RallyIQ

Game plan

Philipp Kohlschreiber v Dominic Thiem

Every number combines what Philipp Kohlschreiber does well with what Dominic Thiem allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Philipp Kohlschreiber wins, best of 3 39%90%: 16%–67% · best of 5: 36%
Serve points won 66.8% / 69.2% Philipp / Dominic · tour 65.7%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 40%serve 66.9% / 69.1%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Philipp Kohlschreiber's record against Dominic Thiem's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −3.3 on serve, −13.6 on return vs expectation (109 points); head-to-head: +0.1 on serve, +3.2 on return vs expectation (445 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

CareerPhilippDominic
Direction choice+0.07 ±0.06
better than 75%
+0.12 ±0.03
better than 83%
Shot selection−0.21 ±0.11
better than 29%
−0.28 ±0.08
better than 25%
Execution−0.24 ±0.45
better than 56%
+0.04 ±0.20
better than 71%
Points left on the table2.49 ±0.11
lower than 62%
2.48 ±0.05
lower than 63%

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.

Philipp Kohlschreiber serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowPhilipp winsv DominicMatchupOptimal
Wide37%71%73%70.7%±4.035% ▼
Body11%66%63%66.1%±6.80% ▼
T51%73%73%70.3%±3.865% ▲

Optimal v Dominic Thiem: +0.4±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +0.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowPhilipp winsv DominicMatchupOptimal
Wide51%70%72%69.3%±3.851%
Body13%62%65%64.4%±7.00% ▼
T36%69%72%69.8%±4.549% ▲

Optimal v Dominic Thiem: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +0.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Dominic Thiem serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowDominic winsv PhilippMatchupOptimal
Wide47%73%76%76.4%±3.560% ▲
Body5%61%57%55.0%±7.70% ▼
T48%74%74%73.0%±3.640% ▼

Optimal v Philipp Kohlschreiber: +0.9±0.5 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.

Ad court

1st serveNowDominic winsv PhilippMatchupOptimal
Wide52%71%74%72.5%±3.865% ▲
Body7%64%62%62.9%±7.00% ▼
T40%71%77%76.0%±4.335% ▼

Optimal v Philipp Kohlschreiber: +0.4±0.5 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.8 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.

Philipp Kohlschreiber returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DominicValue
FH through the middle48%+4.3−2.0−1.2+1.0±1.8
FH crosscourt29%+5.5−3.4−1.6+0.5±3.1
FH down the line18%+1.7−1.9−1.3−1.5±3.4
FH slice through the middle3%−4.2+0.3−1.6−5.5±2.0
BH inside-in1%+7.7−0.3+0.8+8.2±1.9

Lean FH through the middle: +0.8±1.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (522 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DominicValue
BH through the middle33%+6.4−1.2−1.1+4.1±1.7
BH crosscourt18%+8.8−0.8+0.8+8.8±2.5
BH slice through the middle18%−4.2−0.3−1.9−6.5±1.9
BH down the line14%+4.2−2.1−4.4−2.3±3.6
BH slice crosscourt13%+0.5+1.4−1.4+0.5±2.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.5±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (731 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DominicValue
FH through the middle47%−3.5−0.9−0.9−5.3±2.3
FH crosscourt30%−0.2−2.7−3.1−6.0±3.7
FH down the line23%−1.8−2.7−0.8−5.2±3.9

Lean FH down the line: +0.3±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (143 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv DominicValue
BH through the middle35%−2.9+0.5±0.0−2.4±1.6
BH crosscourt24%+1.0−2.0±0.0−0.9±2.3
FH through the middle13%−2.9+0.6−0.9−3.1±1.9
BH down the line11%−0.2−1.3−0.4−1.8±4.1
FH inside-in6%+0.6−1.0−3.1−3.5±3.6
FH inside-out5%+1.0−0.2−0.8±0.0±3.0

Lean FH inside-out: +2.4±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (505 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Dominic Thiem returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PhilippValue
FH through the middle51%+4.3−1.4−0.6+2.3±1.7
FH down the line22%+1.7−1.0+0.4+1.1±3.3
FH crosscourt17%+5.5−1.0−0.5+4.1±3.4
FH slice through the middle6%−4.2−1.0−0.1−5.3±2.1
FH slice down the line2%−4.3−3.2−0.4−7.8±2.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.6±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (2907 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PhilippValue
BH through the middle34%+6.4−1.0±0.0+5.4±1.5
BH slice through the middle18%−4.2−2.3−2.1−8.6±1.8
BH crosscourt18%+8.8−1.5+1.5+8.8±2.2
BH slice crosscourt13%+0.5−2.3+1.5−0.3±2.5
BH down the line12%+4.2−4.1+1.1+1.3±3.7

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.3±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (3946 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PhilippValue
FH through the middle48%−3.5−0.5−0.7−4.7±2.1
FH crosscourt29%−0.2+0.8−1.7−1.1±3.7
FH down the line19%−1.8−0.8−0.4−2.9±4.3
FH slice through the middle2%−12.7−0.5−0.9−14.1±1.8
FH slice down the line1%−9.4−0.3±0.0−9.7±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.4±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (802 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv PhilippValue
BH through the middle32%−2.9−1.0−1.1−4.9±1.5
BH crosscourt27%+1.0+1.2+1.3+3.5±2.1
FH through the middle13%−2.9+0.9−0.7−2.7±1.8
FH inside-out9%+1.0+0.2−0.4+0.8±3.2
BH down the line8%−0.2−5.1+1.1−4.2±4.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.7±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (2564 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 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.

Philipp Kohlschreiber

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · serve +1+5.2±4.2+2.2+3.0
BH to the middle · serve +1+4.8±3.1+2.9+1.9
FH to the middle · rally+1.8±3.1+1.5+0.3
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.6±4.7+0.5+1.2
BH to their forehand · serve +1+1.6±4.9+4.0−2.3
FH slice to the middle · rally+0.8±2.6+2.3−1.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · rally−11.8±5.1−7.0−4.8
FH to their backhand · return−7.3±5.3−4.2−3.1
BH slice to their forehand · rally−7.1±3.0−1.9−5.2
FH to their forehand · return−6.9±5.4−5.3−1.6
BH to their backhand · rally−6.8±3.7−4.0−2.7

Dominic Thiem

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1+6.6±4.9+1.4+5.1
FH to their forehand · rally+5.6±4.6+4.4+1.2
BH to their forehand · rally+5.2±4.8+3.9+1.3
FH to their forehand · return +1+4.4±5.4+2.4+2.0
FH to their backhand · return +1+3.2±5.3+0.6+2.6
BH slice to their backhand · return+2.2±3.8−1.0+3.2

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · rally−7.1±4.5−3.5−3.5
BH to their forehand · return +1−6.5±6.2−0.8−5.7
BH to their forehand · return−6.5±6.0−3.5−3.0
BH slice to the middle · return−5.9±3.1−4.2−1.7
BH to their forehand · serve +1−5.8±5.7−3.1−2.7

Against Dominic Thiem-like opponents

Philipp Kohlschreiber vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–63.5%35.2%
Players most similar to Dominic Thiem1 62.1%19.6%
Dominic Thiem (charted head-to-head)2 64.2%36.5%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Casper Ruud, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Joao Fonseca, Hubert Hurkacz, Lorenzo Musetti, Alexei Popyrin, Laslo Djere, Thanasi Kokkinakis, Jo Wilfried Tsonga. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head