RallyIQ

Game plan

Mirra Andreeva v Caroline Wozniacki

Every number combines what Mirra Andreeva does well with what Caroline Wozniacki allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Mirra Andreeva wins, best of 3 57%90%: 32%–79% · best of 5: 59%
Serve points won 56.3% / 55.0% Mirra / Caroline · tour 56.3%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 49%serve 56.0% / 56.1%

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. At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Mirra Andreeva's record against Caroline Wozniacki's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +1.0 on serve, +4.7 on return vs expectation (1046 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

CareerMirraCaroline
Direction choice+0.12 ±0.04
better than 75%
+0.03 ±0.05
better than 59%
Shot selection−0.43 ±0.08
better than 15%
+0.06 ±0.06
better than 52%
Execution+1.22 ±0.22
better than 95%
+2.22 ±0.16
better than 100%
Points left on the table2.42 ±0.06
lower than 73%
2.40 ±0.07
lower than 76%

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: Mirra Andreeva +2.10, Caroline Wozniacki +1.97. 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.

Mirra Andreeva serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowMirra winsv CarolineMatchupOptimal
Wide51%69%60%63.6%±2.849% ▼
Body13%59%50%51.9%±4.90% ▼
T36%73%63%68.5%±3.551% ▲

Optimal v Caroline Wozniacki: +0.9±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +4.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowMirra winsv CarolineMatchupOptimal
Wide33%67%60%61.7%±3.648% ▲
Body21%61%47%52.8%±4.66% ▼
T45%65%59%59.6%±3.246%

Optimal v Caroline Wozniacki: +0.8±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +2.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Caroline Wozniacki serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowCaroline winsv MirraMatchupOptimal
Wide42%67%60%61.3%±2.953% ▲
Body25%62%56%60.2%±4.410% ▼
T33%71%61%64.1%±3.437% ▲

Optimal v Mirra Andreeva: +0.2±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowCaroline winsv MirraMatchupOptimal
Wide35%68%64%66.0%±3.439% ▲
Body24%59%47%49.4%±5.09% ▼
T41%63%62%60.7%±3.152% ▲

Optimal v Mirra Andreeva: +0.9±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +6.2 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.

Mirra Andreeva returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CarolineValue
FH through the middle34%+4.2+1.5+0.9+6.6±1.3
FH down the line24%+1.5+3.1+3.6+8.2±2.5
FH slice through the middle19%−6.7+0.1+0.3−6.3±1.7
FH slice crosscourt11%−6.6+0.6−1.1−7.1±2.4
FH crosscourt8%+5.3−3.2+1.4+3.5±2.9

Lean FH down the line: +5.9±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (2589 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CarolineValue
BH through the middle46%+6.0+1.9±0.0+7.9±1.2
BH crosscourt24%+7.7+0.2+1.2+9.1±2.1
BH down the line14%+2.2+3.5−1.1+4.6±3.0
BH slice through the middle7%−6.2−2.0−1.3−9.6±2.1
BH slice crosscourt6%−4.2−2.7−0.1−7.0±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.0±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (1925 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CarolineValue
FH through the middle37%−3.2+1.0+1.8−0.4±2.0
FH down the line34%−0.6±0.0+1.5+0.9±3.6
FH crosscourt15%+0.5−5.4+0.8−4.1±3.4
BH through the middle5%−1.0+0.5+1.8+1.4±2.0
BH inside-in3%+2.0+0.6+0.3+2.8±3.1

Lean BH inside-in: +3.7±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (743 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv CarolineValue
BH through the middle37%−2.6+1.0+1.8+0.3±1.7
BH down the line31%−0.5+0.8+2.9+3.2±3.6
BH crosscourt25%+1.5−1.4+0.3+0.4±2.4
FH through the middle3%−2.7−1.2+1.8−2.1±2.1
FH inside-in2%+0.7+0.3+0.8+1.8±3.5

Lean BH down the line: +2.0±2.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1071 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Caroline Wozniacki returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MirraValue
FH through the middle52%+4.2+3.4+0.1+7.6±1.2
FH crosscourt21%+5.3+3.9−1.9+7.3±2.4
FH down the line16%+1.5+6.2−1.6+6.1±2.8
FH slice through the middle7%−6.7−1.5−0.9−9.1±1.9
FH slice crosscourt2%−6.6−1.7−0.6−8.9±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +2.1±0.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (2852 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MirraValue
BH through the middle45%+6.0+2.8−0.6+8.3±1.3
BH crosscourt36%+7.7+4.0−0.8+10.9±2.0
BH slice through the middle9%−6.2−1.9+0.1−8.1±2.2
BH down the line5%+2.2+5.0−0.5+6.6±3.9
BH slice down the line3%−12.5−2.1−1.8−16.4±3.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.3±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (1809 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MirraValue
FH through the middle43%−3.2+3.7+0.4+0.9±1.9
FH down the line29%−0.6+2.5−2.2−0.3±4.0
FH crosscourt26%+0.5+3.0−2.9+0.6±3.3
BH inside-out1%+2.2+0.3−2.9−0.4±3.1
BH through the middle1%−1.0−0.3+0.1−1.1±1.3

Lean FH through the middle: +0.6±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (983 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv MirraValue
BH crosscourt54%+1.5+3.5−0.1+4.9±2.1
BH through the middle35%−2.6+4.1+0.1+1.7±1.7
BH down the line12%−0.5+2.0−2.9−1.5±4.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.9±1.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (834 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.

Mirra Andreeva

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to their forehand · rally+5.6±2.6+2.7+2.9
BH volley to their backhand · rally+5.2±5.2+2.0+3.2
FH to their backhand · return+4.4±1.9+1.6+2.8
FH volley to their forehand · rally+4.2±4.5+3.1+1.1
BH to their backhand · return +1+3.9±1.6+2.9+1.0
FH volley to the middle · rally+3.8±5.3+0.8+2.9

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their forehand · rally−5.5±2.9−6.1+0.6
FH drop shot to their backhand · rally−5.1±5.5−1.5−3.6
BH slice to their backhand · return−3.1±3.0−3.2+0.1
BH slice to the middle · return−2.9±2.1−1.9−1.0
BH slice to their backhand · return +1−2.7±2.7−1.5−1.2

Caroline Wozniacki

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally+5.8±5.7+6.0−0.3
BH to their backhand · return +1+5.1±1.5+3.2+1.9
FH to the middle · return+4.7±1.0+4.2+0.5
BH to the middle · return +1+4.6±1.3+3.1+1.5
FH to the middle · rally+3.9±0.8+2.9+1.0
FH to the middle · return +1+3.8±1.5+2.8+1.0

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their forehand · rally−6.8±2.8−2.2−4.6
BH slice to their backhand · rally−3.4±2.0−1.7−1.7
FH slice to their forehand · rally−3.2±3.3+0.3−3.6
FH slice to the middle · serve +1−3.0±2.8−0.3−2.6
FH volley to their backhand · rally−3.0±5.1−0.7−2.3

Against Caroline Wozniacki-like opponents

Mirra Andreeva vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–59.9%46.4%
Players most similar to Caroline Wozniacki8 60.5%51.0%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Marie Bouzkova, Daria Kasatkina, Emma Navarro, Emma Raducanu, Victoria Azarenka, Linda Fruhvirtova, Anna Karolina Schmiedlova, Alize Cornet, Alison Riske Amritraj, Agnieszka Radwanska. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.