Game plan

Miomir Kecmanovic v Hubert Hurkacz

Every number combines what Miomir Kecmanovic does well with what Hubert Hurkacz allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Miomir Kecmanovic wins, best of 3 37%90%: 16%–63% · best of 5: 34%

Serve points won 64.5% / 67.1% Miomir / Hubert · tour 63.5%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 32%serve 63.5% / 67.4%

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 Miomir Kecmanovic's record against Hubert Hurkacz's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +3.8 on serve, +0.9 on return vs expectation (647 points); head-to-head: +2.4 on serve, +0.7 on return vs expectation (335 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	Miomir	Hubert
Direction choice	−0.06 ±0.09 better than 43%	+0.09 ±0.02 better than 79%
Shot selection	−0.28 ±0.10 better than 25%	+0.14 ±0.05 better than 68%
Execution	+1.00 ±0.38 better than 95%	−0.38 ±0.15 better than 49%
Points left on the table	2.31 ±0.15 lower than 84%	2.49 ±0.04 lower than 62%

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: Miomir Kecmanovic +1.29, Hubert Hurkacz +0.49. 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.

Miomir Kecmanovic serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Miomir wins	v Hubert	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	41%	68%	73%	67.9%±3.4	42%
Body	16%	61%	63%	60.6%±5.8	2% ▼
T	43%	73%	77%	75.7%±3.2	56% ▲

Optimal v Hubert Hurkacz: +1.3±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Miomir wins	v Hubert	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	45%	71%	73%	71.7%±3.5	58% ▲
Body	14%	65%	64%	66.7%±6.1	1% ▼
T	41%	68%	73%	69.6%±3.5	41%

Optimal v Hubert Hurkacz: +0.6±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Hubert Hurkacz serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Hubert wins	v Miomir	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	78%	76%	80.5%±2.4	39% ▼
Body	5%	63%	58%	57.9%±7.1	0% ▼
T	48%	80%	80%	84.0%±2.5	61% ▲

Optimal v Miomir Kecmanovic: +0.7±0.4 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Hubert wins	v Miomir	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	53%	78%	73%	79.1%±2.8	66% ▲
Body	4%	66%	58%	60.9%±7.4	0% ▼
T	42%	76%	73%	76.6%±3.2	34% ▼

Optimal v Miomir Kecmanovic: +0.2±0.4 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.9 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.

Miomir Kecmanovic returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Hubert	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.3	+2.7	−2.1	+4.8±1.5
FH crosscourt	21%	+5.5	+0.3	−6.6	−0.9±2.9
FH down the line	13%	+1.7	+4.3	−6.7	−0.7±3.2
FH slice through the middle	10%	−4.2	−0.1	−2.8	−7.1±1.8
FH slice down the line	3%	−4.3	−0.3	−7.6	−12.2±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +3.9±1.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (845 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Hubert	Value
BH crosscourt	37%	+8.8	+3.2	−2.7	+9.3±2.1
BH through the middle	35%	+6.4	+1.6	−1.0	+7.0±1.6
BH slice through the middle	13%	−4.2	−0.2	−4.9	−9.3±1.9
BH slice crosscourt	9%	+0.5	+0.5	−6.9	−5.9±2.4
BH down the line	5%	+4.2	+0.7	−5.6	−0.7±3.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.5±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (721 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Hubert	Value
FH through the middle	56%	−3.5	+0.6	−1.0	−3.9±2.1
FH crosscourt	28%	−0.2	+2.8	−2.9	−0.3±3.6
FH down the line	16%	−1.8	+1.1	−4.1	−4.8±3.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.7±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (172 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Hubert	Value
BH crosscourt	46%	+1.0	+2.0	−1.8	+1.2±1.9
BH through the middle	42%	−2.9	+1.8	−0.7	−1.8±1.5
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	+0.5	−5.0	−4.7±3.9
FH through the middle	3%	−2.9	+0.9	−1.0	−3.0±1.6
FH inside-in	2%	+0.6	+2.6	−2.9	+0.3±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.0±1.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (550 returns charted)

Hubert Hurkacz returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
FH through the middle	44%	+4.3	−0.4	+1.1	+4.9±1.3
FH crosscourt	24%	+5.5	−2.3	+4.0	+7.2±2.9
FH down the line	21%	+1.7	−2.0	+1.8	+1.5±2.8
FH slice through the middle	5%	−4.2	−2.1	+0.5	−5.8±1.9
FH slice crosscourt	5%	−4.3	−4.4	+1.3	−7.4±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.9±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (6555 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
BH through the middle	34%	+6.4	−0.2	+2.4	+8.6±1.4
BH crosscourt	26%	+8.8	−0.1	+1.4	+10.1±2.0
BH slice through the middle	14%	−4.2	−3.5	+0.9	−6.8±1.8
BH down the line	10%	+4.2	−0.9	−0.5	+2.9±3.7
BH slice crosscourt	10%	+0.5	−6.1	−0.8	−6.4±2.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.1±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (6287 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
FH through the middle	44%	−3.5	+1.4	−0.1	−2.2±1.7
FH down the line	26%	−1.8	−1.5	+3.7	+0.4±3.7
FH crosscourt	26%	−0.2	−3.3	+3.3	−0.2±3.4
FH slice through the middle	2%	−12.7	−3.7	−0.7	−17.0±2.0
FH slice crosscourt	1%	−12.5	−3.9	±0.0	−16.4±2.0

Lean FH down the line: +1.9±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (1676 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
BH crosscourt	42%	+1.0	−1.1	+0.4	+0.3±1.9
BH through the middle	37%	−2.9	±0.0	+0.3	−2.6±1.3
BH down the line	14%	−0.2	+0.5	+0.1	+0.4±3.8
FH through the middle	2%	−2.9	−1.7	−0.1	−4.6±2.1
BH slice through the middle	1%	−11.3	−1.4	±0.0	−12.7±1.7
FH inside-out	1%	+1.0	−1.2	+3.7	+3.5±3.5

Lean FH inside-out: +4.6±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (3803 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.