RallyIQ

Game plan

Thomas Johansson v Nicolas Kiefer

Every number combines what Thomas Johansson does well with what Nicolas Kiefer allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Thomas Johansson wins, best of 3 77%90%: 45%–95% · best of 5: 83%
Serve points won 64.9% / 59.0% Thomas / Nicolas · tour 63.4%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 76%serve 65.3% / 59.8%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Thomas Johansson's record against Nicolas Kiefer's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −11.6 on serve, +10.5 on return vs expectation (181 points); head-to-head: +6.5 on serve, +3.2 on return vs expectation (147 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

CareerThomasNicolas
Direction choice+0.21 ±0.10
better than 95%
+0.09 ±0.17
better than 80%
Shot selection−0.32 ±0.24
better than 21%
+0.16 ±0.23
better than 71%
Execution−0.41 ±0.55
better than 48%
−1.52 ±0.70
better than 9%
Points left on the table2.34 ±0.29
lower than 80%
2.54 ±0.35
lower than 56%

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.

Thomas Johansson serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowThomas winsv NicolasMatchupOptimal
Wide57%76%76%78.2%±7.270% ▲
Body4%57%71%64.9%±16.50% ▼
T40%81%77%83.2%±7.130% ▼

Optimal v Nicolas Kiefer: +0.3±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +3.5 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowThomas winsv NicolasMatchupOptimal
Wide50%75%73%75.2%±8.442% ▼
Body5%65%62%64.0%±16.50% ▼
T45%79%79%84.7%±6.358% ▲

Optimal v Nicolas Kiefer: +0.9±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +5.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Nicolas Kiefer serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowNicolas winsv ThomasMatchupOptimal
Wide50%72%74%72.9%±7.743% ▼
Body6%63%57%56.6%±15.90% ▼
T44%77%74%75.8%±8.257% ▲

Optimal v Thomas Johansson: +0.5±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +2.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowNicolas winsv ThomasMatchupOptimal
Wide52%71%78%77.0%±8.043% ▼
Body3%59%60%55.9%±17.30% ▼
T44%70%76%74.1%±8.357% ▲

Optimal v Thomas Johansson: +0.2±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.0 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.

Thomas Johansson returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv NicolasValue
FH through the middle40%+4.3−0.7+0.7+4.3±3.0
FH down the line28%+1.7+1.7−2.9+0.4±4.5
FH crosscourt23%+5.5−1.7−1.0+2.8±4.4
FH slice through the middle7%−4.2−0.8+1.2−3.7±1.9
FH slice down the line3%−4.3−2.0−0.1−6.3±2.0

Lean FH through the middle: +2.2±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (261 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv NicolasValue
BH through the middle37%+6.4−0.9±0.0+5.5±2.8
BH crosscourt29%+8.8−1.0+4.2+12.0±3.6
BH slice crosscourt13%+0.5+1.0−2.3−0.7±2.9
BH down the line11%+4.2+0.8+0.2+5.2±4.2
BH slice through the middle7%−4.2−2.7−1.7−8.6±2.2

Lean BH crosscourt: +7.0±2.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (214 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv NicolasValue
FH down the line43%−1.8+1.2+0.3−0.4±4.5
FH through the middle40%−3.5+0.4+1.8−1.3±2.9
FH crosscourt17%−0.2+0.2−0.7−0.8±3.9

Lean FH down the line: +0.4±2.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (75 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv NicolasValue
BH through the middle48%−2.9−2.0+0.9−4.1±2.6
BH crosscourt43%+1.0−0.6−2.7−2.2±3.3
BH down the line9%−0.2−0.4+1.7+1.0±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +0.6±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (117 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Nicolas Kiefer returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ThomasValue
FH through the middle53%+4.3+1.6−0.6+5.3±3.0
FH crosscourt30%+5.5+0.2−2.5+3.3±4.4
FH down the line18%+1.7−3.0−0.6−1.9±4.4

Lean FH through the middle: +1.9±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (148 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ThomasValue
BH through the middle37%+6.4+0.6±0.0+7.0±2.9
BH crosscourt30%+8.8−0.8−1.4+6.6±3.6
BH slice through the middle14%−4.2+0.6+1.3−2.3±2.4
BH down the line9%+4.2+3.2−0.2+7.2±4.0
BH slice crosscourt7%+0.5−0.9−0.1−0.5±2.6

Lean BH through the middle: +2.4±2.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (161 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv ThomasValue
BH crosscourt52%+1.0−0.6+1.8+2.2±3.2
BH through the middle38%−2.9+0.7+1.1−1.1±2.5
BH down the line10%−0.2−0.3−2.5−3.0±4.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.8±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (122 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.

Thomas Johansson

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1+4.3±3.7−0.6+4.9
FH to their forehand · return +1+3.4±4.4+0.4+3.0
BH to their backhand · serve +1+2.0±3.2+0.2+1.8
FH to the middle · return+0.9±2.7−0.8+1.7
BH to their backhand · return +1+0.8±3.5+1.2−0.5
FH to their forehand · serve +1+0.7±4.2−4.1+4.8

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return−2.4±4.6−1.2−1.2
FH to their backhand · rally−2.3±3.0−2.0−0.3
FH to the middle · rally−2.2±2.5−0.1−2.1
BH to their forehand · rally−2.2±4.3−2.8+0.6
BH to their backhand · return−2.1±3.2−1.7−0.4

Nicolas Kiefer

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · return+2.7±4.6+3.0−0.3
FH to the middle · return+0.8±2.7+1.1−0.3
BH to their backhand · return +1+0.6±3.5±0.0+0.6
BH to the middle · return±0.0±2.5+0.8−0.8
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.1±3.8−0.8+0.6
BH to their backhand · rally−1.2±2.3−1.3+0.1

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · rally−5.2±3.0−4.6−0.6
FH to their forehand · rally−4.2±3.0−4.0−0.2
BH to their backhand · serve +1−3.9±3.3−3.3−0.6
FH to their forehand · return +1−3.4±4.4−1.1−2.3
BH to their forehand · rally−2.9±4.4−2.4−0.5

Against Nicolas Kiefer-like opponents

Thomas Johansson vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–63.7%34.2%
Players most similar to Nicolas Kiefer1 51.6%48.8%
Nicolas Kiefer (charted head-to-head)1 71.8%43.4%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Marin Cilic, Otto Virtanen, Andreas Seppi, Mardy Fish, Mario Ancic, Sebastien Grosjean, Wayne Ferreira, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Magnus Norman. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head