Game plan

Miomir Kecmanovic v Mattia Bellucci

Every number combines what Miomir Kecmanovic does well with what Mattia Bellucci 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 67%90%: 28%–93% · best of 5: 71%

Serve points won 62.5% / 59.1% Miomir / Mattia · tour 61.3%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 69%serve 62.7% / 58.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Miomir Kecmanovic's record against Mattia Bellucci's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −1.0 on serve, −2.1 on return vs expectation (624 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	Mattia
Direction choice	−0.06 ±0.09 better than 43%	−0.19 ±0.10 better than 15%
Shot selection	−0.28 ±0.10 better than 25%	−0.43 ±0.21 better than 15%
Execution	+1.00 ±0.38 better than 95%	−0.76 ±0.76 better than 34%
Points left on the table	2.31 ±0.15 lower than 84%	3.20 ±0.21 lower than 12%

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.

Miomir Kecmanovic serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Miomir wins	v Mattia	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	41%	68%	74%	69.2%±7.6	42%
Body	16%	61%	64%	61.0%±12.1	2% ▼
T	43%	73%	81%	79.3%±7.1	56% ▲

Optimal v Mattia Bellucci: +1.0±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +7.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Miomir wins	v Mattia	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	45%	71%	75%	73.3%±7.8	58% ▲
Body	14%	65%	60%	62.2%±13.1	1% ▼
T	41%	68%	76%	72.3%±7.6	41%

Optimal v Mattia Bellucci: +0.6±0.9 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.

Mattia Bellucci serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Mattia wins	v Miomir	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	35%	76%	76%	78.7%±6.6	32% ▼
Body	11%	64%	58%	59.1%±12.4	0% ▼
T	55%	72%	80%	77.2%±5.8	68% ▲

Optimal v Miomir Kecmanovic: +1.0±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Mattia wins	v Miomir	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	61%	69%	73%	69.8%±6.8	58% ▼
Body	10%	68%	58%	63.5%±12.7	0% ▼
T	29%	74%	73%	74.6%±7.9	42% ▲

Optimal v Miomir Kecmanovic: +0.3±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +4.0 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 Mattia	Value
FH through the middle	51%	+4.3	+2.7	−0.2	+6.7±2.6
FH crosscourt	21%	+5.5	+0.3	+3.0	+8.8±4.0
FH down the line	13%	+1.7	+4.3	−0.3	+5.7±4.1
FH slice through the middle	10%	−4.2	−0.1	−2.9	−7.2±2.2
FH slice down the line	3%	−4.3	−0.3	−0.2	−4.7±2.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.7±3.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (845 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Mattia	Value
BH crosscourt	37%	+8.8	+3.2	+0.7	+12.8±3.2
BH through the middle	35%	+6.4	+1.6	+0.8	+8.7±2.4
BH slice through the middle	13%	−4.2	−0.2	−0.5	−4.9±2.4
BH slice crosscourt	9%	+0.5	+0.5	+1.3	+2.3±2.6
BH down the line	5%	+4.2	+0.7	−3.1	+1.8±4.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.5±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (721 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Mattia	Value
FH through the middle	56%	−3.5	+0.6	−0.4	−3.3±2.8
FH crosscourt	28%	−0.2	+2.8	+1.0	+3.6±4.4
FH down the line	16%	−1.8	+1.1	−0.2	−0.9±4.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.5±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (172 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Mattia	Value
BH crosscourt	46%	+1.0	+2.0	±0.0	+3.0±2.9
BH through the middle	42%	−2.9	+1.8	+0.2	−0.9±2.3
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	+0.5	−1.1	−0.8±4.7
FH through the middle	3%	−2.9	+0.9	−0.4	−2.3±2.3
FH inside-in	2%	+0.6	+2.6	+1.0	+4.2±3.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.2±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (550 returns charted)

Mattia Bellucci returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
FH slice through the middle	41%	−4.2	−1.7	+0.5	−5.4±2.3
FH through the middle	23%	+4.3	−2.1	+1.1	+3.3±2.4
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.5	+1.1	+1.8	+8.4±3.6
FH slice crosscourt	12%	−4.3	+1.6	+1.0	−1.8±2.6
FH down the line	9%	+1.7	−1.4	+4.0	+4.2±3.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +8.5±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (107 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
BH through the middle	41%	+6.4	−3.6	+2.4	+5.2±2.4
BH slice through the middle	18%	−4.2	−1.0	+0.9	−4.3±2.3
BH crosscourt	17%	+8.8	−1.0	−0.5	+7.3±3.5
BH down the line	17%	+4.2	−0.8	+1.4	+4.9±3.9
BH slice down the line	7%	−8.4	+1.2	−0.8	−7.9±3.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.4±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (161 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
FH through the middle	33%	−3.5	+0.5	−0.1	−3.1±2.4
FH slice through the middle	25%	−12.7	−1.2	−0.7	−14.6±1.9
FH crosscourt	22%	−0.2	±0.0	+3.7	+3.4±3.9
FH down the line	13%	−1.8	−1.6	+3.3	−0.1±3.8
FH slice crosscourt	8%	−12.5	+0.9	±0.0	−11.6±1.3

Lean FH through the middle: +1.7±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (64 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Miomir	Value
BH through the middle	60%	−2.9	+0.3	+0.3	−2.3±2.1
BH crosscourt	22%	+1.0	+0.2	+0.1	+1.4±3.1
BH down the line	14%	−0.2	−1.3	+0.4	−1.2±3.9
FH through the middle	5%	−2.9	+0.7	−0.1	−2.3±1.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.7±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (110 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 clay. Each player's clay record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Miomir Kecmanovic

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	+9.1±4.5	+6.4	+2.7
BH to their forehand · rally	+5.8±4.4	+3.5	+2.3
FH to their backhand · rally	+4.4±3.5	+2.4	+2.0
BH to their forehand · return	+4.3±5.2	+3.8	+0.5
BH to the middle · return	+3.6±2.8	+3.0	+0.6
FH to the middle · return	+1.1±2.8	+2.0	−0.9

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1	−2.9±4.4	−0.1	−2.8
FH to the middle · rally	−2.4±2.3	−0.2	−2.2
FH to their backhand · return +1	−2.0±5.0	+0.1	−2.1
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−1.3±4.6	+1.5	−2.7
FH to their forehand · rally	+0.3±3.0	+2.5	−2.3

Mattia Bellucci

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+4.3±4.3	+0.2	+4.1
FH to their forehand · rally	+2.3±3.3	−1.1	+3.5
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+1.6±5.6	+0.9	+0.7
BH to the middle · rally	+1.3±2.4	+1.0	+0.3
BH to the middle · return +1	+0.7±2.8	+0.2	+0.5
FH to the middle · rally	+0.7±2.3	+0.7	±0.0

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · rally	−5.3±3.7	−2.9	−2.4
BH to the middle · return	−3.7±2.8	−5.8	+2.1
FH slice to the middle · return	−2.7±2.8	−3.2	+0.5
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−2.1±4.3	−4.1	+2.0
BH to their forehand · return	−0.4±5.8	+1.0	−1.5

Against Mattia Bellucci-like opponents

Miomir Kecmanovic v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	62.7%	35.0%
Players most similar to Mattia Bellucci	2	62.5%	34.8%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Cameron Norrie, Gael Monfils, Thiago Monteiro, Yannick Hanfmann, Yoshihito Nishioka, Cristian Garin, Dominik Koepfer, Federico Delbonis, Paolo Lorenzi, Gaston Gaudio. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.