Game plan
Mirra Andreeva v Magdalena Frech
Every number combines what Mirra Andreeva does well with what Magdalena Frech 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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Mirra Andreeva's record against Magdalena Frech's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −1.8 on serve, +3.7 on return vs expectation (708 points); head-to-head: +2.0 on serve, −2.5 on return vs expectation (281 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 | Mirra | Magdalena |
|---|---|---|
| Direction choice | +0.12 ±0.04 better than 75% | +0.14 ±0.09 better than 78% |
| Shot selection | −0.43 ±0.08 better than 15% | −0.42 ±0.11 better than 15% |
| Execution | +1.22 ±0.22 better than 95% | +1.36 ±0.49 better than 96% |
| Points left on the table | 2.42 ±0.06 lower than 73% | 2.39 ±0.15 lower than 78% |
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 +2.41, Magdalena Frech +0.75. 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 serve | Now | Mirra wins | v Magdalena | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 51% | 69% | 68% | 71.0%±5.2 | 49% ▼ |
| Body | 13% | 59% | 57% | 59.0%±7.3 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 36% | 73% | 71% | 76.3%±5.3 | 51% ▲ |
Optimal v Magdalena Frech: +1.2±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Mirra wins | v Magdalena | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 33% | 67% | 66% | 67.7%±5.8 | 34% |
| Body | 21% | 61% | 61% | 65.8%±6.9 | 6% ▼ |
| T | 45% | 65% | 68% | 68.7%±5.9 | 60% ▲ |
Optimal v Magdalena Frech: +0.3±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +1.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Magdalena Frech serving
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Now | Magdalena wins | v Mirra | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 37% | 62% | 60% | 55.3%±6.0 | 29% ▼ |
| Body | 12% | 59% | 56% | 57.4%±9.3 | 5% ▼ |
| T | 51% | 63% | 61% | 55.5%±5.9 | 66% ▲ |
Optimal v Mirra Andreeva: +0.2±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +1.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Now | Magdalena wins | v Mirra | Matchup | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 47% | 66% | 64% | 64.3%±5.9 | 62% ▲ |
| Body | 13% | 48% | 47% | 38.5%±8.9 | 0% ▼ |
| T | 40% | 56% | 62% | 53.0%±6.1 | 38% ▼ |
Optimal v Mirra Andreeva: +1.0±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +7.8 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
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Magdalena | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 34% | +4.2 | +1.5 | +2.3 | +8.0±2.1 |
| FH down the line | 24% | +1.5 | +3.1 | +0.5 | +5.1±3.7 |
| FH slice through the middle | 19% | −6.7 | +0.1 | +1.2 | −5.4±2.1 |
| FH slice crosscourt | 11% | −6.6 | +0.6 | −0.6 | −6.6±2.1 |
| FH crosscourt | 8% | +5.3 | −3.2 | +2.0 | +4.0±3.8 |
Lean FH through the middle: +5.7±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (2589 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Magdalena | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 46% | +6.0 | +1.9 | +0.6 | +8.5±1.9 |
| BH crosscourt | 24% | +7.7 | +0.2 | +1.5 | +9.5±2.9 |
| BH down the line | 14% | +2.2 | +3.5 | −0.9 | +4.8±4.1 |
| BH slice through the middle | 7% | −6.2 | −2.0 | −0.4 | −8.7±2.4 |
| BH slice crosscourt | 6% | −4.2 | −2.7 | +0.2 | −6.7±2.7 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +3.9±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (1925 returns charted)
2nd serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Magdalena | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 37% | −3.2 | +1.0 | −1.7 | −4.0±2.6 |
| FH down the line | 34% | −0.6 | ±0.0 | −0.4 | −1.0±4.6 |
| FH crosscourt | 15% | +0.5 | −5.4 | +0.9 | −4.0±4.2 |
| BH through the middle | 5% | −1.0 | +0.5 | +0.9 | +0.4±2.4 |
| BH inside-in | 3% | +2.0 | +0.6 | −2.7 | −0.2±3.8 |
Lean BH through the middle: +3.5±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (743 returns charted)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Magdalena | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 37% | −2.6 | +1.0 | +0.9 | −0.7±2.3 |
| BH down the line | 31% | −0.5 | +0.8 | +1.3 | +1.6±4.5 |
| BH crosscourt | 25% | +1.5 | −1.4 | −2.7 | −2.6±3.2 |
| FH through the middle | 3% | −2.7 | −1.2 | −1.7 | −5.6±2.6 |
| FH inside-in | 2% | +0.7 | +0.3 | +0.9 | +1.9±4.3 |
Lean FH inside-in: +2.5±4.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (1071 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
Magdalena Frech returning
1st serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Mirra | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 39% | +4.2 | +2.5 | +0.1 | +6.7±2.2 |
| FH slice through the middle | 25% | −6.7 | +1.5 | −0.9 | −6.2±2.2 |
| FH down the line | 16% | +1.5 | −0.6 | −1.6 | −0.7±3.9 |
| FH crosscourt | 14% | +5.3 | +0.1 | −1.9 | +3.5±3.5 |
| FH slice down the line | 4% | −10.5 | +1.5 | −0.7 | −9.6±3.1 |
Lean FH through the middle: +5.7±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (317 returns charted)
1st serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Mirra | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH through the middle | 41% | +6.0 | +2.1 | −0.6 | +7.5±2.1 |
| BH crosscourt | 27% | +7.7 | +1.5 | −0.8 | +8.4±2.9 |
| BH slice through the middle | 13% | −6.2 | +1.2 | +0.1 | −5.0±2.4 |
| BH down the line | 8% | +2.2 | +2.1 | −0.5 | +3.7±3.9 |
| BH slice crosscourt | 8% | −4.2 | −0.9 | −2.7 | −7.8±2.9 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +4.3±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (300 returns charted)
2nd serve to the forehand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Mirra | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH through the middle | 49% | −3.2 | +1.1 | +0.4 | −1.7±2.5 |
| FH crosscourt | 26% | +0.5 | +0.1 | −2.9 | −2.3±3.7 |
| FH down the line | 25% | −0.6 | +1.8 | −2.2 | −1.0±4.4 |
Lean FH down the line: +0.7±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (68 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)
2nd serve to the backhand
| Return | Now | Tour | Own | v Mirra | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 37% | +1.5 | +1.2 | −0.1 | +2.6±2.9 |
| BH down the line | 34% | −0.5 | +3.5 | −2.9 | +0.1±4.4 |
| BH through the middle | 29% | −2.6 | +1.5 | +0.1 | −0.9±2.2 |
Lean BH crosscourt: +1.9±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (139 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.
Mirra Andreeva
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their forehand · return +1 | +5.4±5.2 | +3.1 | +2.3 |
| BH to their forehand · rally | +5.2±5.4 | +5.9 | −0.7 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | +4.9±4.6 | +0.4 | +4.4 |
| BH to the middle · return | +4.8±3.2 | +2.2 | +2.6 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | +4.8±4.2 | +1.7 | +3.1 |
| BH to their backhand · return +1 | +4.3±4.6 | +3.0 | +1.4 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH slice to their backhand · rally | −2.8±3.9 | ±0.0 | −2.8 |
| FH to their forehand · return | −1.1±5.5 | −3.6 | +2.6 |
| FH to the middle · rally | −0.9±3.2 | +1.0 | −2.0 |
| BH to their forehand · serve +1 | −0.9±6.2 | −0.5 | −0.4 |
| FH to their backhand · return +1 | −0.1±5.5 | −2.8 | +2.7 |
Magdalena Frech
Favour
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their backhand · return +1 | +5.2±4.6 | +2.1 | +3.1 |
| FH to their forehand · return +1 | +4.9±5.2 | +4.1 | +0.8 |
| BH to their forehand · return +1 | +4.8±5.9 | +2.2 | +2.6 |
| FH to the middle · rally | +4.6±3.1 | +2.3 | +2.3 |
| BH to their forehand · return | +4.4±5.6 | +6.2 | −1.9 |
| BH to the middle · rally | +4.2±2.9 | +3.2 | +1.0 |
Avoid
| Shot | Edge | Own | Theirs |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH to their backhand · return | −4.5±4.6 | −0.3 | −4.2 |
| FH to the middle · serve +1 | −4.1±3.6 | −0.6 | −3.4 |
| FH to their forehand · return | −3.6±5.8 | −0.1 | −3.4 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −3.6±4.9 | −2.1 | −1.4 |
| BH to their backhand · serve +1 | −2.9±4.7 | +1.4 | −4.3 |
Against Magdalena Frech-like opponents
| Mirra Andreeva v | Matches | Serve pts won | Return pts won |
|---|---|---|---|
| All charted opponents | – | 59.9% | 46.4% |
| Players most similar to Magdalena Frech | 5 | 56.4% | 49.9% |
| Magdalena Frech (charted head-to-head) | 2 | 62.7% | 44.8% |
Similar by tactical fingerprint: Elina Svitolina, Daria Kasatkina, Jaqueline Cristian, Victoria Azarenka, Linda Fruhvirtova, Caroline Wozniacki, Vera Zvonareva, Agnieszka Radwanska, Flavia Pennetta, Dinara Safina. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.