RallyIQ

Game plan

Mark Philippoussis v Tim Henman

Every number combines what Mark Philippoussis does well with what Tim Henman allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Mark Philippoussis wins, best of 3 35%90%: 18%–56% · best of 5: 31%
Serve points won 68.0% / 71.3% Mark / Tim · tour 65.7%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 48%serve 69.1% / 69.5%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Mark Philippoussis's record against Tim Henman's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −4.1 on serve, −7.7 on return vs expectation (1015 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

CareerMarkTim
Direction choice+0.07 ±0.14
better than 74%
+0.09 ±0.11
better than 80%
Shot selection+0.32 ±0.21
better than 82%
+0.03 ±0.21
better than 56%
Execution−1.40 ±0.61
better than 12%
−1.47 ±0.39
better than 10%
Points left on the table3.53 ±0.34
lower than 8%
3.76 ±0.27
lower than 5%

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.

Mark Philippoussis serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowMark winsv TimMatchupOptimal
Wide46%81%76%83.6%±3.859% ▲
Body7%66%65%67.6%±9.80% ▼
T47%80%79%83.4%±4.141% ▼

Optimal v Tim Henman: +0.6±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowMark winsv TimMatchupOptimal
Wide50%79%76%81.0%±4.143% ▼
Body4%63%70%70.3%±10.80% ▼
T46%79%75%82.1%±4.357% ▲

Optimal v Tim Henman: +0.3±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Tim Henman serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowTim winsv MarkMatchupOptimal
Wide45%76%79%81.6%±4.243% ▼
Body11%64%65%65.5%±9.30% ▼
T44%77%83%84.7%±3.857% ▲

Optimal v Mark Philippoussis: +0.9±0.7 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.

Ad court

1st serveNowTim winsv MarkMatchupOptimal
Wide47%73%78%77.4%±4.654% ▲
Body15%62%64%63.0%±10.62% ▼
T38%73%77%78.5%±5.044% ▲

Optimal v Mark Philippoussis: +1.0±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +2.9 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.

Mark Philippoussis returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
FH through the middle51%+4.3−2.7−5.1−3.6±2.3
FH down the line30%+1.7−4.1+2.7+0.3±3.8
FH crosscourt17%+5.5−5.3−1.7−1.5±4.1
FH slice through the middle3%−4.2+0.8−0.1−3.5±2.0

Lean FH down the line: +2.4±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (386 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
BH slice through the middle32%−4.2±0.0−2.5−6.7±2.3
BH through the middle21%+6.4−3.4−4.7−1.7±2.3
BH slice crosscourt21%+0.5+1.5+0.2+2.2±2.9
BH crosscourt10%+8.8−3.2−0.2+5.4±3.2
BH down the line9%+4.2−4.8−4.4−5.0±4.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.6±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (480 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
FH through the middle39%−3.5−1.3+0.2−4.5±2.8
FH down the line30%−1.8−2.1−1.2−5.0±4.6
FH crosscourt25%−0.2±0.0+2.5+2.3±4.3
BH through the middle6%+0.1−0.9−0.8−1.6±1.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.1±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (129 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv TimValue
BH slice crosscourt28%−4.0+3.0+1.1+0.1±2.4
BH through the middle22%−2.9+0.6−0.8−3.1±2.1
BH crosscourt17%+1.0+0.2+2.0+3.3±2.8
BH slice through the middle15%−11.3+0.7+0.6−10.0±2.4
BH slice down the line7%−9.3+0.9+0.8−7.6±4.2

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.4±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (405 returns charted)

Tim Henman returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MarkValue
FH through the middle36%+4.3−0.5−0.8+2.9±2.4
FH down the line31%+1.7+3.3−2.0+3.0±4.0
FH crosscourt17%+5.5−3.5−1.9±0.0±4.2
FH slice through the middle9%−4.2+1.5+0.1−2.6±2.1
FH slice down the line5%−4.3+0.8+0.1−3.3±2.6

Lean FH down the line: +1.4±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (666 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MarkValue
BH slice through the middle32%−4.2+0.3−0.5−4.5±2.1
BH slice crosscourt27%+0.5+1.2−1.0+0.7±2.7
BH through the middle16%+6.4−2.1−3.7+0.6±2.5
BH slice down the line10%−8.4−0.9−1.2−10.4±3.3
BH crosscourt9%+8.8−5.3−1.7+1.7±3.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.8±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (792 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MarkValue
FH down the line36%−1.8−0.1−4.1−6.0±4.6
FH through the middle30%−3.5−2.4−1.4−7.2±2.8
FH crosscourt28%−0.2+2.5+1.0+3.3±4.4
FH slice through the middle4%−12.7+1.5+0.6−10.6±1.6
FH slice down the line2%−9.4−0.9±0.0−10.3±1.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.3±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (238 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MarkValue
BH slice crosscourt27%−4.0+0.4+1.5−2.2±2.4
BH through the middle19%−2.9+0.7−1.5−3.7±2.3
BH slice through the middle16%−11.3+0.7+0.2−10.4±2.4
BH crosscourt14%+1.0−2.7−0.8−2.5±3.1
BH slice down the line10%−9.3+2.1−1.3−8.6±4.1
BH down the line9%−0.2−0.5+0.5−0.3±5.0

Lean BH down the line: +4.2±4.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (582 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 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.

Mark Philippoussis

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · rally+3.7±4.7−1.1+4.8
BH slice to their forehand · return+3.6±5.4+1.9+1.7
FH volley to their forehand · serve +1+3.6±7.5+4.9−1.3
BH to their backhand · serve +1+3.3±3.9+2.4+0.9
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.0±4.1+1.0+2.0
FH to their forehand · return+0.5±6.0−2.0+2.6

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to their backhand · serve +1−7.8±6.7−6.3−1.5
BH volley to their forehand · serve +1−7.6±7.1−4.5−3.1
BH to the middle · return−7.5±2.9−3.2−4.4
BH to their forehand · return +1−6.9±7.0−7.1+0.2
BH to their forehand · rally−6.9±6.4−3.5−3.3

Tim Henman

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return +1+8.0±6.0+4.6+3.3
BH volley to their backhand · serve +1+4.9±5.9+2.2+2.7
FH to their backhand · serve +1+3.5±5.0+3.7−0.2
FH to their backhand · return +1+1.9±5.8−2.7+4.6
FH to their forehand · serve +1+0.9±5.3+4.1−3.3
FH to their backhand · return−0.1±5.0+2.4−2.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · return−10.3±4.5−7.1−3.2
BH to their forehand · rally−9.4±6.5−5.8−3.6
FH to the middle · rally−7.7±3.8−3.7−4.0
BH to the middle · rally−7.0±3.6−4.0−3.0
BH to the middle · return−6.4±3.0−2.3−4.2

Against Tim Henman-like opponents

Mark Philippoussis vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–68.7%30.3%
Players most similar to Tim Henman5 64.2%22.1%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Gilles Muller, Greg Rusedski, Pete Sampras, Patrick Rafter, Todd Martin, Richard Krajicek, Boris Becker, Michael Stich, Brad Gilbert. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.