RallyIQ

Game plan

Ugo Humbert v Egor Gerasimov

Every number combines what Ugo Humbert does well with what Egor Gerasimov allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Ugo Humbert wins, best of 3 63%90%: 42%–81% · best of 5: 66%
Serve points won 65.9% / 63.2% Ugo / Egor · tour 63.8%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 63%serve 65.9% / 63.2%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Ugo Humbert's record against Egor Gerasimov's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads. 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

CareerUgoEgor
Direction choice−0.09 ±0.06
better than 34%
−0.12 ±0.11
better than 26%
Shot selection−0.20 ±0.13
better than 30%
+0.25 ±0.18
better than 75%
Execution+0.66 ±0.45
better than 87%
−0.08 ±0.57
better than 64%
Points left on the table2.97 ±0.12
lower than 21%
2.49 ±0.18
lower than 61%

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.

Ugo Humbert serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowUgo winsv EgorMatchupOptimal
Wide45%78%69%74.0%±6.158% ▲
Body5%64%60%61.5%±13.80% ▼
T49%70%76%72.0%±6.942% ▼

Optimal v Egor Gerasimov: +0.3±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +1.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowUgo winsv EgorMatchupOptimal
Wide53%72%73%72.3%±6.245% ▼
Body5%59%67%62.9%±13.70% ▼
T42%81%70%79.3%±5.855% ▲

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

Egor Gerasimov serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowEgor winsv UgoMatchupOptimal
Wide42%77%73%77.0%±6.355% ▲
Body7%63%65%65.0%±12.60% ▼
T51%70%75%70.1%±6.645% ▼

Optimal v Ugo Humbert: +0.9±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +4.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowEgor winsv UgoMatchupOptimal
Wide68%72%79%78.4%±5.564% ▼
Body9%65%68%70.5%±11.60% ▼
T23%67%73%67.7%±8.336% ▲

Optimal v Ugo Humbert: +0.4±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.1 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.

Ugo Humbert returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EgorValue
FH through the middle41%+4.3+1.8+1.4+7.5±2.7
FH crosscourt22%+5.5+2.7−1.3+6.9±4.0
FH down the line20%+1.7+3.4−0.8+4.3±3.9
FH slice through the middle12%−4.2+0.4−0.9−4.8±2.3
FH slice crosscourt2%−4.3−1.1+0.6−4.8±2.3

Lean FH through the middle: +2.8±2.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (698 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EgorValue
BH through the middle45%+6.4+2.6+2.2+11.2±2.3
BH down the line16%+4.2+4.7+1.3+10.1±4.3
BH crosscourt15%+8.8+1.8+1.1+11.7±3.3
BH slice through the middle13%−4.2−1.2−1.4−6.8±2.4
BH slice down the line5%−8.4+0.6+0.9−6.9±3.3

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.7±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (963 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EgorValue
FH through the middle58%−3.5+0.6−1.3−4.2±2.6
FH crosscourt21%−0.2−2.0+0.7−1.6±4.4
FH down the line19%−1.8−2.9−0.2−4.9±4.5
BH through the middle3%+0.1+0.6+0.3+1.0±1.8

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.0±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (339 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv EgorValue
BH through the middle58%−2.9+2.5+0.3−0.1±2.2
BH crosscourt21%+1.0+0.6+2.2+3.8±3.1
BH down the line20%−0.2+2.7−1.1+1.4±4.9
BH slice through the middle1%−11.3±0.0±0.0−11.3±1.1

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.9±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (503 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Egor Gerasimov returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv UgoValue
FH through the middle65%+4.3±0.0+2.7+6.9±2.5
FH crosscourt20%+5.5+0.1+4.9+10.5±4.2
FH down the line16%+1.7+1.2−3.9−1.0±4.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.2±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (200 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv UgoValue
BH through the middle52%+6.4+0.2+4.5+11.1±2.3
BH crosscourt28%+8.8−2.0+5.3+12.1±3.3
BH down the line12%+4.2−5.8−1.3−2.9±4.1
BH slice through the middle6%−4.2+0.1+2.1−2.0±2.0
BH slice crosscourt3%+0.5−1.4+5.2+4.4±2.5

Lean BH crosscourt: +3.3±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (189 returns charted)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv UgoValue
BH through the middle55%−2.9+0.2+1.2−1.4±2.1
BH crosscourt30%+1.0−0.6−0.1+0.4±2.8
BH down the line15%−0.2−0.7+1.2+0.3±4.4

Lean BH crosscourt: +1.0±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (118 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 hard. Each player's hard record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Ugo Humbert

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to the middle · return+5.8±2.5+2.8+3.0
BH to their backhand · return+4.6±3.8+3.4+1.2
FH to their forehand · return +1+3.8±5.3+0.6+3.2
FH to the middle · return +1+3.0±3.6−0.2+3.1
FH to the middle · serve +1+2.7±3.3+0.4+2.3
FH to their backhand · return+0.1±5.2+2.6−2.5

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their backhand · return +1−5.6±4.5−4.4−1.3
BH to their backhand · serve +1−3.0±4.4−4.2+1.2
FH to their forehand · serve +1−2.7±4.2−1.8−0.9
FH to their backhand · rally−2.0±3.1−0.8−1.1
BH slice to their backhand · rally−1.6±3.4−2.4+0.8

Egor Gerasimov

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return+2.5±2.8+1.2+1.3
BH to the middle · return+2.2±2.2+0.1+2.0
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.4±4.2+1.3+0.1
FH to the middle · rally+1.0±2.5+1.1±0.0
BH to the middle · serve +1+0.5±3.3−0.3+0.8
BH to their backhand · serve +1+0.3±4.3+0.1+0.2

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · return−4.0±5.3−5.7+1.7
BH to their backhand · return +1−3.7±4.8−0.2−3.5
BH to the middle · rally−3.6±2.1−2.6−1.0
FH to their forehand · rally−2.8±3.0+1.1−3.9
FH to their forehand · return +1−2.3±5.5+1.8−4.1

Against Egor Gerasimov-like opponents

Ugo Humbert vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–66.7%34.7%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Jannik Sinner, Flavio Cobolli, Cameron Norrie, Pedro Martinez, Cristian Garin, Fernando Verdasco, Paul Henri Mathieu, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Gaston Gaudio, Marcelo Rios. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.