RallyIQ

Game plan

Learner Tien v Taylor Fritz

Every number combines what Learner Tien does well with what Taylor Fritz allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Learner Tien wins, best of 3 22%90%: 7%–48% · best of 5: 16%
Serve points won 62.4% / 68.9% Learner / Taylor · tour 63.5%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 24%serve 62.9% / 68.7%

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 Learner Tien's record against Taylor Fritz's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −2.1 on serve, −0.6 on return vs expectation (929 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

CareerLearnerTaylor
Direction choice+0.07 ±0.09
better than 74%
+0.03 ±0.04
better than 64%
Shot selection−0.29 ±0.17
better than 24%
−0.11 ±0.06
better than 38%
Execution+0.47 ±0.60
better than 83%
+0.66 ±0.27
better than 88%
Points left on the table2.54 ±0.11
lower than 56%
2.35 ±0.06
lower than 78%

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: Learner Tien +0.76, Taylor Fritz −0.38. 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.

Learner Tien serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowLearner winsv TaylorMatchupOptimal
Wide44%69%74%70.0%±4.957% ▲
Body9%65%63%64.9%±8.80% ▼
T47%62%77%65.3%±4.743% ▼

Optimal v Taylor Fritz: +0.6±0.6 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 serveNowLearner winsv TaylorMatchupOptimal
Wide51%70%76%73.5%±4.164% ▲
Body9%71%63%70.6%±8.80% ▼
T40%78%74%79.7%±4.536% ▼

Optimal v Taylor Fritz: +0.8±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +4.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Taylor Fritz serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowTaylor winsv LearnerMatchupOptimal
Wide48%76%69%72.9%±4.138% ▼
Body3%66%55%57.1%±10.80% ▼
T49%82%76%83.0%±3.462% ▲

Optimal v Learner Tien: +0.4±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +5.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowTaylor winsv LearnerMatchupOptimal
Wide52%80%74%80.9%±3.742% ▼
Body4%62%58%56.7%±10.70% ▼
T45%76%67%70.7%±4.858% ▲

Optimal v Learner Tien: +0.3±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +5.4 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.

Learner Tien returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TaylorValue
FH through the middle30%+4.3+0.8−0.6+4.4±2.2
FH slice through the middle23%−4.2+0.1±0.0−4.1±1.9
FH crosscourt17%+5.5+2.9−0.9+7.5±3.7
FH slice crosscourt16%−4.3+2.4+1.3−0.7±2.7
FH down the line8%+1.7+0.1−0.6+1.1±3.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.4±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (420 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TaylorValue
BH through the middle39%+6.4−0.2+0.6+6.8±1.9
BH crosscourt25%+8.8−0.9−4.5+3.4±3.1
BH down the line16%+4.2+2.1−0.5+5.8±3.9
BH slice through the middle11%−4.2−1.4−0.3−5.8±2.1
BH slice down the line6%−8.4+0.5−1.8−9.7±3.1

Lean BH through the middle: +3.6±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (497 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TaylorValue
FH through the middle45%−3.5−1.1+0.4−4.2±2.3
FH crosscourt39%−0.2+2.7−1.6+0.8±3.8
FH down the line13%−1.8+0.4−1.1−2.4±3.9
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7+0.5+0.6−11.6±2.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.1±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (155 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TaylorValue
BH through the middle42%−2.9+0.7+0.8−1.3±1.9
BH crosscourt30%+1.0+1.2−0.4+1.8±2.9
BH down the line15%−0.2−0.1−0.9−1.2±3.9
FH through the middle7%−2.9+1.2+0.4−1.3±1.7
FH inside-in5%+0.6±0.0−1.6−1.1±3.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.2±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (257 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Taylor Fritz returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LearnerValue
FH through the middle46%+4.3+1.3−1.2+4.3±2.0
FH down the line22%+1.7+0.4−5.5−3.5±3.7
FH slice through the middle12%−4.2+0.1−1.4−5.4±2.0
FH crosscourt10%+5.5+1.8+6.0+13.3±3.7
FH slice down the line7%−4.3+0.4−1.2−5.1±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +11.7±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (2456 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LearnerValue
BH through the middle47%+6.4+2.1+2.7+11.3±1.7
BH crosscourt29%+8.8−1.8+3.8+10.8±2.6
BH down the line9%+4.2+1.7+0.9+6.8±4.2
BH slice through the middle9%−4.2−2.5+0.9−5.8±2.3
BH slice crosscourt3%+0.5−3.9−1.1−4.5±3.0

Lean BH through the middle: +3.3±1.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (2022 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LearnerValue
FH through the middle51%−3.5−0.7+0.3−3.9±2.4
FH down the line25%−1.8−3.4−1.0−6.2±4.2
FH crosscourt14%−0.2+1.8±0.0+1.5±4.3
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7−1.6−0.8−15.1±2.2
FH slice down the line3%−9.4+1.8±0.0−7.6±2.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.8±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (707 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LearnerValue
BH through the middle42%−2.9+0.8+1.5−0.6±1.7
BH crosscourt34%+1.0−0.8+1.3+1.5±2.5
BH down the line13%−0.2−1.3+0.1−1.4±4.6
FH through the middle6%−2.9+0.2+0.3−2.4±2.4
FH inside-in3%+0.6−0.5±0.0±0.0±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.7±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1417 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.

Learner Tien

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · rally+5.3±2.1+3.7+1.6
BH slice to their forehand · rally+5.3±2.8+3.1+2.2
BH to the middle · serve +1+4.7±2.0+4.3+0.4
BH to their forehand · serve +1+3.4±3.6+2.0+1.5
FH slice to their backhand · return+3.3±2.9+1.5+1.8
FH slice to their backhand · rally+2.9±3.4+2.2+0.8

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their backhand · rally−3.1±1.9−3.8+0.7
BH to their backhand · return +1−2.6±2.7−1.3−1.3
FH to their forehand · return−1.8±3.6−0.8−1.1
BH to their backhand · return−1.4±2.4+0.3−1.7
FH to their backhand · return +1−1.1±2.8+1.4−2.5

Taylor Fritz

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · return+4.4±1.3+1.7+2.7
FH to their backhand · return+3.9±3.0−1.3+5.2
BH to their forehand · return+3.7±3.0+0.4+3.2
BH to their forehand · rally+3.0±2.1+1.3+1.7
BH to their forehand · return +1+2.8±3.9+0.5+2.3
BH to the middle · rally+2.1±1.1+0.3+1.8

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their backhand · rally−5.5±2.3−3.7−1.8
BH slice to the middle · rally−4.6±2.0−3.9−0.7
BH to their backhand · rally−3.4±1.5−0.1−3.3
BH to their backhand · serve +1−3.3±2.5−0.6−2.7
FH to their forehand · return−3.2±3.7+1.6−4.8

Against Taylor Fritz-like opponents

Learner Tien vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–62.2%38.5%
Players most similar to Taylor Fritz5 60.1%38.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Jannik Sinner, Gael Monfils, Karen Khachanov, Marcos Giron, Alexander Shevchenko, Rinky Hijikata, Miomir Kecmanovic, Arthur Cazaux, Borna Coric, Andreas Seppi. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.