RallyIQ

Game plan

Lorenzo Sonego v Matteo Berrettini

Every number combines what Lorenzo Sonego does well with what Matteo Berrettini allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Lorenzo Sonego wins, best of 3 17%90%: 6%–38% · best of 5: 12%
Serve points won 64.2% / 72.1% Lorenzo / Matteo · tour 63.5%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 21%serve 64.9% / 71.8%

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. Both were charted enough in the last three seasons, so those carry the most weight. The result is then nudged by Lorenzo Sonego's record against Matteo Berrettini's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −3.2 on serve, −1.0 on return vs expectation (870 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

CareerLorenzoMatteo
Direction choice−0.13 ±0.09
better than 22%
−0.02 ±0.06
better than 51%
Shot selection+0.12 ±0.22
better than 67%
−0.61 ±0.09
better than 8%
Execution−0.79 ±0.46
better than 33%
+0.03 ±0.36
better than 70%
Points left on the table2.89 ±0.14
lower than 25%
2.71 ±0.09
lower than 39%

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: Lorenzo Sonego −1.97, Matteo Berrettini −0.79. 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.

Lorenzo Sonego serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowLorenzo winsv MatteoMatchupOptimal
Wide56%67%76%70.3%±3.555%
Body12%63%65%65.3%±7.10% ▼
T32%75%75%75.4%±3.945% ▲

Optimal v Matteo Berrettini: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +4.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowLorenzo winsv MatteoMatchupOptimal
Wide46%75%74%75.9%±3.659% ▲
Body15%67%65%69.3%±6.62% ▼
T39%73%71%72.2%±4.239%

Optimal v Matteo Berrettini: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Matteo Berrettini serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowMatteo winsv LorenzoMatchupOptimal
Wide46%79%74%79.7%±3.139% ▼
Body6%68%69%73.3%±7.40% ▼
T48%80%77%82.0%±3.061% ▲

Optimal v Lorenzo Sonego: +0.6±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +1.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowMatteo winsv LorenzoMatchupOptimal
Wide50%79%75%80.6%±3.144% ▼
Body7%68%70%74.0%±7.10% ▼
T43%76%78%81.3%±3.356% ▲

Optimal v Lorenzo Sonego: +0.7±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +0.9 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.

Lorenzo Sonego returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
FH through the middle33%+4.3+1.6−0.2+5.7±2.0
FH slice through the middle23%−4.2+0.7+0.7−2.9±1.8
FH down the line19%+1.7+1.7−1.2+2.2±3.7
FH crosscourt12%+5.5±0.0+1.0+6.5±3.8
FH slice down the line9%−4.3−1.4+1.0−4.7±3.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.8±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (725 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
BH through the middle41%+6.4+0.2+1.0+7.6±1.8
BH crosscourt23%+8.8±0.0+1.5+10.3±2.6
BH slice through the middle15%−4.2−0.4−1.3−6.0±2.0
BH down the line10%+4.2−4.5−4.0−4.3±4.3
BH slice down the line5%−8.4−1.1−2.0−11.4±3.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.8±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (873 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
FH through the middle48%−3.5−1.2−0.8−5.5±2.4
FH down the line24%−1.8+2.8±0.0+1.0±4.1
FH crosscourt20%−0.2−0.2−0.5−0.9±4.0
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7+0.5−1.3−13.5±1.8
FH slice down the line4%−9.4−0.2−0.6−10.2±2.3

Lean FH down the line: +4.5±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (139 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
BH through the middle43%−2.9−1.1−0.1−4.1±1.6
BH crosscourt34%+1.0−1.2−1.6−1.8±2.2
BH down the line9%−0.2−0.5+0.1−0.7±4.7
FH through the middle7%−2.9+1.0−0.8−2.7±2.0
FH inside-out3%+1.0−0.7±0.0+0.3±3.2

Lean FH inside-out: +2.9±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (708 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Matteo Berrettini returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LorenzoValue
FH through the middle43%+4.3−0.5±0.0+3.7±1.7
FH slice through the middle22%−4.2+1.2−1.5−4.5±1.9
FH down the line14%+1.7−4.0+0.4−1.9±3.5
FH crosscourt11%+5.5−1.3+3.6+7.8±3.8
FH slice crosscourt6%−4.3+2.1−1.1−3.3±2.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.9±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (1460 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LorenzoValue
BH through the middle31%+6.4+0.7+0.7+7.8±1.8
BH slice through the middle29%−4.2−0.5+0.1−4.7±1.9
BH crosscourt15%+8.8+0.1+0.2+9.1±2.7
BH slice crosscourt11%+0.5−1.5−2.3−3.3±2.7
BH down the line7%+4.2+1.7+3.9+9.9±4.3

Lean BH down the line: +7.6±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (1842 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LorenzoValue
FH through the middle51%−3.5−1.8−0.1−5.3±2.3
FH down the line24%−1.8−1.3−1.5−4.6±4.4
FH crosscourt16%−0.2−3.0−0.3−3.5±4.3
FH slice through the middle6%−12.7+1.1−0.3−11.8±1.9
FH slice down the line2%−9.4±0.0±0.0−9.4±1.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.9±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (389 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv LorenzoValue
BH through the middle47%−2.9+0.2+0.8−1.9±1.6
BH crosscourt26%+1.0−1.2+0.2±0.0±2.4
BH down the line12%−0.2±0.0+0.6+0.4±4.6
FH through the middle8%−2.9+0.2−0.1−2.7±2.1
FH inside-in3%+0.6−3.7−0.3−3.4±4.3

Lean BH down the line: +1.7±4.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (1173 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.

Lorenzo Sonego

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to the middle · return+2.1±1.8+1.3+0.9
BH to their backhand · return +1+0.8±2.5+0.3+0.4
FH to their backhand · return+0.4±2.7+1.3−0.9
FH to their forehand · return−0.2±3.5−0.8+0.6
BH to the middle · return−0.2±1.2−0.2±0.0
FH to the middle · return +1−0.3±2.2+1.0−1.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally−9.5±5.8−4.0−5.4
BH to their forehand · rally−6.9±3.0−3.9−3.1
FH to their backhand · return +1−6.4±2.9−1.8−4.6
BH to their forehand · return−5.1±3.6−2.8−2.3
BH slice to their backhand · return−4.3±2.7−2.1−2.2

Matteo Berrettini

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1+3.2±2.2+1.1+2.1
BH to their forehand · return+2.1±3.5−0.9+3.0
BH to their forehand · serve +1+1.9±4.5+3.3−1.4
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.9±1.7+0.9+1.0
BH slice to their forehand · rally+0.9±2.9−0.8+1.7
BH slice to the middle · return+0.6±1.8+0.3+0.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to the middle · rally−5.3±2.7−3.3−2.0
FH to their backhand · return +1−4.9±2.7−3.0−1.9
BH to their backhand · rally−4.1±1.5−2.5−1.6
BH slice to their backhand · return−4.0±2.6−1.1−2.8
BH to their forehand · rally−3.9±3.1−3.2−0.7

Against Matteo Berrettini-like opponents

Lorenzo Sonego vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–64.1%31.7%
Players most similar to Matteo Berrettini4 61.9%29.7%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Stefanos Tsitsipas, Ben Shelton, Tallon Griekspoor, Grigor Dimitrov, Alexei Popyrin, Zizou Bergs, Dominic Thiem, Tim Van Rijthoven, Jo Wilfried Tsonga, Roger Federer. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.