RallyIQ

Game plan

Lesia Tsurenko v Paula Badosa

Every number combines what Lesia Tsurenko does well with what Paula Badosa allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Lesia Tsurenko wins, best of 3 25%90%: 4%–67% · best of 5: 20%
Serve points won 50.5% / 55.6% Lesia / Paula · tour 58.1%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 26%serve 51.1% / 55.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Lesia Tsurenko's record against Paula Badosa's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −16.6 on serve, +5.4 on return vs expectation (127 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

CareerLesiaPaula
Direction choice−0.24 ±0.13
better than 14%
−0.24 ±0.05
better than 13%
Shot selection−0.07 ±0.18
better than 37%
+0.29 ±0.09
better than 77%
Execution+0.30 ±0.65
better than 72%
+0.75 ±0.35
better than 86%
Points left on the table2.55 ±0.10
lower than 59%
2.83 ±0.08
lower than 22%

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: Lesia Tsurenko +0.67, Paula Badosa +1.55. 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.

Lesia Tsurenko serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowLesia winsv PaulaMatchupOptimal
Wide30%62%67%63.3%±7.345% ▲
Body42%51%54%47.4%±7.327% ▼
T28%65%65%61.5%±8.128%

Optimal v Paula Badosa: +0.9±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +7.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowLesia winsv PaulaMatchupOptimal
Wide38%59%62%54.9%±7.639%
Body43%49%55%47.7%±8.028% ▼
T18%62%62%59.4%±9.133% ▲

Optimal v Paula Badosa: +0.6±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +6.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Paula Badosa serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowPaula winsv LesiaMatchupOptimal
Wide47%67%63%63.8%±6.348%
Body19%62%55%59.3%±9.34% ▼
T33%73%70%75.3%±6.648% ▲

Optimal v Lesia Tsurenko: +0.7±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +8.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowPaula winsv LesiaMatchupOptimal
Wide26%67%64%65.4%±7.438% ▲
Body16%53%49%45.7%±9.81% ▼
T58%72%59%66.4%±6.661% ▲

Optimal v Lesia Tsurenko: +1.5±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.5 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.

Lesia Tsurenko returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PaulaValue
FH through the middle43%+4.2−0.4+1.2+5.0±2.4
FH crosscourt21%+5.3+0.3−1.4+4.2±4.0
FH slice through the middle14%−6.7+1.1+0.5−5.0±2.4
FH down the line13%+1.5+0.2−0.5+1.2±4.3
FH slice down the line5%−10.5−0.8+0.2−11.0±3.1

Lean FH through the middle: +3.4±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (297 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PaulaValue
BH through the middle47%+6.0−2.5−0.9+2.6±2.4
BH crosscourt19%+7.7+2.7−0.1+10.3±3.4
BH down the line14%+2.2−0.3−2.7−0.9±4.4
BH slice through the middle12%−6.2−0.2−0.9−7.3±2.5
BH slice crosscourt4%−4.2−0.5−0.8−5.5±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +9.0±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (217 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PaulaValue
FH through the middle46%−3.2+0.5+1.4−1.2±2.8
FH crosscourt38%+0.5+1.2+0.7+2.4±4.2
FH down the line16%−0.6+0.8+0.9+1.2±4.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.9±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (92 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PaulaValue
BH through the middle43%−2.6+1.4+2.0+0.8±2.4
BH crosscourt31%+1.5−1.9−0.3−0.7±3.3
BH down the line26%−0.5−1.3−1.7−3.6±4.9

Lean BH through the middle: +1.6±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (112 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Paula Badosa returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LesiaValue
FH through the middle45%+4.2+0.5+0.6+5.2±2.5
FH down the line21%+1.5+1.4+0.4+3.4±4.4
FH crosscourt15%+5.3+0.1+1.1+6.4±4.1
FH slice through the middle12%−6.7−0.7−1.7−9.1±2.2
FH slice crosscourt4%−6.6+1.1±0.0−5.6±1.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.9±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (726 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LesiaValue
BH through the middle49%+6.0+1.3+0.9+8.3±2.1
BH crosscourt24%+7.7+1.9+2.0+11.6±3.2
BH down the line16%+2.2+4.0+2.3+8.5±4.5
BH slice through the middle7%−6.2−0.4−1.7−8.3±2.4
BH slice crosscourt2%−4.2+0.5−1.1−4.7±2.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.4±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (767 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LesiaValue
FH through the middle54%−3.2+1.0−2.6−4.8±3.0
FH crosscourt30%+0.5−0.8+2.2+1.9±4.5
FH down the line13%−0.6−2.2+3.2+0.5±5.2
FH slice through the middle3%−15.2+0.6±0.0−14.6±1.2

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.3±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (217 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LesiaValue
BH through the middle45%−2.6+2.0−2.4−3.0±2.5
BH crosscourt38%+1.5+3.3+1.8+6.6±3.4
BH down the line8%−0.5+0.7+0.5+0.6±5.1
FH through the middle4%−2.7−1.1−2.6−6.4±2.5
FH inside-out3%+1.4+0.8+3.2+5.4±4.0

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.4±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (450 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 grass. Each player's grass record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Lesia Tsurenko

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return +1+4.8±5.3+3.8+1.0
BH to their forehand · rally+4.7±5.6+3.4+1.3
BH to their forehand · serve +1+4.6±5.6+3.8+0.8
BH to the middle · rally+3.4±2.9+2.6+0.9
BH slice to the middle · rally+2.6±3.3+1.0+1.6
BH to the middle · return +1+2.5±3.1+2.7−0.2

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1−3.3±5.3−1.3−2.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1−3.2±5.5−4.8+1.6
BH to their forehand · return−2.6±5.2+0.1−2.8
BH to their backhand · return +1−1.0±4.1±0.0−0.9
FH to their backhand · return +1−0.7±4.8−2.2+1.5

Paula Badosa

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return+7.4±5.8+3.6+3.9
BH to their backhand · return+7.3±4.6+3.6+3.7
FH to the middle · rally+6.2±3.3+1.8+4.4
BH to the middle · return+5.0±3.5+2.9+2.2
FH to their forehand · serve +1+5.0±5.3+4.5+0.5
FH to their forehand · return +1+4.9±5.1+2.6+2.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1−4.9±5.3+0.8−5.8
BH to their forehand · return +1−3.5±5.6−3.1−0.4
BH to their forehand · serve +1−3.4±4.4−2.8−0.6
BH to their backhand · return +1−2.5±4.8+0.4−2.9
FH to their backhand · return +1−1.4±5.6−1.8+0.4

Against Paula Badosa-like opponents

Lesia Tsurenko vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–50.9%45.4%
Players most similar to Paula Badosa1 39.0%54.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Coco Gauff, Marie Bouzkova, Kimberly Birrell, Jaqueline Cristian, Anna Bondar, Lin Zhu, Qiang Wang, Jennifer Brady, Carla Suarez Navarro, Louisa Chirico. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.