Game plan

Sabine Lisicki v Linda Noskova

Every number combines what Sabine Lisicki does well with what Linda Noskova allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Sabine Lisicki wins, best of 3 34%90%: 12%–62% · best of 5: 30%

Serve points won 59.1% / 62.4% Sabine / Linda · tour 58.1%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 35%serve 59.2% / 62.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Sabine Lisicki's record against Linda Noskova's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −1.6 on serve, −2.8 on return vs expectation (210 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	Sabine	Linda
Direction choice	+0.02 ±0.12 better than 56%	+0.14 ±0.05 better than 79%
Shot selection	+0.35 ±0.13 better than 83%	−0.07 ±0.09 better than 39%
Execution	−1.31 ±0.65 better than 13%	+0.02 ±0.49 better than 62%
Points left on the table	2.61 ±0.18 lower than 50%	2.63 ±0.08 lower than 47%

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.

Sabine Lisicki serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Sabine wins	v Linda	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	46%	69%	65%	68.3%±5.6	46%
Body	18%	60%	57%	60.3%±8.3	3% ▼
T	36%	75%	74%	80.2%±5.4	51% ▲

Optimal v Linda Noskova: +1.0±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +9.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Sabine wins	v Linda	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	40%	73%	70%	76.2%±5.7	55% ▲
Body	18%	50%	58%	52.5%±9.1	3% ▼
T	42%	65%	66%	66.4%±6.4	42%

Optimal v Linda Noskova: +0.9±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +8.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Linda Noskova serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Linda wins	v Sabine	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	39%	70%	69%	72.6%±5.3	55% ▲
Body	10%	57%	62%	62.0%±8.5	0% ▼
T	50%	73%	65%	70.1%±6.1	45% ▼

Optimal v Sabine Lisicki: +0.7±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Linda wins	v Sabine	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	49%	72%	67%	73.1%±5.8	42% ▼
Body	8%	52%	59%	55.0%±9.3	0% ▼
T	42%	68%	63%	66.5%±6.4	58% ▲

Optimal v Sabine Lisicki: +0.7±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.3 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.

Sabine Lisicki returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Linda	Value
FH through the middle	44%	+4.2	−0.6	+0.6	+4.1±2.4
FH crosscourt	24%	+5.3	−0.6	−0.5	+4.2±4.0
FH down the line	21%	+1.5	+4.0	−1.1	+4.4±4.4
FH slice through the middle	6%	−6.7	+1.6	−0.3	−5.4±2.3
FH slice crosscourt	3%	−6.6	−0.1	±0.0	−6.7±2.5

Lean FH down the line: +1.4±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (340 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Linda	Value
BH through the middle	46%	+6.0	+0.9	−0.4	+6.6±2.3
BH crosscourt	25%	+7.7	−0.8	−0.6	+6.4±3.4
BH down the line	22%	+2.2	+2.4	+4.4	+8.9±4.5
BH slice through the middle	4%	−6.2	−0.1	−0.6	−6.9±2.3
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	−0.5	−0.8	−5.4±2.6

Lean BH down the line: +2.8±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (296 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Linda	Value
FH through the middle	42%	−3.2	−0.9	−1.3	−5.3±2.7
FH down the line	31%	−0.6	+2.0	−2.2	−0.7±4.9
FH crosscourt	27%	+0.5	+2.3	−3.6	−0.8±4.0

Lean FH down the line: +1.9±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (64 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Linda	Value
BH through the middle	44%	−2.6	−1.5	+0.9	−3.2±2.4
BH crosscourt	30%	+1.5	−3.0	−1.9	−3.5±3.3
BH down the line	21%	−0.5	−3.3	−1.2	−5.0±4.9
FH through the middle	4%	−2.7	+0.8	−1.3	−3.2±1.8

Lean BH through the middle: +0.5±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (135 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Linda Noskova returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sabine	Value
FH through the middle	40%	+4.2	+2.7	−0.1	+6.7±2.5
FH down the line	19%	+1.5	±0.0	+1.2	+2.7±4.4
FH crosscourt	16%	+5.3	+0.3	+0.4	+6.0±4.2
FH slice through the middle	15%	−6.7	+1.2	+1.9	−3.6±2.5
FH slice crosscourt	8%	−6.6	−0.6	+0.8	−6.4±2.6

Lean FH through the middle: +3.9±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (714 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sabine	Value
BH through the middle	41%	+6.0	−0.9	−2.6	+2.5±2.4
BH crosscourt	25%	+7.7	−0.7	+0.3	+7.4±3.3
BH down the line	12%	+2.2	−3.7	−2.4	−3.9±4.7
BH slice through the middle	11%	−6.2	−1.3	+0.6	−6.9±2.4
BH slice crosscourt	8%	−4.2	−1.9	−0.4	−6.5±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +6.8±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (631 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sabine	Value
FH through the middle	44%	−3.2	−2.0	+0.8	−4.4±3.0
FH crosscourt	27%	+0.5	+0.3	−0.7	+0.1±4.5
FH down the line	25%	−0.6	−5.0	−0.7	−6.3±5.3
FH slice crosscourt	4%	−14.9	−0.6	±0.0	−15.5±1.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.2±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (197 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sabine	Value
BH crosscourt	39%	+1.5	−1.9	+1.0	+0.6±3.3
BH through the middle	32%	−2.6	+0.9	+0.5	−1.1±2.6
BH down the line	26%	−0.5	+2.2	+1.0	+2.7±5.2
FH through the middle	3%	−2.7	−0.6	+0.8	−2.5±2.3

Lean BH down the line: +2.2±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (338 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.

Sabine Lisicki

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · rally	+3.3±5.3	+4.7	−1.4
FH to their backhand · return +1	+2.8±6.1	+2.0	+0.8
BH to their backhand · return +1	+1.7±5.0	+3.6	−1.9
FH to their backhand · return	+0.8±5.7	+3.6	−2.8
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+0.8±5.3	+0.5	+0.3
BH to their backhand · rally	−0.7±4.5	+0.8	−1.5

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	−13.3±6.2	−9.3	−4.0
BH to their backhand · serve +1	−8.7±5.0	−6.0	−2.7
FH to the middle · serve +1	−5.5±3.8	−3.4	−2.1
BH to the middle · return +1	−4.7±3.7	−3.8	−0.9
BH to the middle · rally	−4.4±3.3	−3.4	−1.0

Linda Noskova

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+6.6±6.4	+5.1	+1.5
BH to their backhand · return	+4.5±4.5	+0.8	+3.7
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+4.3±5.4	+4.5	−0.1
FH to their forehand · return +1	+4.0±5.8	+5.2	−1.2
FH to their forehand · return	+2.0±5.9	+1.3	+0.7
BH to the middle · return +1	+1.9±3.8	+1.5	+0.4

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · rally	−8.5±5.2	−6.5	−1.9
FH to the middle · serve +1	−5.7±3.8	−3.9	−1.8
BH to their forehand · rally	−5.1±6.2	−4.2	−1.0
FH to their backhand · return	−4.9±6.0	−4.7	−0.2
BH to the middle · return	−4.1±3.3	±0.0	−4.1

Against Linda Noskova-like opponents

Sabine Lisicki v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	57.7%	42.5%
Players most similar to Linda Noskova	1	58.1%	41.9%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Barbora Krejcikova, Clara Tauson, Viktoria Hruncakova, Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova, Sofia Kenin, Aliaksandra Sasnovich, Veronika Kudermetova, Petra Kvitova, Johanna Konta. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.