Game plan

Sara Sorribes Tormo v Jana Novotna

Every number combines what Sara Sorribes Tormo does well with what Jana Novotna allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Sara Sorribes Tormo wins, best of 3 17%90%: 3%–51% · best of 5: 12%

Serve points won 51.0% / 58.2% Sara / Jana · tour 58.1%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 15%serve 50.7% / 58.6%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Sara Sorribes Tormo's record against Jana Novotna's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +8.5 on serve, +8.9 on return vs expectation (125 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	Sara	Jana
Direction choice	−0.48 ±0.10 better than 0%	+0.23 ±0.18 better than 89%
Shot selection	−0.84 ±0.19 better than 5%	−0.64 ±0.34 better than 8%
Execution	+2.10 ±0.36 better than 99%	+0.13 ±0.70 better than 67%
Points left on the table	3.12 ±0.13 lower than 7%	3.55 ±0.47 lower than 1%

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.

Sara Sorribes Tormo serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Sara wins	v Jana	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	61%	64%	59.4%±7.4	59% ▲
Body	41%	51%	58%	52.1%±10.6	26% ▼
T	15%	59%	67%	57.5%±10.0	15%

Optimal v Jana Novotna: +0.6±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Sara wins	v Jana	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	24%	58%	60%	51.7%±8.4	32% ▲
Body	52%	53%	55%	52.5%±11.0	37% ▼
T	24%	54%	66%	55.8%±9.5	31% ▲

Optimal v Jana Novotna: +0.5±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Jana Novotna serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Jana wins	v Sara	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	65%	62%	61.5%±7.8	59% ▲
Body	24%	54%	51%	47.0%±9.8	9% ▼
T	32%	62%	60%	53.9%±10.5	32%

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +0.9±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +6.0 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Jana wins	v Sara	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	33%	60%	60%	55.0%±8.9	48% ▲
Body	27%	44%	55%	42.6%±9.4	11% ▼
T	41%	70%	57%	62.4%±8.8	41%

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +1.0±1.1 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +7.7 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.

Sara Sorribes Tormo returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jana	Value
FH through the middle	55%	+4.2	+3.8	−1.9	+6.0±2.7
FH down the line	19%	+1.5	+2.0	+0.4	+3.9±4.6
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.3	+3.1	+1.7	+10.1±4.4
FH slice through the middle	8%	−6.7	+0.1	+0.6	−6.0±2.3
FH slice crosscourt	4%	−6.6	+0.1	±0.0	−6.6±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.5±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (518 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jana	Value
BH through the middle	49%	+6.0	+2.4	−1.1	+7.4±2.6
BH crosscourt	22%	+7.7	+4.0	+2.6	+14.4±3.5
BH down the line	12%	+2.2	+3.2	+0.5	+5.9±4.7
BH slice through the middle	8%	−6.2	+1.9	+0.8	−3.6±2.6
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	−0.8	+1.6	−3.4±2.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.3±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (530 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jana	Value
FH through the middle	50%	−3.2	+1.6	−2.7	−4.3±3.1
FH crosscourt	27%	+0.5	±0.0	+2.2	+2.7±4.4
FH down the line	23%	−0.6	+1.9	+4.5	+5.8±5.1

Lean FH down the line: +5.9±4.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (113 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Jana	Value
FH inside-out	34%	+1.4	+0.7	+4.5	+6.5±4.2
FH through the middle	31%	−2.7	+2.4	−2.7	−3.0±2.6
BH through the middle	18%	−2.6	+1.7	+0.1	−0.8±2.7
BH crosscourt	8%	+1.5	−0.1	+0.8	+2.2±3.4
BH down the line	3%	−0.5	−1.9	−1.7	−4.1±4.1

Lean FH inside-out: +5.6±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (261 returns charted)

Jana Novotna returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
FH slice through the middle	45%	−6.7	+5.1	+0.9	−0.8±2.4
FH through the middle	15%	+4.2	−1.6	+1.5	+4.0±2.5
FH slice crosscourt	14%	−6.6	+2.8	±0.0	−3.9±1.9
FH slice down the line	14%	−10.5	+4.2	±0.0	−6.3±2.4
FH down the line	6%	+1.5	−0.5	+2.4	+3.4±3.8

Lean FH through the middle: +4.7±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (222 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
BH slice through the middle	49%	−6.2	+2.4	−0.1	−4.0±2.3
BH slice crosscourt	41%	−4.2	+6.1	+0.1	+2.1±2.9
BH slice down the line	11%	−12.5	+3.0	−0.4	−9.9±2.9

Lean BH slice crosscourt: +4.2±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (217 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
FH crosscourt	30%	+0.5	+1.4	+0.2	+2.1±4.1
FH down the line	22%	−0.6	−0.5	+5.1	+4.1±4.9
FH through the middle	22%	−3.2	−0.8	+3.0	−1.0±2.7
FH slice through the middle	12%	−15.2	+2.2	±0.0	−13.0±1.4
FH slice crosscourt	8%	−14.9	+2.9	±0.0	−12.0±1.3

Lean FH down the line: +6.0±4.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (92 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
BH slice crosscourt	38%	−7.5	+0.9	±0.0	−6.6±1.9
BH slice through the middle	34%	−11.7	+2.1	±0.0	−9.6±1.6
BH slice down the line	15%	−10.6	+2.4	±0.0	−8.2±2.3
FH inside-out	12%	+1.4	−3.0	+5.1	+3.5±3.6

Lean BH slice crosscourt: ±0.0±1.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (65 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.

Sara Sorribes Tormo

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their backhand · return	+8.9±5.2	+6.2	+2.7
FH to their backhand · return	+8.8±5.9	+3.3	+5.5
BH slice to their forehand · rally	+7.0±4.6	+6.5	+0.5
BH slice to their backhand · rally	+5.8±3.6	+2.0	+3.8
FH to the middle · rally	+5.4±3.5	+3.7	+1.7
FH to their forehand · return	+5.4±6.0	+3.2	+2.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their forehand · serve +1	−4.1±5.8	+5.1	−9.2
BH to the middle · rally	−3.2±3.4	+2.5	−5.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	−2.7±6.0	+3.2	−6.0
FH to the middle · return	+0.2±3.9	+4.8	−4.5
BH to their backhand · serve +1	+0.3±4.9	+2.2	−2.0

Jana Novotna

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their forehand · rally	+7.1±5.0	+7.9	−0.8
FH to their backhand · rally	+4.2±4.9	+1.8	+2.4
FH to their forehand · return +1	+3.2±5.6	−0.9	+4.1
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+2.9±5.6	+0.1	+2.8
FH to their backhand · serve +1	+1.1±5.7	−0.6	+1.7
FH to the middle · rally	+0.9±3.6	−1.0	+1.8

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to the middle · return	−0.8±4.2	−3.2	+2.5
FH to their forehand · rally	+0.5±4.7	+0.5	±0.0
BH slice to their backhand · rally	+0.5±3.7	+5.4	−4.9
BH slice to the middle · rally	+0.6±3.3	+2.3	−1.7
FH to the middle · rally	+0.9±3.6	−1.0	+1.8

Against Jana Novotna-like opponents

Sara Sorribes Tormo v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	50.6%	48.1%
Players most similar to Jana Novotna	1	60.7%	56.5%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Tatjana Maria, Taylor Townsend, Kirsten Flipkens, Francesca Schiavone, Roberta Vinci, Amelie Mauresmo, Conchita Martinez, Steffi Graf, Gabriela Sabatini, Martina Navratilova. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.