Game plan

Sara Sorribes Tormo v Magdalena Frech

Every number combines what Sara Sorribes Tormo 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

Sara Sorribes Tormo wins, best of 3 53%90%: 25%–80% · best of 5: 54%

Serve points won 52.6% / 51.9% Sara / Magdalena · tour 56.3%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 50%serve 52.6% / 52.7%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Magdalena Frech's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −0.2 on serve, +7.6 on return vs expectation (345 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	Magdalena
Direction choice	−0.48 ±0.10 better than 0%	+0.14 ±0.09 better than 78%
Shot selection	−0.84 ±0.19 better than 5%	−0.42 ±0.11 better than 15%
Execution	+2.10 ±0.36 better than 99%	+1.36 ±0.49 better than 96%
Points left on the table	3.12 ±0.13 lower than 7%	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: Sara Sorribes Tormo +3.78, Magdalena Frech +1.69. 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.

Sara Sorribes Tormo serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Sara wins	v Magdalena	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	61%	68%	63.2%±6.7	58% ▲
Body	41%	51%	57%	51.3%±7.6	26% ▼
T	15%	59%	71%	62.6%±9.1	16%

Optimal v Magdalena Frech: +1.1±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +4.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Sara wins	v Magdalena	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	24%	58%	66%	58.6%±7.8	34% ▲
Body	52%	53%	61%	58.0%±7.6	37% ▼
T	24%	54%	68%	57.9%±8.3	29% ▲

Optimal v Magdalena Frech: +0.6±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +0.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Magdalena Frech serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Magdalena wins	v Sara	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	37%	62%	62%	57.9%±7.0	34% ▼
Body	12%	59%	51%	52.4%±9.8	0% ▼
T	51%	63%	60%	54.8%±7.3	66% ▲

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +0.8±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Magdalena wins	v Sara	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	47%	66%	60%	61.1%±7.1	62% ▲
Body	13%	48%	55%	46.2%±9.8	13%
T	40%	56%	57%	47.5%±7.6	25% ▼

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +1.0±0.9 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +7.3 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.

Sara Sorribes Tormo returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magdalena	Value
FH through the middle	55%	+4.2	+3.8	+2.3	+10.3±2.4
FH down the line	19%	+1.5	+2.0	+0.5	+4.1±4.5
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.3	+3.1	+2.0	+10.4±4.3
FH slice through the middle	8%	−6.7	+0.1	+1.2	−5.4±2.5
FH slice crosscourt	4%	−6.6	+0.1	−0.6	−7.2±2.3

Lean FH crosscourt: +3.4±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (518 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magdalena	Value
BH through the middle	49%	+6.0	+2.4	+0.6	+9.1±2.3
BH crosscourt	22%	+7.7	+4.0	+1.5	+13.3±3.4
BH down the line	12%	+2.2	+3.2	−0.9	+4.5±4.7
BH slice through the middle	8%	−6.2	+1.9	−0.4	−4.8±2.5
BH slice crosscourt	3%	−4.2	−0.8	+0.2	−4.8±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.9±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (530 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magdalena	Value
FH through the middle	50%	−3.2	+1.6	−1.7	−3.3±3.0
FH crosscourt	27%	+0.5	±0.0	+0.9	+1.4±4.3
FH down the line	23%	−0.6	+1.9	−0.4	+0.9±5.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.5±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (113 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Magdalena	Value
FH inside-out	34%	+1.4	+0.7	−0.4	+1.6±4.2
FH through the middle	31%	−2.7	+2.4	−1.7	−2.0±2.5
BH through the middle	18%	−2.6	+1.7	+0.9	±0.0±2.8
BH crosscourt	8%	+1.5	−0.1	−2.7	−1.3±3.5
BH down the line	3%	−0.5	−1.9	+1.3	−1.1±4.6

Lean FH inside-out: +2.1±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (261 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Magdalena Frech returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
FH through the middle	39%	+4.2	+2.5	+1.5	+8.1±2.4
FH slice through the middle	25%	−6.7	+1.5	+0.9	−4.4±2.4
FH down the line	16%	+1.5	−0.6	+2.4	+3.3±4.2
FH crosscourt	14%	+5.3	+0.1	+3.5	+8.9±4.0
FH slice down the line	4%	−10.5	+1.5	±0.0	−9.0±1.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.5±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (317 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
BH through the middle	41%	+6.0	+2.1	+1.6	+9.8±2.3
BH crosscourt	27%	+7.7	+1.5	+0.5	+9.7±3.2
BH slice through the middle	13%	−6.2	+1.2	−0.1	−5.1±2.4
BH down the line	8%	+2.2	+2.1	−0.6	+3.7±4.5
BH slice crosscourt	8%	−4.2	−0.9	+0.1	−5.0±2.8

Lean BH through the middle: +4.2±1.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (300 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
FH through the middle	49%	−3.2	+1.1	+3.0	+0.9±2.8
FH crosscourt	26%	+0.5	+0.1	+0.2	+0.8±4.0
FH down the line	25%	−0.6	+1.8	+5.1	+6.3±4.8

Lean FH down the line: +4.1±4.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (68 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Sara	Value
BH crosscourt	37%	+1.5	+1.2	+1.0	+3.6±3.7
BH down the line	34%	−0.5	+3.5	+1.6	+4.6±5.3
BH through the middle	29%	−2.6	+1.5	+1.6	+0.5±2.8

Lean BH down the line: +1.5±3.8 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.

Sara Sorribes Tormo

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to the middle · return +1	+7.2±2.3	+3.5	+3.7
FH to their backhand · rally	+6.7±2.0	+3.1	+3.6
BH to their forehand · rally	+6.4±3.3	+5.6	+0.8
FH to their backhand · return +1	+5.8±3.5	+2.5	+3.3
FH to their forehand · rally	+5.4±1.8	+3.4	+2.0
FH to the middle · return +1	+5.3±2.3	+3.1	+2.2

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−0.7±2.3	+0.9	−1.6
BH to their forehand · serve +1	+1.0±4.8	+1.6	−0.7
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+1.8±3.4	+3.1	−1.3
BH to their forehand · return	+2.5±4.4	+2.3	+0.2
BH slice to the middle · rally	+2.6±1.8	+2.3	+0.3

Magdalena Frech

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	+6.6±3.7	+2.6	+4.0
BH to the middle · return	+5.4±1.9	+2.3	+3.2
BH to their forehand · return	+5.2±4.1	+4.6	+0.7
BH to their forehand · rally	+4.3±3.0	+3.4	+0.9
FH to the middle · return	+4.3±2.0	+1.6	+2.6
BH to the middle · serve +1	+4.1±2.3	+1.4	+2.7

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−3.3±2.4	+0.6	−3.9
BH slice to the middle · rally	−0.9±2.1	+1.7	−2.6
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−0.2±3.5	+2.7	−3.0
FH to their backhand · rally	−0.2±2.0	−0.3	+0.1
FH to their forehand · rally	+0.1±1.8	+1.6	−1.5

Against Magdalena Frech-like opponents

Sara Sorribes Tormo v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	50.6%	48.1%
Players most similar to Magdalena Frech	2	49.7%	54.8%

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.