Moscow · QF · Hard · 19 Oct 2017
Julia Goerges v Lesia Tsurenko
85–65 in points · Julia Goerges won
Why it went the way it did
Julia Goerges won 11.9 more points than Lesia Tsurenko relative to what the serve alone predicted. Lesia Tsurenko's biggest leaks: forehand execution −6.9, slice shot selection −4.0, return execution −2.0.
Each shot moves its hitter's chance of winning the point. Those moves are split into direction choice, shot selection and execution, and summed here. Read both columns together: one player's gain is the other's loss.
| Shot | Julia Goerges | Lesia Tsurenko | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | +0.4 | ±0.0 | −2.3 | −1.9 | −0.1 | ±0.0 | −1.3 | −1.4 |
| Serve 2nd | +0.1 | ±0.0 | +2.7 | +2.8 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | +0.3 | +0.3 |
| Return | +0.4 | +2.1 | −0.3 | +2.1 | +0.1 | −0.2 | −2.0 | −2.1 |
| Forehand | +0.4 | +2.1 | −3.0 | −0.5 | ±0.0 | +2.0 | −6.9 | −4.8 |
| Backhand | ±0.0 | +0.5 | −1.7 | −1.2 | +0.1 | +0.8 | −1.3 | −0.4 |
| Slice | +0.1 | −1.0 | −0.2 | −1.1 | −0.2 | −4.0 | +1.0 | −3.2 |
| Net | +0.1 | +0.4 | +0.6 | +1.1 | +0.1 | +0.2 | +1.1 | +1.5 |
| Touch | −0.1 | +0.4 | −0.6 | −0.2 | +0.3 | −0.4 | −0.5 | −0.6 |
| All shots | +1.4 | +4.6 | −4.9 | +1.1 | +0.5 | −1.6 | −9.8 | −10.8 |
Set by set
| Set | Julia Goerges | Lesia Tsurenko | Net, Julia | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +1.7 | −3.8 | +5.5 | |
| 2 | −0.6 | −7.0 | +6.4 |
Adaptation
First-serve direction mix set by set, with the share of points each direction won. The scores measure whether the server moved toward the directions that had been winning earlier in this match, set to set and every two to three service games, in points per 100 first serves. Read them as a habit, not a gain: across the tour, a direction's edge in early sets barely predicts the later ones. Whether the returner responded can't be told apart from noise within one match.
Julia Goerges serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 57% 71% | 7% 0% | 37% 73% |
| 2 | 55% 69% | 7% 100% | 38% 55% |
Set to set −0.04 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets −0.08 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Lesia Tsurenko serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 32% 14% | 27% 50% | 41% 67% |
| 2 | 51% 47% | 18% 25% | 31% 71% |
Within sets +0.20 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Counterfactual: the best direction every time
If each shot had gone in the direction that is usually worth most for that stroke and position, this is how many more points each player would expect to win. It's an upper bound: the best direction isn't always on, and the chart can't see the ball's pace or position.
Julia Goerges
6.3 points left on the table across 259 shots 2.43 per 100 shots
- Return +1: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×6; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.29 pts
- Return of a 2nd serve, body, deuce court hit FH through the middle + approach ×1; FH down the line + approach rates higher · 0.28 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×6; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.26 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH drop shot through the middle + approach ×1; FH drop shot crosscourt + approach rates higher · 0.25 pts
Lesia Tsurenko
6.7 points left on the table across 245 shots 2.72 per 100 shots
- Serve +1: mid-depth return to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×5; BH down the line rates higher · 0.35 pts
- Return of a 2nd serve, wide, deuce court hit FH through the middle ×3; FH inside-out rates higher · 0.34 pts
- Return +1: drive to your middle hit FH through the middle ×4; FH down the line rates higher · 0.26 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drop shot to your forehand side, opponent at net hit FH crosscourt ×3; FH down the line rates higher · 0.25 pts