Bouzkova vs Rakhimova Prediction: Ningbo 2026 Round of 32
Bouzkova is the favorite in Ningbo, but comparable service records and Rakhimova's stronger return figures support the model's more cautious assessment.
Marie Bouzkova faces Kamilla Rakhimova in Ningbo's round of 32. Court Shark's model gives Bouzkova a 64% chance, but the hard-court evidence supports a closer match than the market suggests.
The disagreement concerns the size of Bouzkova's edge
Court Shark's model is 6 percentage points less confident than the market in Marie Bouzkova against Kamilla Rakhimova. Both favor Bouzkova. The distinction is how much room each leaves for an upset, and the surface records give a reasonable basis for a more cautious assessment.
Monday's round of 32 in Ningbo offers Rakhimova a chance to extend her two-match winning run, while Bouzkova seeks to respond to her latest defeat. Rakhimova beat Dayana Yastremska and Tatiana Barkova at this tournament. Bouzkova lost her latest match to Maja Chwalinska in Wuhan, so their recent results provide different starting points for this meeting.
Bouzkova's No. 28 ranking, against Rakhimova's No. 69, supports her status as favorite and is consistent with the market's stronger preference. It does not explain the price. Rankings establish a broader separation, while the hard-court results offer a narrower view of this particular matchup. The market also moved one percentage point toward Bouzkova from its opening assessment.
Model and market on Kamilla Rakhimova
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
Kamilla Rakhimova's chance as the market consensus priced it from the opening line, next to the Court Shark model.
| Reading | Kamilla Rakhimova | Marie Bouzkova |
|---|---|---|
| Opening consensus | 31% | 69% |
| Latest consensus | 30% | 70% |
| Court Shark model | 36% | 64% |
Hard-court service records leave little separation
Over the last 52 weeks on hard courts, both players held serve in 66% of their service games. That is a meaningful counterweight to the ranking difference because neither player established a service advantage in this comparison of their records on the surface. Their holds were identical.
Rakhimova broke serve in 38% of return games, compared with Bouzkova's 35%. My reading is that these figures support caution about making Bouzkova an overwhelming favorite: Rakhimova's return record offers a plausible route to keeping the match competitive.
The samples covered 46 matches for Rakhimova and 29 for Bouzkova, rather than meetings against the same opponents under identical conditions. They establish comparable outcomes, not equal playing strength. Both players also went 6-4 across their latest ten matches, with the same record across their latest ten on hard courts. Recent winning frequency therefore supplies no clear reason to widen Bouzkova's advantage.
Rakhimova's workload could outweigh her recent wins
Rakhimova played five matches in the last 14 days, while Bouzkova played three during that span. Rakhimova's latest appearance came on Sunday, immediately before this match, whereas Bouzkova had four days between her last match and the scheduled meeting. Rest favors Bouzkova.
That difference is a concrete way the more cautious forecast could prove wrong: Rakhimova's recent success may come with a physical cost against a fresher opponent. Her latest win required a deciding set. That establishes a longer route through the match than a straight-sets result, although it does not establish fatigue or an injury.
The opposite possibility is that Rakhimova carries her recent results into another competitive performance while Bouzkova struggles to rebound from her defeat in Wuhan. They had never met before. There is no direct record showing whether Rakhimova's stronger hard-court return figures translate into an advantage against Bouzkova's serve.
The prediction
Court Shark's model favors Bouzkova with a 64% win probability; the market consensus gives her 70%. The evidence supports the favorite more clearly than it supports the market's larger margin. Her ranking and extra rest support her selection, while the surface records argue against dismissing Rakhimova's chances.
Court Shark's AI analyst, which reads the matchup without the market, also picks Bouzkova and agrees with the model. The clearest supporting case is her broader ranking advantage alongside the lighter recent workload, rather than a decisive superiority in hard-court service results. The forecast's median total is 20 games. That is a midpoint, not an exact score prediction.
A Bouzkova win in straight sets is the likeliest single result, with the middle half of forecast outcomes spanning 17 to 27 games. Rakhimova's return is the test. If she creates the service breaks suggested by her recent surface record, Bouzkova's ranking advantage may not translate into a short afternoon.
Ways to win
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
Every way the match can finish. The likeliest single result is Marie Bouzkova in straight sets (45%).
| Result | Chance |
|---|---|
| Kamilla Rakhimova wins 2-0 | 21% |
| Kamilla Rakhimova wins 2-1 | 15% |
| Marie Bouzkova wins 2-1 | 19% |
| Marie Bouzkova wins 2-0 | 45% |
Explore this matchup
Compare both players side by side: recent results, surfaces, serve and return.
Player comparison
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
Each measure on the same scale: recent wins, wins on this surface, head-to-head wins and the model's chance.
| Measure | Kamilla Rakhimova | Marie Bouzkova |
|---|---|---|
| Wins, last 10 matches | 60% (6-4) | 60% (6-4) |
| Wins, last 10 on hard | 60% (6-4) | 60% (6-4) |
| Model win probability | 36% | 64% |
Recent form
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
Each player's most recent completed matches, up to 10, oldest on the left.
| Player | Date | Result | Opponent | Score | Event |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Sep 4, 2026 | L | Aryna Sabalenka | 3-6 4-6 | US Open |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Sep 21, 2026 | W | Polina Kudermetova | 7-6(4) 4-6 7-5 | Seoul |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Sep 23, 2026 | L | Katie Volynets | 3-6 0-6 | Seoul |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 1, 2026 | W | Marina Bassols Ribera | 6-4 7-6(2) | Beijing |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 3, 2026 | W | Leylah Fernandez | 6-2 4-6 6-3 | Beijing |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 5, 2026 | L | Iva Jovic | 1-6 5-7 | Beijing |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 10, 2026 | W | Sofia Kenin | 6-0 6-3 | WTA Wuhan |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 11, 2026 | L | Han Shi | 6-7(2) 1-6 | WTA Wuhan |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 17, 2026 | W | Dayana Yastremska | 6-2 6-4 | WTA Ningbo |
| Kamilla Rakhimova | Oct 18, 2026 | W | Tatiana Barkova | 7-6(4) 4-6 6-4 | WTA Ningbo |
| Marie Bouzkova | Aug 19, 2026 | W | Iva Jovic | 7-6(0) 7-6(5) | Cincinnati |
| Marie Bouzkova | Aug 19, 2026 | L | Cori Gauff | 3-6 2-6 | Cincinnati |
| Marie Bouzkova | Aug 31, 2026 | W | Elsa Jacquemot | 6-2 6-2 | US Open |
| Marie Bouzkova | Sep 3, 2026 | W | Harriet Dart | 6-2 6-2 | US Open |
| Marie Bouzkova | Sep 5, 2026 | L | Iga Swiatek | 6-7(3) 6-7(3) | US Open |
| Marie Bouzkova | Sep 25, 2026 | W | Sonay Kartal | 7-6(2) 4-6 6-4 | BJK Cup Finals |
| Marie Bouzkova | Oct 3, 2026 | W | Kimberly Birrell | 6-4 6-4 | Beijing |
| Marie Bouzkova | Oct 5, 2026 | L | Qinwen Zheng | 6-7(3) 6-4 5-7 | Beijing |
| Marie Bouzkova | Oct 12, 2026 | W | Clara Tauson | 6-1 2-0 RET | WTA Wuhan |
| Marie Bouzkova | Oct 14, 2026 | L | Maja Chwalinska | 6-1 1-6 1-6 | WTA Wuhan |
Win rate by surface
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
Share of matches won on each surface across each player's last 50 matches with full statistics.
| Surface | Kamilla Rakhimova | Marie Bouzkova |
|---|---|---|
| Hard | 50% (19-19) | 48% (14-15) |
| Clay | 20% (1-4) | 70% (7-3) |
| Grass | 43% (3-4) | 82% (9-2) |
Serve and return on hard courts
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
How often each player held serve and broke serve on hard over their last 50 matches with full statistics, against the tour's all-years average on the surface.
| Measure | Kamilla Rakhimova | Marie Bouzkova | Tour average, all years |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service games held | 64% | 66% | 63% |
| Return games broken | 38% | 35% | 37% |
| Matches in sample | 38 | 29 |
Model win probability
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
The Court Shark model's chance for each player to win this match.
| Player | Win probability | Recent form (last 10) |
|---|---|---|
| Kamilla Rakhimova | 36% | 6-4 |
| Marie Bouzkova | 64% | 6-4 |
How long it could go
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
A 60% chance the match lasts 17 to 27 games; 20 is the middle of the range.
| Total games | Chance |
|---|---|
| 12 | 0.4% |
| 13 | 1.5% |
| 14 | 3.3% |
| 15 | 5.6% |
| 16 | 7.9% |
| 17 | 9.0% |
| 18 | 8.7% |
| 19 | 7.9% |
| 20 | 6.7% |
| 21 | 5.0% |
| 22 | 5.7% |
| 23 | 3.5% |
| 24 | 2.2% |
| 25 | 3.6% |
| 26 | 3.8% |
| 27 | 3.6% |
| 28 | 3.8% |
| 29 | 3.8% |
| 30 | 3.6% |
| 31 | 3.1% |
| 32 | 2.6% |
| 33 | 1.7% |
| 34 | 1.2% |
| 35 | 1.0% |
| 36 | 0.4% |
Service games held: where they stand
Article snapshot, Oct 18, 2026 · Not live
Each dot is one of the WTA top 100 with enough matches in the last 52 weeks. Kamilla Rakhimova ranks ahead of 4 of 65; Marie Bouzkova is 30th of 65.
| Player | Service games held | Place |
|---|---|---|
| Kamilla Rakhimova | 61.1% | Ahead of 4 of 65 |
| Marie Bouzkova | 69.7% | 30th of 65 |
| Field median | 69.3% | |
| Field best (Elena Rybakina) | 83.1% | 1st |
Court Shark win probabilities are statistical estimates, not advice. No outcome is guaranteed.
Methodology and sources
How we build model estimates and where our information comes from.
Model estimates and observed results
The win probabilities come from the Court Shark match model, trained on completed ATP and WTA matches. A probability says how often a player in this position wins, not that one result will happen. The model's number for a match is recorded before play and never changed afterwards, so it can be checked against the result.
Sources and citations
Results, scores, rankings and serve statistics come from the Court Shark match database. The market consensus is the pre-match price for each player converted to a probability. Figures in this article are a snapshot taken when it was written.
Limitations
Serve and return rates count only matches with full serve statistics, which are sparser for Challenger and lower-level events, and the tour average they are compared with covers every year on record. Head-to-head records count every meeting with a recorded winner, walkovers and retirements included. Charts and tables are a snapshot and do not update after publication.
About the desk
Who works on the Tennis Desk and how an article is put together. Read about the desk
Editorial standards
What we publish, what we check and how we decide what is fit to print. Read our standards
Corrections
Spotted an error? Write to hello@courtshark.ai and we will correct it and note the change. Read the corrections policy