Game plan
Maryna Zanevska v Nadia Podoroska
Every number combines what Maryna Zanevska does well with what Nadia Podoroska allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective
Forecast
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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Maryna Zanevska's record against Nadia Podoroska's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −7.4 on serve, −6.3 on return vs expectation (92 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.
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.
Maryna Zanevska serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Maryna wins | v Nadia | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 23% | 68% | 71% | 73.3%±11.2 | 38% ▲ |
| Body | 22% | 62% | 65% | 69.4%±12.3 | 7% ▼ |
| T | 55% | 70% | 69% | 70.8%±10.4 | 55% |
Optimal v Nadia Podoroska: +0.5±1.3 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Maryna wins | v Nadia | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 45% | 69% | 70% | 73.1%±10.1 | 60% ▲ |
| Body | 19% | 55% | 62% | 60.7%±14.1 | 4% ▼ |
| T | 36% | 62% | 64% | 61.5%±12.6 | 36% |
Optimal v Nadia Podoroska: +1.0±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +6.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Nadia Podoroska serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Nadia wins | v Maryna | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 36% | 57% | 67% | 58.0%±12.2 | 36% |
| Body | 21% | 50% | 59% | 51.8%±13.0 | 6% ▼ |
| T | 43% | 66% | 72% | 70.2%±11.9 | 58% ▲ |
Optimal v Maryna Zanevska: +0.7±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +8.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Nadia wins | v Maryna | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 34% | 60% | 68% | 62.9%±12.3 | 49% ▲ |
| Body | 23% | 64% | 57% | 64.7%±12.6 | 23% |
| T | 43% | 55% | 61% | 51.3%±12.8 | 28% ▼ |
Optimal v Maryna Zanevska: +0.6±1.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +6.3 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.
Maryna Zanevska returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Nadia | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 55% | +4.2 | +2.4 | +0.8 | +7.4±3.0 |
| FH down the line | 26% | +1.5 | +2.2 | +0.5 | +4.2±4.5 |
| FH crosscourt | 9% | +5.3 | −0.4 | −0.3 | +4.5±3.7 |
| FH slice through the middle | 9% | −6.7 | −1.5 | −0.4 | −8.6±1.8 |
Lean FH through the middle: +2.6±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (74 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Nadia | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 45% | +6.0 | −0.9 | −0.1 | +4.9±2.8 |
| BH slice through the middle | 20% | −6.2 | +0.1 | −1.4 | −7.5±2.0 |
| BH down the line | 18% | +2.2 | −0.7 | +2.1 | +3.6±4.0 |
| BH crosscourt | 16% | +7.7 | −1.4 | +0.8 | +7.2±3.2 |
Lean BH through the middle: +2.4±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (55 returns charted)
Nadia Podoroska returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Maryna | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 42% | +4.2 | −0.8 | −1.1 | +2.2±3.2 |
| FH crosscourt | 19% | +5.3 | +0.1 | −1.1 | +4.3±4.0 |
| FH slice through the middle | 19% | −6.7 | −0.1 | +0.8 | −6.0±2.2 |
| FH down the line | 11% | +1.5 | +2.0 | +0.3 | +3.9±3.6 |
| FH slice crosscourt | 8% | −6.6 | +1.2 | ±0.0 | −5.4±1.5 |
Lean FH crosscourt: +3.6±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (144 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Maryna | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 56% | +6.0 | +0.4 | −2.8 | +3.6±2.9 |
| BH crosscourt | 26% | +7.7 | −0.4 | −2.1 | +5.2±3.6 |
| BH down the line | 10% | +2.2 | −1.2 | +0.2 | +1.2±4.1 |
| BH slice through the middle | 5% | −6.2 | +0.5 | +1.0 | −4.8±1.9 |
| BH slice down the line | 3% | −12.5 | +0.8 | ±0.0 | −11.7±1.5 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +2.4±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (171 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Maryna | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 41% | −2.6 | +0.8 | +1.1 | −0.7±2.8 |
| BH crosscourt | 30% | +1.5 | −1.0 | +0.9 | +1.3±3.4 |
| FH through the middle | 13% | −2.7 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −2.8±2.1 |
| BH down the line | 6% | −0.5 | −2.2 | +2.0 | −0.7±3.9 |
| FH inside-in | 5% | +0.7 | +0.6 | +1.5 | +2.9±3.0 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +1.4±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (98 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.
Maryna Zanevska
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to the middle · return | +7.0±4.2 | +3.3 | +3.7 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | +1.0±4.3 | −0.9 | +1.9 |
| FH to the middle · rally | +0.4±2.7 | +0.7 | −0.3 |
| BH to the middle · return | −0.9±3.4 | +0.2 | −1.0 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | −1.9±5.2 | −0.4 | −1.5 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their forehand · rally | −1.9±5.2 | −0.4 | −1.5 |
| BH to the middle · return | −0.9±3.4 | +0.2 | −1.0 |
| FH to the middle · rally | +0.4±2.7 | +0.7 | −0.3 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | +1.0±4.3 | −0.9 | +1.9 |
| FH to the middle · return | +7.0±4.2 | +3.3 | +3.7 |
Nadia Podoroska
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their forehand · rally | +6.4±5.2 | +5.7 | +0.7 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | ±0.0±4.4 | +0.1 | −0.1 |
| BH to the middle · return | −1.2±3.3 | +0.5 | −1.7 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −4.7±4.1 | −1.5 | −3.2 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to their backhand · rally | −4.7±4.1 | −1.5 | −3.2 |
| BH to the middle · return | −1.2±3.3 | +0.5 | −1.7 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | ±0.0±4.4 | +0.1 | −0.1 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | +6.4±5.2 | +5.7 | +0.7 |
Against Nadia Podoroska-like opponents
| Maryna Zanevska v | Matches | Serve pts won | Return pts won |
|---|---|---|---|
| All charted opponents | – | 51.9% | 41.1% |
| Players most similar to Nadia Podoroska | 1 | 46.7% | 34.0% |
Similar by tactical fingerprint: Diana Shnaider, Ashlyn Krueger, Bianca Andreescu, Jasmine Paolini, Maya Joint, Maria Sakkari, Nao Hibino, Irina Camelia Begu, Andrea Petkovic, Dominika Cibulkova. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.