RallyIQ

Game plan

Stan Wawrinka v Roger Federer

Every number combines what Stan Wawrinka does well with what Roger Federer allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Stan Wawrinka wins, best of 3 21%90%: 9%–39% · best of 5: 16%
Serve points won 62.8% / 69.4% Stan / Roger · tour 63.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 21%serve 62.7% / 69.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Stan Wawrinka's record against Roger Federer's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −0.2 on serve, +0.8 on return vs expectation (1367 points); head-to-head: +0.5 on serve, −0.8 on return vs expectation (3009 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

CareerStanRoger
Direction choice+0.15 ±0.05
better than 88%
+0.04 ±0.02
better than 68%
Shot selection−0.72 ±0.08
better than 5%
+0.18 ±0.03
better than 72%
Execution−0.11 ±0.23
better than 63%
+0.08 ±0.09
better than 72%
Points left on the table2.40 ±0.08
lower than 74%
2.74 ±0.04
lower than 35%

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.

Stan Wawrinka serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowStan winsv RogerMatchupOptimal
Wide45%72%69%68.2%±2.041% ▼
Body9%63%63%62.8%±4.10% ▼
T46%77%70%72.6%±2.159% ▲

Optimal v Roger Federer: +0.4±0.3 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +2.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowStan winsv RogerMatchupOptimal
Wide52%73%68%68.6%±2.165% ▲
Body4%63%61%60.6%±5.90% ▼
T44%73%67%67.5%±2.335% ▼

Optimal v Roger Federer: +0.2±0.3 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +0.8 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Roger Federer serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowRoger winsv StanMatchupOptimal
Wide46%76%73%76.8%±1.750% ▲
Body8%68%66%71.0%±3.50% ▼
T46%81%75%81.3%±1.650% ▲

Optimal v Stan Wawrinka: +0.3±0.2 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +2.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowRoger winsv StanMatchupOptimal
Wide56%78%74%79.5%±1.669% ▲
Body6%64%66%66.5%±4.00% ▼
T38%76%73%76.7%±1.931% ▼

Optimal v Stan Wawrinka: +0.5±0.3 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +1.8 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.

Stan Wawrinka returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv RogerValue
FH through the middle30%+4.3−2.6−0.9+0.7±1.1
FH slice through the middle27%−4.2+0.7−0.4−3.9±1.1
FH crosscourt15%+5.5−0.1−0.8+4.7±2.2
FH slice crosscourt13%−4.3+2.3−1.0−3.0±2.0
FH down the line8%+1.7−2.6−2.0−2.9±2.7

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.6±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (2553 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv RogerValue
BH slice through the middle40%−4.2±0.0−0.8−5.0±0.9
BH slice crosscourt30%+0.5+1.5±0.0+2.0±1.2
BH through the middle12%+6.4−3.1−1.4+1.9±1.5
BH crosscourt8%+8.8−0.5−0.8+7.5±2.1
BH slice down the line6%−8.4+0.4−1.9−9.9±2.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +8.6±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (2669 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv RogerValue
FH through the middle45%−3.5−1.3−1.3−6.1±1.5
FH crosscourt33%−0.2−1.8−1.5−3.6±2.6
FH down the line10%−1.8−0.5−1.4−3.7±3.4
FH slice through the middle6%−12.7+0.5−0.1−12.3±2.2
FH slice crosscourt2%−12.5−0.3−2.7−15.5±2.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.0±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (745 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv RogerValue
BH crosscourt31%+1.0+0.4−0.9+0.5±1.3
BH through the middle28%−2.9+0.7−0.7−2.9±1.1
BH slice crosscourt16%−4.0−4.1−2.5−10.6±1.6
BH slice through the middle9%−11.3−1.7−1.9−14.9±1.7
BH down the line7%−0.2−2.1−1.0−3.4±3.3
FH inside-in4%+0.6+2.6−1.5+1.6±3.3

Lean FH inside-in: +5.8±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (1996 returns charted)

Roger Federer returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv StanValue
FH through the middle49%+4.3+0.3−1.1+3.4±0.9
FH down the line25%+1.7−0.4−0.8+0.5±2.0
FH crosscourt17%+5.5−0.6−1.0+3.9±2.1
FH slice through the middle5%−4.2+2.8±0.0−1.4±1.5
FH slice down the line2%−4.3+1.9−0.3−2.6±2.9
BH through the middle0%+6.6+0.6+0.2+7.3±2.2

Lean BH through the middle: +4.9±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (11918 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv StanValue
BH slice through the middle26%−4.2+2.2+0.7−1.3±1.0
BH through the middle25%+6.4−0.8+0.2+5.8±1.0
BH slice crosscourt23%+0.5+3.3+1.0+4.8±1.6
BH crosscourt14%+8.8−2.0+1.0+7.9±1.5
BH down the line8%+4.2+1.0+0.2+5.4±2.7
FH inside-out0%+8.6+0.5−0.8+8.3±3.0

Lean FH inside-out: +4.9±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (16185 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv StanValue
FH through the middle45%−3.5+0.5−1.3−4.2±1.3
FH down the line28%−1.8+1.2−3.9−4.4±2.7
FH crosscourt20%−0.2−1.5−1.0−2.7±2.8
BH slice through the middle2%−6.9+1.5−0.4−5.8±2.1
BH through the middle1%+0.1+0.3−0.4±0.0±1.6

Lean BH through the middle: +4.0±1.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (3030 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv StanValue
BH slice crosscourt25%−4.0+1.4−0.7−3.3±1.6
BH through the middle22%−2.9−1.4−0.4−4.7±0.8
BH slice through the middle16%−11.3+1.0−0.4−10.7±1.6
BH crosscourt14%+1.0−2.3−0.2−1.5±1.3
BH down the line8%−0.2−0.3−1.0−1.6±2.6
FH inside-in4%+0.6+0.6−1.0+0.1±2.9

Lean FH inside-in: +4.7±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (11907 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.

Stan Wawrinka

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to their forehand · return+1.8±1.9+3.4−1.6
FH slice to the middle · rally+1.6±1.8+0.7+0.9
FH slice to their forehand · return +1+1.2±3.5+2.4−1.2
FH slice to their backhand · return+0.9±2.2+1.8−0.9
FH volley to their forehand · serve +1+0.7±4.6+2.3−1.6
FH slice to their forehand · rally+0.5±2.9+2.5−1.9

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH volley to the middle · rally−9.7±4.9−4.5−5.3
BH volley to the middle · rally−7.3±4.4−5.2−2.1
BH volley to their forehand · rally−7.0±4.0−1.3−5.7
FH volley to their backhand · rally−6.9±4.2−2.7−4.3
BH slice to their forehand · rally−6.1±1.9−2.1−4.0

Roger Federer

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
Smash to the middle · rally+6.9±4.3+6.3+0.6
FH volley to the middle · rally+6.7±4.6+2.8+3.9
FH volley to their backhand · rally+4.8±3.7+1.2+3.6
FH volley to their forehand · rally+4.5±3.6+1.9+2.6
BH drop shot to their forehand · serve +1+3.7±4.8+7.5−3.8
BH drop shot to their forehand · rally+3.3±4.1+3.4−0.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to the middle · serve +1−6.0±2.2−1.3−4.7
FH drop shot to their forehand · rally−4.2±5.4+0.4−4.6
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1−4.0±2.0+0.5−4.4
FH slice to their backhand · return +1−3.7±3.3−2.1−1.6
BH to their forehand · return +1−3.0±2.3+0.2−3.2

Against Roger Federer-like opponents

Stan Wawrinka vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–64.7%34.8%
Players most similar to Roger Federer8 65.1%35.3%
Roger Federer (charted head-to-head)17 63.1%29.9%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Stefanos Tsitsipas, Grigor Dimitrov, Alexei Popyrin, Dominic Thiem, Tim Van Rijthoven, Jo Wilfried Tsonga, Tommy Haas, Ivan Ljubicic, James Blake. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head