Game plan

Lindsay Davenport v Karolina Pliskova

Every number combines what Lindsay Davenport does well with what Karolina Pliskova allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Lindsay Davenport wins, best of 3 77%90%: 44%–95% · best of 5: 83%

Serve points won 60.6% / 54.9% Lindsay / Karolina · tour 55.0%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 78%serve 60.3% / 54.5%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Lindsay Davenport's record against Karolina Pliskova's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +5.4 on serve, −5.9 on return vs expectation (207 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	Lindsay	Karolina
Direction choice	+0.45 ±0.06 better than 98%	+0.15 ±0.05 better than 80%
Shot selection	+0.31 ±0.10 better than 79%	−0.12 ±0.08 better than 34%
Execution	−0.13 ±0.28 better than 55%	−0.01 ±0.35 better than 60%
Points left on the table	2.18 ±0.10 lower than 95%	2.45 ±0.06 lower than 70%

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.

Lindsay Davenport serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Lindsay wins	v Karolina	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	66%	70%	69.4%±4.4	59% ▲
Body	8%	57%	56%	56.1%±8.1	0% ▼
T	48%	66%	69%	68.0%±4.5	41% ▼

Optimal v Karolina Pliskova: +0.5±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Lindsay wins	v Karolina	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	42%	70%	68%	72.6%±4.6	35% ▼
Body	5%	57%	55%	55.1%±10.4	0% ▼
T	53%	67%	69%	70.9%±4.2	65% ▲

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

Karolina Pliskova serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Karolina wins	v Lindsay	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	46%	67%	66%	67.4%±4.1	31% ▼
Body	15%	63%	60%	65.1%±6.8	15%
T	39%	75%	66%	72.7%±4.5	54% ▲

Optimal v Lindsay Davenport: +0.4±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Karolina wins	v Lindsay	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	74%	68%	75.6%±4.3	59% ▲
Body	10%	55%	56%	54.5%±8.2	0% ▼
T	45%	70%	62%	67.8%±4.3	41% ▼

Optimal v Lindsay Davenport: +0.7±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.

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.

Lindsay Davenport returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karolina	Value
FH through the middle	46%	+4.2	−1.1	−0.4	+2.6±1.8
FH crosscourt	40%	+5.3	+0.6	−0.8	+5.1±2.9
FH down the line	13%	+1.5	−2.4	−2.9	−3.7±4.0
BH through the middle	2%	+5.2	−0.3	−0.6	+4.3±2.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.3±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (817 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karolina	Value
BH through the middle	57%	+6.0	−3.2	−0.6	+2.2±1.8
BH crosscourt	32%	+7.7	−1.5	−0.4	+5.9±2.9
BH down the line	8%	+2.2	+0.2	+1.2	+3.5±4.3
BH slice through the middle	2%	−6.2	−2.0	−2.1	−10.3±2.1
BH slice crosscourt	1%	−4.2	+1.5	−1.5	−4.2±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.9±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (569 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karolina	Value
FH crosscourt	41%	+0.5	−1.9	−0.6	−2.0±3.8
FH through the middle	35%	−3.2	−0.6	−1.6	−5.4±2.6
FH down the line	22%	−0.6	−1.9	−1.4	−3.8±5.0
BH through the middle	2%	−1.0	+0.5	−0.8	−1.2±1.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.5±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (332 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Karolina	Value
BH crosscourt	50%	+1.5	+0.7	+0.6	+2.7±2.7
BH through the middle	30%	−2.6	−2.2	−0.8	−5.6±2.2
BH down the line	19%	−0.5	+1.3	−0.3	+0.5±4.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.0±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (310 returns charted)

Karolina Pliskova returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Lindsay	Value
FH through the middle	50%	+4.2	−2.0	−2.1	+0.1±1.9
FH down the line	22%	+1.5	−0.7	+0.8	+1.6±3.6
FH crosscourt	19%	+5.3	−3.9	+1.1	+2.6±3.8
FH slice through the middle	5%	−6.7	−0.6	+0.9	−6.3±2.6
FH slice crosscourt	3%	−6.6	−1.2	+1.6	−6.3±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.4±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (1107 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Lindsay	Value
BH through the middle	43%	+6.0	+1.1	−2.6	+4.5±2.0
BH crosscourt	23%	+7.7	−0.5	−3.6	+3.6±3.1
BH down the line	15%	+2.2	+0.1	+0.7	+2.9±4.2
BH slice through the middle	11%	−6.2	−0.5	+1.7	−5.0±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	5%	−4.2	−0.9	+1.5	−3.6±3.0

Lean BH through the middle: +2.4±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (1161 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Lindsay	Value
FH through the middle	44%	−3.2	−2.2	−0.7	−6.1±2.8
FH down the line	30%	−0.6	+3.8	+1.4	+4.6±5.1
FH crosscourt	24%	+0.5	−3.5	−0.5	−3.4±4.4
FH slice through the middle	2%	−15.2	−0.1	−0.2	−15.5±1.6

Lean FH down the line: +7.1±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (248 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Lindsay	Value
BH crosscourt	41%	+1.5	−1.4	−2.4	−2.3±2.8
BH through the middle	36%	−2.6	+0.5	+0.2	−1.9±2.1
BH down the line	17%	−0.5	−1.7	+2.8	+0.6±4.9
FH inside-in	3%	+0.7	−1.8	−0.5	−1.5±4.4
FH through the middle	2%	−2.7	+0.9	−0.7	−2.5±2.3

Lean BH down the line: +2.1±4.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (664 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 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.

Lindsay Davenport

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return +1	+7.4±5.5	+0.9	+6.5
FH volley to their forehand · rally	+6.6±5.7	+2.6	+4.0
FH to their forehand · return +1	+3.9±4.5	+2.0	+2.0
FH to their forehand · rally	+2.4±4.1	+0.8	+1.6
BH to their backhand · return	+1.3±3.7	+2.5	−1.1
BH to their backhand · serve +1	+0.4±4.0	+1.0	−0.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	−7.5±4.2	−3.2	−4.3
FH to their backhand · return +1	−7.2±4.7	−3.4	−3.8
FH to their backhand · rally	−4.8±4.2	−4.1	−0.7
BH to the middle · return	−4.0±2.8	−1.6	−2.5
BH to the middle · rally	−3.8±2.8	−1.0	−2.8

Karolina Pliskova

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+5.7±4.8	+2.9	+2.8
BH slice to their backhand · return +1	+5.4±3.2	+2.9	+2.6
BH to their forehand · return +1	+2.8±5.0	+2.7	+0.1
BH to the middle · return +1	+2.6±2.6	+2.2	+0.4
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+2.2±4.4	−1.4	+3.6
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+1.9±4.7	+1.1	+0.7

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return	−8.2±3.7	−2.1	−6.1
FH to their forehand · rally	−5.4±4.1	−1.9	−3.5
FH to their backhand · rally	−5.4±4.2	−5.1	−0.3
FH to the middle · return	−4.3±3.0	−3.0	−1.3
BH to the middle · return	−3.9±2.7	−1.7	−2.2

Against Karolina Pliskova-like opponents

Lindsay Davenport v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	58.3%	43.5%
Players most similar to Karolina Pliskova	1	62.1%	37.5%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Naomi Osaka, Anastasia Potapova, Belinda Bencic, Ekaterina Alexandrova, Sorana Cirstea, Shuai Zhang, Veronika Kudermetova, Shelby Rogers, Anett Kontaveit, Maria Sharapova. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.