Game plan

Kristina Mladenovic v Laura Siegemund

Every number combines what Kristina Mladenovic does well with what Laura Siegemund allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Kristina Mladenovic wins, best of 3 57%90%: 26%–85% · best of 5: 59%

Serve points won 54.4% / 53.0% Kristina / Laura · tour 55.0%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 60%serve 54.7% / 52.9%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Kristina Mladenovic's record against Laura Siegemund's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −9.9 on serve, −3.1 on return vs expectation (105 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	Kristina	Laura
Direction choice	+0.11 ±0.08 better than 74%	−0.01 ±0.09 better than 52%
Shot selection	+0.31 ±0.15 better than 79%	−0.15 ±0.31 better than 32%
Execution	−1.28 ±0.74 better than 14%	−1.01 ±0.57 better than 17%
Points left on the table	2.64 ±0.14 lower than 45%	2.66 ±0.08 lower than 41%

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.

Kristina Mladenovic serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Kristina wins	v Laura	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	65%	66%	65.8%±6.7	62% ▲
Body	16%	61%	61%	64.1%±9.6	1% ▼
T	37%	76%	71%	79.0%±6.8	37%

Optimal v Laura Siegemund: +0.8±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +8.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Kristina wins	v Laura	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	37%	66%	67%	67.7%±7.6	37%
Body	25%	53%	53%	49.3%±9.5	10% ▼
T	38%	66%	64%	66.0%±8.0	53% ▲

Optimal v Laura Siegemund: +1.1±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +5.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Laura Siegemund serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Laura wins	v Kristina	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	38%	61%	70%	64.9%±7.8	54% ▲
Body	38%	57%	58%	57.9%±8.6	23% ▼
T	24%	65%	68%	64.8%±8.3	23%

Optimal v Kristina Mladenovic: +0.5±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Laura wins	v Kristina	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	30%	57%	70%	62.0%±8.1	45% ▲
Body	34%	53%	64%	61.6%±9.4	19% ▼
T	36%	59%	65%	60.5%±8.3	36%

Optimal v Kristina Mladenovic: +0.4±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +0.7 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.

Kristina Mladenovic returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Laura	Value
FH through the middle	46%	+4.2	−1.0	+1.0	+4.1±2.6
FH crosscourt	39%	+5.3	−4.4	+0.6	+1.5±3.9
FH down the line	9%	+1.5	−0.6	+1.1	+2.0±4.4
FH slice through the middle	4%	−6.7	+0.1	+0.5	−6.1±2.1
FH slice crosscourt	2%	−6.6	−0.1	+0.7	−6.0±1.6

Lean FH through the middle: +1.8±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (248 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Laura	Value
BH through the middle	42%	+6.0	−1.1	−0.1	+4.9±2.4
BH crosscourt	22%	+7.7	−0.6	−1.0	+6.2±3.4
BH down the line	15%	+2.2	−1.2	−3.5	−2.5±4.6
BH slice through the middle	12%	−6.2	+0.6	−0.4	−6.0±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	6%	−4.2	−0.6	−0.9	−5.7±2.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.7±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (303 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Laura	Value
FH through the middle	47%	−3.2	−0.2	−1.7	−5.0±3.0
FH crosscourt	40%	+0.5	−1.5	−1.7	−2.7±4.4
FH down the line	12%	−0.6	+0.3	−3.1	−3.3±4.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.2±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (89 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Laura	Value
BH through the middle	33%	−2.6	−1.9	−1.1	−5.6±2.8
BH crosscourt	22%	+1.5	−1.2	−1.5	−1.2±3.6
FH through the middle	13%	−2.7	−0.8	−1.7	−5.1±2.6
FH inside-out	11%	+1.4	+3.2	−3.1	+1.5±4.2
FH inside-in	11%	+0.7	−1.3	−1.7	−2.3±4.6

Lean FH inside-out: +4.2±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (237 returns charted)

Laura Siegemund returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kristina	Value
FH through the middle	37%	+4.2	−2.3	−0.3	+1.5±2.8
FH crosscourt	20%	+5.3	−4.3	−0.2	+0.9±4.3
FH down the line	17%	+1.5	+1.4	+0.5	+3.4±4.6
FH slice through the middle	13%	−6.7	−0.8	+0.9	−6.6±2.6
FH slice crosscourt	9%	−6.6	+0.7	+0.6	−5.3±2.5

Lean FH down the line: +3.8±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (385 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kristina	Value
BH through the middle	45%	+6.0	+1.0	+0.4	+7.4±2.6
BH crosscourt	23%	+7.7	−2.1	−2.0	+3.7±3.5
BH slice through the middle	12%	−6.2	−2.8	−1.9	−11.0±2.5
BH down the line	9%	+2.2	−2.0	−1.7	−1.5±4.6
BH slice crosscourt	5%	−4.2	−0.2	−0.8	−5.2±2.7

Lean BH through the middle: +5.6±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (311 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kristina	Value
FH through the middle	34%	−3.2	−1.4	+0.8	−3.8±3.0
FH crosscourt	26%	+0.5	−1.0	+3.7	+3.3±4.3
FH slice crosscourt	15%	−14.9	+0.3	±0.0	−14.6±1.6
FH down the line	14%	−0.6	−0.2	+3.2	+2.5±4.7
FH slice through the middle	10%	−15.2	−0.9	±0.0	−16.1±1.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.2±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (87 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Kristina	Value
BH through the middle	40%	−2.6	−0.5	±0.0	−3.1±2.7
BH crosscourt	36%	+1.5	−1.2	+1.2	+1.5±3.5
BH down the line	20%	−0.5	+3.1	+5.1	+7.7±5.2
FH through the middle	4%	−2.7	+0.4	+0.8	−1.5±2.2

Lean BH down the line: +6.9±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (138 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 clay. Each player's clay record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Kristina Mladenovic

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · rally	+4.2±4.7	+5.8	−1.6
BH to their backhand · return +1	+4.1±4.7	+1.8	+2.3
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+2.8±4.8	+0.7	+2.1
FH to the middle · serve +1	+2.4±3.6	+1.6	+0.7
FH to their forehand · rally	+1.4±4.2	+2.7	−1.3
BH to their backhand · rally	+1.1±4.0	+1.3	−0.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−6.0±6.3	−0.3	−5.7
FH to their backhand · return +1	−5.1±5.6	−4.0	−1.1
FH to the middle · rally	−4.7±3.4	−2.3	−2.4
BH to their forehand · rally	−4.4±6.0	−6.0	+1.6
FH to their forehand · return	−4.1±5.2	−6.0	+1.9

Laura Siegemund

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	+9.1±5.9	+4.8	+4.3
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+2.5±5.0	+1.4	+1.1
FH to the middle · serve +1	+2.3±3.6	+1.5	+0.9
BH to the middle · return	+1.4±3.1	+0.9	+0.5
FH to their backhand · return	+0.9±5.2	+0.8	+0.1
FH to the middle · return +1	±0.0±3.8	−0.7	+0.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · rally	−6.7±4.5	−5.9	−0.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	−5.7±5.6	−4.5	−1.2
FH to their backhand · rally	−5.1±4.5	−1.5	−3.5
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−4.5±4.1	−1.0	−3.6
BH to their forehand · serve +1	−3.9±5.5	−2.2	−1.8

Against Laura Siegemund-like opponents

Kristina Mladenovic v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	54.5%	42.1%
Players most similar to Laura Siegemund	1	46.0%	39.3%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Bianca Andreescu, Camila Osorio, Antonia Ruzic, Aliaksandra Sasnovich, Anastasija Sevastova, Su Wei Hsieh, Kateryna Baindl, Sabine Lisicki, Timea Bacsinszky. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.