Game plan

Magda Linette v Victoria Mboko

Every number combines what Magda Linette does well with what Victoria Mboko allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Magda Linette wins, best of 3 17%90%: 7%–33% · best of 5: 12%

Serve points won 54.3% / 61.6% Magda / Victoria · tour 56.7%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 15%serve 53.9% / 61.9%

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. Both were charted enough in the last three seasons, so those carry the most weight. The result is then nudged by Magda Linette's record against Victoria Mboko's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +1.3 on serve, +0.8 on return vs expectation (1237 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	Magda	Victoria
Direction choice	+0.27 ±0.05 better than 93%	−0.14 ±0.12 better than 29%
Shot selection	+0.36 ±0.07 better than 84%	−0.26 ±0.13 better than 23%
Execution	−0.20 ±0.32 better than 48%	+0.45 ±0.62 better than 77%
Points left on the table	2.20 ±0.07 lower than 94%	2.70 ±0.15 lower than 34%

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: Magda Linette −0.78, Victoria Mboko +1.31. 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.

Magda Linette serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Magda wins	v Victoria	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	43%	67%	64%	64.9%±5.2	58% ▲
Body	19%	56%	58%	56.7%±8.2	4% ▼
T	38%	68%	66%	67.1%±6.6	38%

Optimal v Victoria Mboko: +0.4±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Magda wins	v Victoria	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	59%	66%	62%	62.8%±6.4	52% ▼
Body	9%	53%	49%	46.2%±9.9	0% ▼
T	32%	63%	64%	62.0%±6.1	48% ▲

Optimal v Victoria Mboko: +0.4±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Victoria Mboko serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Victoria wins	v Magda	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	67%	67%	67.8%±5.3	29% ▼
Body	22%	60%	64%	65.8%±6.9	22%
T	34%	74%	72%	77.5%±5.3	49% ▲

Optimal v Magda Linette: +0.5±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +6.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Victoria wins	v Magda	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	50%	71%	68%	72.8%±5.1	62% ▲
Body	24%	58%	64%	65.4%±7.5	8% ▼
T	27%	68%	67%	70.7%±6.4	30% ▲

Optimal v Magda Linette: +0.6±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.3 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.

Magda Linette returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Victoria	Value
FH through the middle	44%	+4.2	−0.4	−0.4	+3.3±2.3
FH crosscourt	35%	+5.3	−1.2	+0.6	+4.7±3.6
FH down the line	15%	+1.5	−1.3	−4.0	−3.8±4.3
FH slice through the middle	4%	−6.7	−2.7	−2.0	−11.4±2.6
FH slice crosscourt	2%	−6.6	−3.3	−0.2	−10.1±2.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.9±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (1150 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Victoria	Value
BH through the middle	47%	+6.0	+0.2	±0.0	+6.1±2.0
BH crosscourt	32%	+7.7	+0.1	−0.5	+7.4±3.0
BH down the line	11%	+2.2	−1.7	−3.3	−2.8±4.5
BH slice through the middle	4%	−6.2	−1.8	−1.6	−9.6±2.6
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	−2.5	−1.3	−8.0±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.4±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (980 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Victoria	Value
FH crosscourt	48%	+0.5	+0.6	−0.2	+1.0±4.2
FH through the middle	36%	−3.2	+2.2	−1.3	−2.3±2.9
FH down the line	14%	−0.6	−1.2	+2.9	+1.1±5.3
FH slice crosscourt	2%	−14.9	−1.4	±0.0	−16.3±1.2

Lean FH down the line: +1.6±5.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (284 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Victoria	Value
BH crosscourt	47%	+1.5	−1.4	+1.4	+1.5±3.3
BH through the middle	40%	−2.6	+0.4	−2.0	−4.2±2.5
BH down the line	13%	−0.5	−3.3	−0.4	−4.2±5.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.0±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (510 returns charted)

Victoria Mboko returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magda	Value
FH through the middle	45%	+4.2	+0.4	+0.5	+5.1±2.2
FH crosscourt	21%	+5.3	+0.3	−1.0	+4.6±3.7
FH down the line	17%	+1.5	−3.0	+1.3	−0.1±4.3
FH slice through the middle	8%	−6.7	−0.6	+1.1	−6.2±2.4
FH slice crosscourt	7%	−6.6	+1.0	+0.7	−4.9±2.8

Lean FH through the middle: +2.9±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (453 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magda	Value
BH through the middle	39%	+6.0	+2.4	+0.6	+9.0±2.2
BH crosscourt	23%	+7.7	+0.7	+2.5	+10.9±3.1
BH slice through the middle	17%	−6.2	+1.0	−0.8	−6.0±2.5
BH down the line	10%	+2.2	+1.8	−1.4	+2.6±4.0
BH slice crosscourt	7%	−4.2	−2.1	−0.2	−6.5±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.4±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (261 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magda	Value
FH through the middle	44%	−3.2	+0.3	−1.2	−4.1±2.7
FH down the line	35%	−0.6	+0.4	+1.9	+1.8±4.9
FH crosscourt	21%	+0.5	−3.0	−1.4	−3.9±3.8

Lean FH down the line: +3.7±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (116 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magda	Value
BH crosscourt	45%	+1.5	−0.9	+1.7	+2.3±3.0
BH through the middle	42%	−2.6	−1.2	±0.0	−3.8±2.3
BH down the line	14%	−0.5	+1.1	+1.0	+1.6±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.6±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (173 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 hard. Each player's hard record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Magda Linette

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+4.4±5.4	+0.7	+3.7
BH to the middle · serve +1	+2.0±2.3	+2.9	−0.9
BH to the middle · return	+1.1±1.8	+0.6	+0.5
BH to the middle · return +1	+1.1±2.6	+1.6	−0.5
FH to the middle · rally	+1.1±2.0	+0.5	+0.5
FH to their forehand · return	+1.0±4.2	+0.5	+0.5

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return	−8.6±5.0	−5.2	−3.4
BH to their forehand · rally	−7.3±4.0	−3.2	−4.1
FH to their backhand · return +1	−5.6±5.4	−3.1	−2.6
FH to their backhand · return	−2.6±4.6	−1.0	−1.5
FH to the middle · return +1	−1.3±3.3	−0.3	−1.0

Victoria Mboko

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · serve +1	+4.8±3.4	+1.6	+3.2
BH to their forehand · rally	+4.7±3.7	+3.0	+1.7
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+3.8±5.0	−0.3	+4.1
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+3.7±4.1	+2.0	+1.7
FH to their backhand · return +1	+3.7±4.7	+0.8	+2.8
BH to the middle · return +1	+3.3±2.6	+1.7	+1.6

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · return +1	−2.5±5.6	−7.1	+4.6
FH to their forehand · return	−1.6±4.2	−1.0	−0.6
FH to their backhand · serve +1	−1.4±3.6	−2.1	+0.7
FH to the middle · return +1	−0.6±2.9	−1.1	+0.6
BH to the middle · return	−0.3±1.9	−0.2	−0.1

Against Victoria Mboko-like opponents

Magda Linette v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	57.2%	39.4%
Players most similar to Victoria Mboko	9	58.3%	39.6%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Coco Gauff, Cristina Bucsa, Karolina Pliskova, Belinda Bencic, Ekaterina Alexandrova, Sorana Cirstea, Emma Raducanu, Shelby Rogers, Irina Camelia Begu, Alison Riske Amritraj. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.