Game plan

Kim Clijsters v Angelique Kerber

Every number combines what Kim Clijsters does well with what Angelique Kerber allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Kim Clijsters wins, best of 3 87%90%: 77%–93% · best of 5: 92%

Serve points won 59.9% / 51.4% Kim / Angelique · tour 56.4%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 87%serve 59.9% / 51.4%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Kim Clijsters's record against Angelique Kerber'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	Kim	Angelique
Direction choice	+0.44 ±0.06 better than 98%	+0.18 ±0.05 better than 83%
Shot selection	−0.25 ±0.09 better than 24%	+0.05 ±0.08 better than 50%
Execution	+0.31 ±0.39 better than 73%	+1.65 ±0.29 better than 97%
Points left on the table	2.06 ±0.09 lower than 98%	2.57 ±0.07 lower than 56%

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.

Kim Clijsters serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Kim wins	v Angelique	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	58%	67%	69%	69.8%±3.7	60% ▲
Body	9%	60%	59%	62.2%±7.4	0% ▼
T	32%	70%	63%	65.9%±5.1	40% ▲

Optimal v Angelique Kerber: +0.4±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Kim wins	v Angelique	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	43%	66%	67%	68.3%±4.6	58% ▲
Body	12%	56%	58%	57.5%±6.9	13%
T	44%	61%	60%	56.0%±4.5	29% ▼

Optimal v Angelique Kerber: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +6.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Angelique Kerber serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Angelique wins	v Kim	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	36%	65%	64%	63.3%±4.7	51% ▲
Body	27%	56%	56%	53.9%±6.5	27%
T	37%	59%	64%	54.8%±4.9	22% ▼

Optimal v Kim Clijsters: +0.4±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +5.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Angelique wins	v Kim	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	62%	62%	62%	57.8%±4.7	63%
Body	19%	54%	52%	49.8%±7.0	4% ▼
T	18%	71%	61%	67.8%±5.7	33% ▲

Optimal v Kim Clijsters: +0.8±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +9.8 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.

Kim Clijsters returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
FH through the middle	38%	+4.2	+0.9	+1.1	+6.2±1.9
FH crosscourt	26%	+5.3	+0.8	+3.8	+9.9±3.2
FH down the line	16%	+1.5	+3.0	−0.6	+4.0±3.9
FH slice through the middle	11%	−6.7	+0.3	−1.0	−7.5±2.5
FH slice crosscourt	6%	−6.6	+2.4	+1.0	−3.3±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.6±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (965 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
BH through the middle	42%	+6.0	−0.5	+1.3	+6.8±1.7
BH crosscourt	33%	+7.7	−1.9	+6.5	+12.3±2.5
BH slice through the middle	11%	−6.2	−1.0	+0.6	−6.6±2.5
BH down the line	7%	+2.2	−2.5	−1.7	−2.0±4.0
BH slice crosscourt	5%	−4.2	−1.5	+2.1	−3.5±3.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.0±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (707 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
FH crosscourt	37%	+0.5	−1.1	+2.0	+1.4±4.2
FH through the middle	29%	−3.2	+0.6	+2.0	−0.5±2.8
FH down the line	21%	−0.6	−0.4	+2.4	+1.4±5.1
BH through the middle	6%	−1.0	+0.3	−0.1	−0.8±1.8
FH slice through the middle	4%	−15.2	+0.9	±0.0	−14.3±1.4

Lean FH down the line: +1.5±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (311 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Angelique	Value
BH crosscourt	51%	+1.5	+0.2	+3.7	+5.4±2.6
BH through the middle	35%	−2.6	−0.2	−0.1	−2.9±1.9
BH down the line	12%	−0.5	+0.8	+0.4	+0.6±4.6
BH slice through the middle	1%	−11.7	±0.0	+1.2	−10.4±1.9
FH inside-out	1%	+1.4	±0.0	+2.4	+3.8±3.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.7±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (555 returns charted)

Angelique Kerber returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kim	Value
FH through the middle	53%	+4.2	+2.6	−0.4	+6.3±1.7
FH crosscourt	34%	+5.3	+5.1	+0.3	+10.7±3.0
FH down the line	11%	+1.5	+5.5	−1.9	+5.1±4.0
FH slice through the middle	1%	−6.7	−0.1	+2.4	−4.4±2.2
BH through the middle	1%	+5.2	+1.3	−0.8	+5.8±1.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.2±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (1007 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kim	Value
BH through the middle	48%	+6.0	+1.1	−0.8	+6.4±1.7
BH crosscourt	30%	+7.7	−0.4	−0.9	+6.5±2.9
BH down the line	12%	+2.2	+7.3	−2.9	+6.6±3.7
BH slice through the middle	5%	−6.2	−0.7	+1.7	−5.2±2.5
BH slice crosscourt	2%	−4.2	−0.4	−0.9	−5.4±2.9

Lean BH down the line: +1.2±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (1499 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kim	Value
FH crosscourt	39%	+0.5	−1.4	−0.5	−1.3±4.0
FH down the line	32%	−0.6	+1.3	−0.5	+0.2±4.7
FH through the middle	28%	−3.2	+0.3	−1.3	−4.2±2.7

Lean FH down the line: +1.9±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (285 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kim	Value
BH crosscourt	39%	+1.5	+2.8	+2.5	+6.7±3.2
BH through the middle	37%	−2.6	+1.3	−0.4	−1.7±2.2
BH down the line	20%	−0.5	+4.0	+0.2	+3.6±4.7
FH inside-in	1%	+0.7	−0.9	−0.5	−0.6±3.7
FH through the middle	1%	−2.7	+1.2	−1.3	−2.9±1.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.0±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (646 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.

Kim Clijsters

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH volley to their backhand · rally	+13.1±8.0	+3.7	+9.4
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+7.5±4.5	+2.4	+5.1
BH to their forehand · return	+5.7±4.2	−0.8	+6.5
FH to their backhand · return	+5.5±4.1	+0.3	+5.2
FH to the middle · return	+4.7±1.9	+2.1	+2.6
FH to their backhand · rally	+4.6±2.0	+1.5	+3.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return +1	−4.4±3.1	−1.8	−2.6
FH slice to their forehand · rally	−2.7±5.3	+3.6	−6.3
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−2.4±3.1	−1.3	−1.1
BH to their backhand · return	−2.2±2.4	−0.4	−1.8
BH slice to the middle · rally	−1.6±2.4	−2.6	+0.9

Angelique Kerber

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to the middle · rally	+5.2±2.3	+2.6	+2.6
BH to their forehand · return	+5.0±3.9	+4.1	+1.0
FH to the middle · return +1	+4.8±2.7	+2.2	+2.5
FH to their backhand · return	+4.3±3.1	+4.1	+0.2
FH slice to the middle · rally	+2.9±3.7	+1.7	+1.2
BH to the middle · serve +1	+2.6±1.9	+1.9	+0.8

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
Smash to their forehand · rally	−16.6±7.8	−7.5	−9.2
BH to their backhand · return +1	−6.6±3.3	−2.9	−3.7
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−5.7±4.7	+3.7	−9.4
FH volley to their forehand · rally	−4.4±8.4	−0.2	−4.2
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−4.0±3.1	−3.0	−1.0

Against Angelique Kerber-like opponents

Kim Clijsters v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	58.2%	46.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Cristina Bucsa, Arantxa Rus, Leylah Fernandez, Magda Linette, Sara Bejlek, Olga Danilovic, Anhelina Kalinina, Brenda Fruhvirtova, Anna Lena Friedsam, Flavia Pennetta. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.