Game plan
Michael Mmoh v Reilly Opelka
Every number combines what Michael Mmoh does well with what Reilly Opelka 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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Michael Mmoh's record against Reilly Opelka's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +7.4 on serve, −4.0 on return vs expectation (321 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.
Michael Mmoh serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Michael wins | v Reilly | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 43% | 74% | 80% | 81.4%±6.5 | 43% |
| Body | 20% | 65% | 70% | 71.5%±10.2 | 7% ▼ |
| T | 37% | 71% | 83% | 80.5%±7.3 | 50% ▲ |
Optimal v Reilly Opelka: +1.0±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Michael wins | v Reilly | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 43% | 69% | 81% | 78.1%±7.6 | 43% |
| Body | 18% | 62% | 72% | 70.7%±10.6 | 5% ▼ |
| T | 39% | 72% | 80% | 80.2%±7.1 | 52% ▲ |
Optimal v Reilly Opelka: +0.6±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Reilly Opelka serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Reilly wins | v Michael | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 50% | 77% | 79% | 82.4%±5.9 | 63% ▲ |
| Body | 9% | 62% | 65% | 63.8%±13.4 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 41% | 80% | 75% | 80.7%±6.9 | 37% ▼ |
Optimal v Michael Mmoh: +1.0±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Reilly wins | v Michael | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 49% | 82% | 76% | 84.1%±6.1 | 43% ▼ |
| Body | 7% | 61% | 65% | 62.5%±14.5 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 44% | 77% | 77% | 81.6%±6.3 | 57% ▲ |
Optimal v Michael Mmoh: +1.0±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.7 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.
Michael Mmoh returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Reilly | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH slice through the middle | 33% | −4.2 | −1.1 | −0.3 | −5.6±2.1 |
| FH through the middle | 27% | +4.3 | +2.5 | +1.2 | +7.9±2.5 |
| FH slice down the line | 19% | −4.3 | −1.2 | −1.9 | −7.3±3.0 |
| FH down the line | 12% | +1.7 | −2.7 | +4.4 | +3.5±3.9 |
| FH crosscourt | 10% | +5.5 | +0.5 | +1.7 | +7.7±3.6 |
Lean FH through the middle: +7.9±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (83 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Reilly | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 49% | +6.4 | +0.3 | +0.8 | +7.4±2.4 |
| BH crosscourt | 23% | +8.8 | −0.3 | +0.3 | +8.8±3.3 |
| BH slice through the middle | 16% | −4.2 | −1.8 | −1.5 | −7.6±2.0 |
| BH slice crosscourt | 12% | +0.5 | −0.3 | −1.8 | −1.6±2.6 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +4.5±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (69 returns charted)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Reilly | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 54% | +1.0 | −4.7 | −2.1 | −5.8±3.0 |
| BH through the middle | 33% | −2.9 | +0.9 | −1.1 | −3.0±1.9 |
| BH down the line | 13% | −0.2 | −1.2 | −0.1 | −1.5±4.1 |
Lean BH through the middle: +1.3±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (46 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
Reilly Opelka returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Michael | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 41% | +4.3 | −3.8 | +0.6 | +1.1±2.7 |
| FH down the line | 21% | +1.7 | −0.8 | −4.0 | −3.1±4.0 |
| FH slice through the middle | 16% | −4.2 | −2.6 | −1.2 | −8.0±1.9 |
| FH crosscourt | 13% | +5.5 | −1.9 | −0.3 | +3.2±3.9 |
| FH slice down the line | 4% | −4.3 | +1.2 | ±0.0 | −3.0±2.2 |
Lean FH crosscourt: +4.5±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (809 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Michael | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 57% | +6.4 | −2.2 | −1.8 | +2.4±2.4 |
| BH crosscourt | 24% | +8.8 | −2.2 | +1.4 | +8.0±3.2 |
| BH slice through the middle | 7% | −4.2 | −1.9 | −0.4 | −6.5±2.3 |
| BH down the line | 7% | +4.2 | +2.8 | −1.4 | +5.6±4.4 |
| BH slice crosscourt | 3% | +0.5 | −1.7 | −1.7 | −2.9±2.5 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +5.1±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (713 returns charted)
2nd serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Michael | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 43% | −3.5 | −4.5 | +0.2 | −7.8±2.8 |
| FH down the line | 31% | −1.8 | −4.5 | −4.4 | −10.7±4.6 |
| FH crosscourt | 15% | −0.2 | −5.8 | −1.7 | −7.7±4.0 |
| FH slice through the middle | 6% | −12.7 | +0.1 | ±0.0 | −12.6±1.4 |
| BH through the middle | 3% | +0.1 | −0.5 | −0.1 | −0.4±1.6 |
Lean FH crosscourt: +1.1±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (219 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Michael | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 53% | −2.9 | −2.9 | −0.1 | −5.9±2.1 |
| BH crosscourt | 34% | +1.0 | −3.5 | −0.5 | −3.0±2.9 |
| BH down the line | 9% | −0.2 | −1.5 | −2.0 | −3.7±4.3 |
| FH through the middle | 2% | −2.9 | +0.3 | +0.2 | −2.4±2.1 |
| FH inside-out | 2% | +1.0 | +0.7 | −4.4 | −2.7±3.1 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +1.6±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (482 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.
Michael Mmoh
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their backhand · rally | +6.9±3.4 | +2.0 | +4.9 |
| BH to the middle · return | +2.3±3.0 | +0.3 | +2.0 |
| FH to the middle · rally | +2.1±3.0 | +1.1 | +1.0 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | +0.4±4.2 | +1.2 | −0.7 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −0.4±4.3 | −0.3 | −0.1 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | −2.2±4.5 | −2.2 | −0.1 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their backhand · return | −8.4±4.3 | −4.1 | −4.3 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | −2.2±4.5 | −2.2 | −0.1 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −0.4±4.3 | −0.3 | −0.1 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | +0.4±4.2 | +1.2 | −0.7 |
| FH to the middle · rally | +2.1±3.0 | +1.1 | +1.0 |
Reilly Opelka
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH to the middle · rally | −3.6±3.1 | −5.0 | +1.4 |
| FH to the middle · return | −4.4±3.3 | −5.3 | +0.9 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | −4.5±4.3 | −5.6 | +1.1 |
| BH to the middle · return | −4.5±2.9 | −3.7 | −0.8 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −5.7±4.1 | −7.9 | +2.2 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | −6.4±4.2 | −6.9 | +0.5 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their backhand · rally | −7.9±3.6 | −8.2 | +0.3 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | −6.4±4.2 | −6.9 | +0.5 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −5.7±4.1 | −7.9 | +2.2 |
| BH to the middle · return | −4.5±2.9 | −3.7 | −0.8 |
| FH to their backhand · serve +1 | −4.5±4.3 | −5.6 | +1.1 |
Against Reilly Opelka-like opponents
| Michael Mmoh v | Matches | Serve pts won | Return pts won |
|---|---|---|---|
| All charted opponents | – | 62.3% | 29.3% |
| Players most similar to Reilly Opelka | 1 | 74.4% | 24.7% |
Similar by tactical fingerprint: Arthur Rinderknech, Zhizhen Zhang, Zizou Bergs, Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard, Gabriel Diallo, Nicolas Jarry, Milos Raonic, John Isner, Sam Querrey, Lukas Rosol. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.