3.2−1.3−4.6

Marta Kostyuk

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return +1+3.1±2.3+2.2+0.9
FH to their backhand · return +1+2.8±3.5+4.1−1.3
FH to the middle · serve +1+2.5±1.8+2.1+0.5
BH lob to the middle · rally+2.3±4.1+1.7+0.5
FH to their forehand · return +1+2.2±2.8+1.7+0.5
FH slice to the middle · return +1+1.7±3.8+3.0−1.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their forehand · rally−6.2±4.5−5.8−0.4
BH to their forehand · return−6.2±3.8−0.3−5.9
BH to their forehand · return +1−5.2±5.2−5.8+0.7
BH to their forehand · serve +1−4.6±4.8−3.1−1.5
Smash to their backhand · rally−4.1±8.1−0.3−3.9

Against Marta Kostyuk-like opponents

Kiki Bertens vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–59.9%43.7%
Players most similar to Marta Kostyuk3 61.0%40.2%
Marta Kostyuk (charted head-to-head)1 57.3%31.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Alexandra Eala, Diana Shnaider, Xin Yu Wang, Bianca Andreescu, Leylah Fernandez, Jasmine Paolini, Olga Danilovic, Kaja Juvan, Katie Boulter, Nao Hibino. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head