Game plan

Tomas Martin Etcheverry v David Ferrer

Every number combines what Tomas Martin Etcheverry does well with what David Ferrer allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Tomas Martin Etcheverry wins, best of 3 58%90%: 31%–81% · best of 5: 60%

Serve points won 63.5% / 61.9% Tomas / David · tour 63.4%

Strengths only, no similarity priors 54%serve 62.6% / 61.9%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Tomas Martin Etcheverry's record against David Ferrer's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +12.1 on serve, −0.4 on return vs expectation (283 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	Tomas	David
Direction choice	−0.03 ±0.09 better than 49%	−0.03 ±0.06 better than 48%
Shot selection	+0.41 ±0.17 better than 87%	+0.44 ±0.08 better than 89%
Execution	+0.75 ±0.38 better than 90%	+0.21 ±0.29 better than 76%
Points left on the table	2.46 ±0.11 lower than 66%	2.21 ±0.08 lower than 92%

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.

Tomas Martin Etcheverry serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	Tomas wins	v David	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	54%	76%	74%	76.4%±4.1	67% ▲
Body	11%	62%	60%	57.8%±9.1	0% ▼
T	35%	71%	73%	69.3%±5.8	33% ▼

Optimal v David Ferrer: +0.9±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +4.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	Tomas wins	v David	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	72%	71%	70.1%±5.3	38% ▼
Body	7%	60%	62%	58.3%±10.8	0% ▼
T	49%	73%	74%	75.6%±4.7	62% ▲

Optimal v David Ferrer: +1.0±0.6 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving T every time would read +3.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

David Ferrer serving

Deuce court

1st serve	Now	David wins	v Tomas	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	44%	67%	73%	66.5%±5.0	57% ▲
Body	20%	61%	58%	55.8%±9.4	7% ▼
T	36%	67%	77%	69.5%±5.5	36%

Optimal v Tomas Martin Etcheverry: +0.7±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving T every time would read +4.1 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serve	Now	David wins	v Tomas	Matchup	Optimal
Wide	38%	67%	71%	65.1%±5.7	51% ▲
Body	17%	57%	64%	58.0%±9.6	4% ▼
T	44%	63%	68%	58.3%±5.7	45%

Optimal v Tomas Martin Etcheverry: +0.5±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.2 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.

Tomas Martin Etcheverry returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
FH through the middle	50%	+4.3	+0.5	+1.4	+6.2±1.9
FH down the line	23%	+1.7	+1.3	+4.2	+7.2±3.6
FH crosscourt	19%	+5.5	−0.3	−0.6	+4.6±3.8
FH slice through the middle	6%	−4.2	−0.9	+0.8	−4.4±2.3
FH slice down the line	2%	−4.3	−1.4	−1.1	−6.7±2.8

Lean FH down the line: +1.9±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (491 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
BH through the middle	42%	+6.4	−0.3	+1.1	+7.1±2.0
BH crosscourt	26%	+8.8	−2.0	+1.4	+8.2±2.9
BH down the line	16%	+4.2	−0.6	+1.1	+4.7±4.1
BH slice through the middle	7%	−4.2	−0.1	+1.5	−2.8±2.2
BH slice crosscourt	5%	+0.5	−1.3	+2.6	+1.8±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.9±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (415 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
FH through the middle	54%	−3.5	+2.3	+1.1	−0.1±2.5
FH down the line	25%	−1.8	+3.8	+1.0	+3.1±4.3
FH crosscourt	21%	−0.2	−0.6	+1.4	+0.5±4.2

Lean FH down the line: +2.3±3.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (140 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v David	Value
BH through the middle	37%	−2.9	+1.8	±0.0	−1.1±1.9
BH crosscourt	29%	+1.0	+0.8	+1.4	+3.2±2.6
FH through the middle	14%	−2.9	−1.8	+1.1	−3.6±2.1
FH inside-out	10%	+1.0	−0.4	+1.0	+1.6±3.4
BH down the line	6%	−0.2	−0.8	−0.1	−1.1±4.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.0±2.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (334 returns charted)

David Ferrer returning

1st serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Tomas	Value
FH through the middle	45%	+4.3	−0.9	−1.0	+2.3±2.0
FH crosscourt	19%	+5.5	−0.8	+0.5	+5.2±3.8
FH down the line	19%	+1.7	−0.6	−1.0	±0.0±3.8
FH slice through the middle	10%	−4.2	−0.6	−1.7	−6.5±2.2
FH slice down the line	5%	−4.3	+0.5	+0.7	−3.0±2.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.0±3.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (1210 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Tomas	Value
BH through the middle	44%	+6.4	−0.5	+0.3	+6.2±2.0
BH crosscourt	28%	+8.8	+3.1	−2.2	+9.7±2.9
BH slice through the middle	10%	−4.2	−0.3	±0.0	−4.5±2.4
BH down the line	10%	+4.2	+2.6	−1.5	+5.3±4.4
BH slice down the line	4%	−8.4	−3.6	−1.4	−13.5±3.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.6±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (1260 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Tomas	Value
FH through the middle	40%	−3.5	+1.5	+0.1	−1.9±2.6
FH down the line	35%	−1.8	+3.0	+1.5	+2.8±4.5
FH crosscourt	19%	−0.2	−0.2	−0.7	−1.1±4.4
FH slice through the middle	2%	−12.7	−1.0	±0.0	−13.7±1.1
BH through the middle	2%	+0.1	+0.1	+1.1	+1.3±1.6

Lean FH down the line: +3.2±3.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (339 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

Return	Now	Tour	Own	v Tomas	Value
BH crosscourt	54%	+1.0	+0.4	−0.5	+0.9±2.4
BH through the middle	33%	−2.9	−0.1	+1.1	−1.9±2.0
BH down the line	4%	−0.2	+1.9	−0.8	+0.8±5.0
FH through the middle	4%	−2.9	+0.4	+0.1	−2.5±2.3
FH inside-out	3%	+1.0	+2.4	+1.5	+4.8±3.6

Lean FH inside-out: +4.8±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (945 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.

Tomas Martin Etcheverry

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
FH to their backhand · return	+5.2±2.7	+1.6	+3.6
FH to their forehand · serve +1	+3.7±2.7	+2.1	+1.5
FH to their forehand · return +1	+3.1±3.1	+3.0	+0.1
FH to the middle · return	+2.7±1.5	+0.7	+2.1
FH to their backhand · rally	+2.7±1.4	+0.6	+2.2
FH to their forehand · rally	+2.5±1.5	+2.1	+0.4

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH slice to the middle · rally	−1.2±1.9	−2.1	+0.9
BH to their backhand · serve +1	−0.7±2.4	−0.5	−0.2
BH slice to their backhand · rally	−0.4±1.8	−1.8	+1.3
FH to the middle · serve +1	−0.1±2.2	−0.5	+0.4
FH to their forehand · return	+0.5±3.6	−0.1	+0.6

David Ferrer

Favour

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH to their forehand · rally	+4.2±2.6	+1.3	+2.8
BH to the middle · serve +1	+3.4±2.2	+1.3	+2.1
BH to their forehand · return +1	+3.3±4.4	+1.7	+1.5
BH to their forehand · return	+2.9±3.8	+4.4	−1.5
FH to their backhand · rally	+2.5±1.4	+1.0	+1.5
BH to their backhand · rally	+2.5±1.1	+1.0	+1.5

Avoid

Shot	Edge	Own	Theirs
BH volley to their forehand · rally	−2.2±5.8	+0.7	−2.9
BH slice to their forehand · rally	−2.1±3.3	−2.3	+0.2
FH volley to their forehand · rally	−1.4±5.7	−3.1	+1.7
BH to their backhand · return	−1.3±2.1	+0.4	−1.7
FH to their backhand · serve +1	−1.2±2.0	−1.8	+0.6

Against David Ferrer-like opponents

Tomas Martin Etcheverry v	Matches	Serve pts won	Return pts won
All charted opponents	–	63.0%	36.8%
Players most similar to David Ferrer	1	76.7%	37.8%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Casper Ruud, Tommy Paul, Pablo Carreno Busta, Miomir Kecmanovic, Diego Schwartzman, Ilya Ivashka, Carlos Berlocq, Guillermo Canas, Magnus Norman. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.