RallyIQ

Game plan

Miomir Kecmanovic v Matteo Berrettini

Every number combines what Miomir Kecmanovic does well with what Matteo Berrettini 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 27%90%: 9%–54% · best of 5: 22%
Serve points won 61.7% / 66.7% Miomir / Matteo · tour 63.5%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 29%serve 62.5% / 67.1%

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 Matteo Berrettini's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −7.4 on serve, −3.0 on return vs expectation (451 points); head-to-head: +4.4 on serve, +24.1 on return vs expectation (98 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

CareerMiomirMatteo
Direction choice−0.06 ±0.09
better than 43%
−0.02 ±0.06
better than 51%
Shot selection−0.28 ±0.10
better than 25%
−0.61 ±0.09
better than 8%
Execution+1.00 ±0.38
better than 95%
+0.03 ±0.36
better than 70%
Points left on the table2.31 ±0.15
lower than 84%
2.71 ±0.09
lower than 39%

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 +0.09, Matteo Berrettini +0.36. 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 serveNowMiomir winsv MatteoMatchupOptimal
Wide41%68%76%70.9%±3.842%
Body16%61%65%62.8%±6.92% ▼
T43%73%75%73.8%±3.756% ▲

Optimal v Matteo Berrettini: +0.9±0.7 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.

Ad court

1st serveNowMiomir winsv MatteoMatchupOptimal
Wide45%71%74%72.9%±3.858% ▲
Body14%65%65%67.6%±7.01% ▼
T41%68%71%66.6%±4.341%

Optimal v Matteo Berrettini: +0.9±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +3.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Matteo Berrettini serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowMatteo winsv MiomirMatchupOptimal
Wide46%79%76%81.0%±2.839% ▼
Body6%68%58%62.7%±8.20% ▼
T48%80%80%84.4%±2.861% ▲

Optimal v Miomir Kecmanovic: +0.8±0.5 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.

Ad court

1st serveNowMatteo winsv MiomirMatchupOptimal
Wide50%79%73%79.3%±3.244% ▼
Body7%68%58%62.8%±8.30% ▼
T43%76%73%76.6%±3.656% ▲

Optimal v Miomir Kecmanovic: +0.5±0.5 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.

Miomir Kecmanovic returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
FH through the middle51%+4.3+2.7−0.2+6.8±1.8
FH crosscourt21%+5.5+0.3+1.0+6.7±3.5
FH down the line13%+1.7+4.3−1.2+4.8±3.8
FH slice through the middle10%−4.2−0.1+0.7−3.6±2.0
FH slice down the line3%−4.3−0.3+1.0−3.6±3.0

Lean FH through the middle: +1.8±1.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (845 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
BH crosscourt37%+8.8+3.2+1.5+13.5±2.5
BH through the middle35%+6.4+1.6+1.0+9.0±1.9
BH slice through the middle13%−4.2−0.2−1.3−5.7±2.1
BH slice crosscourt9%+0.5+0.5−2.8−1.8±2.8
BH down the line5%+4.2+0.7−4.0+0.9±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.4±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (721 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
FH through the middle56%−3.5+0.6−0.8−3.7±2.3
FH crosscourt28%−0.2+2.8−0.5+2.1±4.1
FH down the line16%−1.8+1.1±0.0−0.7±4.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.7±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (172 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MatteoValue
BH crosscourt46%+1.0+2.0−1.6+1.4±2.2
BH through the middle42%−2.9+1.8−0.1−1.2±1.7
BH down the line6%−0.2+0.5+0.1+0.3±4.7
FH through the middle3%−2.9+0.9−0.8−2.8±1.8
FH inside-in2%+0.6+2.6−0.5+2.7±3.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.4±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (550 returns charted)

Matteo Berrettini returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MiomirValue
FH through the middle43%+4.3−0.5+1.1+4.8±1.7
FH slice through the middle22%−4.2+1.2+0.5−2.5±2.0
FH down the line14%+1.7−4.0+1.8−0.5±3.6
FH crosscourt11%+5.5−1.3+4.0+8.2±3.8
FH slice crosscourt6%−4.3+2.1+1.3−0.8±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +6.0±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (1460 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MiomirValue
BH through the middle31%+6.4+0.7+2.4+9.6±1.7
BH slice through the middle29%−4.2−0.5+0.9−3.9±1.9
BH crosscourt15%+8.8+0.1+1.4+10.3±2.6
BH slice crosscourt11%+0.5−1.5−0.8−1.8±2.7
BH down the line7%+4.2+1.7−0.5+5.5±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.1±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (1842 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MiomirValue
FH through the middle51%−3.5−1.8−0.1−5.4±2.2
FH down the line24%−1.8−1.3+3.7+0.6±4.5
FH crosscourt16%−0.2−3.0+3.3±0.0±4.2
FH slice through the middle6%−12.7+1.1−0.7−12.3±2.0
FH slice down the line2%−9.4±0.0±0.0−9.4±1.5

Lean FH down the line: +4.3±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (389 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MiomirValue
BH through the middle47%−2.9+0.2+0.3−2.4±1.5
BH crosscourt26%+1.0−1.2+0.4+0.2±2.3
BH down the line12%−0.2±0.0+0.1−0.1±4.5
FH through the middle8%−2.9+0.2−0.1−2.7±2.1
FH inside-in3%+0.6−3.7+3.3+0.2±4.2
FH inside-out2%+1.0−1.6+3.7+3.0±3.5

Lean FH inside-out: +4.4±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1173 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.

Miomir Kecmanovic

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return+3.6±2.9+4.5−0.9
BH to their forehand · serve +1+3.6±3.9+2.9+0.7
BH to their forehand · return +1+3.0±4.2+3.5−0.5
FH to their forehand · return+2.7±3.2+2.0+0.6
BH to their backhand · return+1.9±1.7+2.6−0.7
FH to the middle · return+1.5±1.4+2.5−1.0

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally−7.9±5.6−5.4−2.5
FH to their backhand · return +1−4.9±3.0−0.3−4.6
BH slice to the middle · rally−3.2±1.8−0.7−2.5
BH slice to their backhand · rally−2.8±1.7−0.2−2.6
BH slice to their forehand · rally−2.6±3.2−0.3−2.2

Matteo Berrettini

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to their forehand · rally+9.6±5.7+7.0+2.6
FH to their backhand · serve +1+4.7±1.8+0.9+3.7
FH to their forehand · serve +1+4.3±2.2+1.1+3.3
BH to their forehand · serve +1+3.5±4.5+3.3+0.2
FH to their forehand · rally+2.5±1.4−1.7+4.1
BH slice to the middle · return+1.9±1.9+0.3+1.6

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to the middle · return +1−3.9±2.7−4.1+0.2
FH to their backhand · return +1−2.7±2.6−3.0+0.3
FH slice to the middle · rally−2.4±2.5−3.3+0.9
FH to the middle · rally−2.2±1.2−2.7+0.5
FH to their forehand · return +1−2.0±2.7−1.0−1.1

Against Matteo Berrettini-like opponents

Miomir Kecmanovic vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–62.7%35.0%
Players most similar to Matteo Berrettini3 56.4%31.8%
Matteo Berrettini (charted head-to-head)1 66.7%55.3%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Stefanos Tsitsipas, Ben Shelton, Tallon Griekspoor, Grigor Dimitrov, Alexei Popyrin, Zizou Bergs, Dominic Thiem, Tim Van Rijthoven, Jo Wilfried Tsonga, Roger Federer. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head