RallyIQ

Game plan

Pedro Martinez v Jesper De Jong

Every number combines what Pedro Martinez does well with what Jesper De Jong allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Pedro Martinez wins, best of 3 15%90%: 3%–39% · best of 5: 9%
Serve points won 58.5% / 66.9% Pedro / Jesper · tour 63.5%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 14%serve 58.6% / 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 Pedro Martinez's record against Jesper De Jong's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −1.8 on serve, +3.3 on return vs expectation (205 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

CareerPedroJesper
Direction choice−0.06 ±0.08
better than 43%
−0.14 ±0.06
better than 21%
Shot selection−0.06 ±0.23
better than 46%
+0.30 ±0.12
better than 80%
Execution+0.23 ±0.43
better than 77%
−0.72 ±0.35
better than 36%
Points left on the table2.66 ±0.12
lower than 43%
2.79 ±0.11
lower than 32%

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: Pedro Martinez +0.72, Jesper De Jong +1.19. 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.

Pedro Martinez serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowPedro winsv JesperMatchupOptimal
Wide41%65%72%64.1%±5.939% ▼
Body11%59%64%59.9%±9.20% ▼
T48%68%75%68.1%±5.461% ▲

Optimal v Jesper De Jong: +0.5±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowPedro winsv JesperMatchupOptimal
Wide54%63%73%64.0%±5.667% ▲
Body16%59%58%53.7%±9.53% ▼
T30%62%64%53.1%±7.230%

Optimal v Jesper De Jong: +0.2±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Jesper De Jong serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowJesper winsv PedroMatchupOptimal
Wide44%73%75%75.3%±4.939% ▼
Body7%54%70%61.2%±10.80% ▼
T48%81%76%82.0%±4.361% ▲

Optimal v Pedro Martinez: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +4.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowJesper winsv PedroMatchupOptimal
Wide44%73%71%71.2%±5.540% ▼
Body9%56%56%48.9%±11.20% ▼
T47%71%73%72.5%±5.660% ▲

Optimal v Pedro Martinez: +0.8±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +2.6 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.

Pedro Martinez returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JesperValue
FH through the middle43%+4.3+2.1+0.2+6.6±2.4
FH crosscourt21%+5.5+1.1−3.4+3.2±4.2
FH slice through the middle13%−4.2+1.7−1.0−3.6±2.4
FH down the line12%+1.7+1.9−2.4+1.2±4.3
FH slice crosscourt8%−4.3+0.6−0.8−4.5±2.3

Lean FH through the middle: +3.9±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (426 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JesperValue
BH through the middle41%+6.4+2.2−2.1+6.5±2.2
BH crosscourt27%+8.8−3.4−1.4+4.1±3.1
BH down the line13%+4.2−0.4+0.1+3.9±4.5
BH slice through the middle12%−4.2−1.5−2.3−8.0±2.5
BH slice crosscourt4%+0.5−1.5−5.2−6.2±2.9

Lean BH through the middle: +3.9±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (517 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JesperValue
FH through the middle52%−3.5+1.2−0.8−3.1±2.6
FH crosscourt37%−0.2−0.4+0.2−0.5±4.3
FH down the line10%−1.8+0.6−2.4−3.5±4.0

Lean FH crosscourt: +1.6±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (107 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv JesperValue
BH through the middle41%−2.9−0.2−1.1−4.2±2.1
BH crosscourt30%+1.0±0.0−0.3+0.7±2.9
BH down the line14%−0.2+5.2−1.0+4.1±4.9
FH inside-out7%+1.0−0.7−2.4−2.1±3.4
FH through the middle5%−2.9−0.7−0.8−4.4±2.0

Lean BH down the line: +5.4±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (340 returns charted)

Jesper De Jong returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PedroValue
FH through the middle50%+4.3−0.1+1.7+5.9±2.2
FH down the line18%+1.7−1.9+1.6+1.4±4.3
FH crosscourt15%+5.5+0.1+6.1+11.7±4.2
FH slice through the middle12%−4.2−2.1+1.7−4.6±2.3
FH slice down the line5%−4.3−0.9+0.8−4.3±2.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +7.6±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (543 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PedroValue
BH through the middle37%+6.4−0.2+1.6+7.8±2.0
BH slice through the middle18%−4.2−1.3−1.4−6.9±2.4
BH crosscourt18%+8.8−2.8+1.7+7.7±2.9
BH down the line15%+4.2−1.5+4.4+7.1±4.5
BH slice crosscourt8%+0.5−0.8−2.2−2.5±2.9

Lean BH through the middle: +4.4±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (672 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PedroValue
FH through the middle61%−3.5−0.7+1.2−2.9±2.7
FH crosscourt21%−0.2−0.4−1.6−2.3±4.3
FH down the line18%−1.8+0.7−1.7−2.8±4.6

Lean FH crosscourt: +0.5±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (156 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PedroValue
BH through the middle43%−2.9±0.0+1.0−1.9±2.2
BH crosscourt26%+1.0−0.9+1.2+1.4±3.0
FH through the middle11%−2.9+0.9+1.2−0.8±2.3
FH inside-out8%+1.0+2.1−1.7+1.4±3.7
BH down the line7%−0.2−2.4−0.8−3.4±4.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.4±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (442 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.

Pedro Martinez

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · rally+4.8±1.6+3.5+1.2
BH to the middle · rally+4.2±1.6+2.2+2.0
BH to their forehand · rally+4.0±3.2+3.9+0.1
FH to their forehand · rally+3.5±1.9+2.6+0.9
BH to the middle · serve +1+3.5±2.3+2.3+1.2
FH to the middle · return +1+3.0±2.5+3.1−0.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally−3.9±6.1−0.4−3.5
BH slice to the middle · rally−3.7±2.1−0.4−3.3
BH slice to the middle · return−2.8±2.5−0.7−2.2
FH to their forehand · return−2.3±3.9±0.0−2.3
FH to their backhand · return−1.9±3.4+1.0−2.9

Jesper De Jong

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return +1+7.1±4.8−0.5+7.5
BH to their backhand · return +1+3.5±2.8+3.0+0.5
BH to the middle · return+3.1±1.5−0.1+3.3
BH to their forehand · serve +1+2.8±4.7−2.1+4.8
FH to their backhand · return +1+2.4±3.2+1.5+0.8
FH to the middle · return +1+2.2±2.5+0.7+1.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · serve +1−1.5±3.0−0.1−1.5
BH slice to their forehand · rally−1.2±3.5−4.7+3.5
BH to their forehand · rally−0.6±3.3−2.9+2.3
BH slice to the middle · rally−0.6±2.1+0.6−1.2
FH to their backhand · return±0.0±3.3−0.4+0.3

Against Jesper De Jong-like opponents

Pedro Martinez vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–58.3%34.6%
Players most similar to Jesper De Jong1 57.0%37.8%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Gael Monfils, Botic Van De Zandschulp, Alejandro Tabilo, Nuno Borges, Miomir Kecmanovic, Arthur Cazaux, Mackenzie Mcdonald, Matteo Arnaldi, Otto Virtanen, Andreas Seppi. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.