Shenzhen · R32 · Hard · 9 Jan 2020
Yafan Wang v Sara Sorribes Tormo
80–71 in points · Yafan Wang won
Why it went the way it did
Yafan Wang won 3.4 more points than Sara Sorribes Tormo relative to what the serve alone predicted. Sara Sorribes Tormo's biggest leaks: slice shot selection −12.5, serve 1st execution −1.6, backhand execution −1.3.
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 | Yafan Wang | Sara Sorribes Tormo | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | +0.1 | +0.1 | −0.3 | −0.1 | −0.8 | +0.2 | −1.6 | −2.3 |
| Serve 2nd | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | +0.3 | +0.3 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | +1.1 | +1.1 |
| Return | +0.2 | +0.8 | +1.9 | +2.9 | −0.3 | −0.4 | +4.3 | +3.6 |
| Forehand | +0.2 | +4.6 | −2.9 | +1.8 | −1.3 | +3.9 | +0.4 | +3.0 |
| Backhand | −0.2 | +2.7 | +2.4 | +4.8 | −0.4 | +1.2 | −1.3 | −0.5 |
| Slice | −0.2 | −2.3 | −1.6 | −4.1 | +0.4 | −12.5 | +4.2 | −8.0 |
| Net | −1.2 | +0.1 | −2.6 | −3.6 | −0.4 | +0.2 | +0.6 | +0.4 |
| Touch | −0.2 | −1.1 | −1.5 | −2.8 | −0.1 | −1.0 | −0.3 | −1.4 |
| All shots | −1.4 | +4.9 | −4.3 | −0.7 | −2.9 | −8.6 | +7.4 | −4.1 |
Set by set
| Set | Yafan Wang | Sara Sorribes Tormo | Net, Yafan | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −3.1 | +2.8 | −5.9 | |
| 2 | +0.9 | −5.2 | +6.2 | |
| 3 | +1.4 | −1.7 | +3.1 |
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.
Yafan Wang serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52% 56% | 16% 60% | 32% 20% |
| 2 | 42% 63% | 16% 67% | 42% 75% |
| 3 | 42% 79% | 24% 50% | 33% 27% |
Set to set −0.84 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets +0.22 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Sara Sorribes Tormo serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 47% 44% | 53% 90% | – |
| 2 | 36% 40% | 43% 42% | 21% 50% |
| 3 | 43% 33% | 43% 44% | 14% 33% |
Set to set +0.50 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets +1.14 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.
Yafan Wang
13.9 points left on the table across 451 shots 3.07 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×14; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.60 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side, you at net hit FH volley through the middle ×2; FH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.50 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: lob to your middle, you at net hit Smash through the middle ×2; Smash crosscourt rates higher · 0.50 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: slice to your middle, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×2; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.45 pts
Sara Sorribes Tormo
14.4 points left on the table across 441 shots 3.26 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH slice through the middle ×15; BH slice crosscourt rates higher · 0.90 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×10; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.55 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×10; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.54 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle hit FH through the middle ×7; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.49 pts