BJK Cup Playoffs · RR · Clay · 15 Nov 2024
Veronika Erjavec v Suzan Lamens
66–89 in points · Suzan Lamens won
Why it went the way it did
Suzan Lamens won 11.8 more points than Veronika Erjavec relative to what the serve alone predicted. Veronika Erjavec's biggest leaks: serve 1st execution −3.3, slice shot selection −3.0, net execution −2.7.
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 | Veronika Erjavec | Suzan Lamens | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | +0.5 | ±0.0 | −3.3 | −2.8 | +0.5 | ±0.0 | +1.8 | +2.3 |
| Serve 2nd | +0.2 | ±0.0 | +2.6 | +2.8 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −0.2 |
| Return | +0.1 | −0.8 | −2.1 | −2.7 | ±0.0 | +0.3 | +1.3 | +1.5 |
| Forehand | +0.9 | +2.6 | +1.2 | +4.7 | +1.3 | +3.5 | −1.9 | +2.9 |
| Backhand | +0.8 | +0.7 | −1.9 | −0.4 | −0.3 | +1.1 | +3.3 | +4.1 |
| Slice | +0.2 | −3.0 | −0.5 | −3.2 | −0.4 | −1.7 | +0.1 | −2.0 |
| Net | −0.3 | +0.1 | −2.7 | −2.8 | +0.1 | +0.1 | −0.9 | −0.7 |
| Touch | ±0.0 | +0.3 | −1.0 | −0.7 | +0.1 | −0.8 | +0.1 | −0.7 |
| Other | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −0.3 | −0.5 | −0.9 |
| All shots | +2.4 | ±0.0 | −7.7 | −5.3 | +1.0 | +2.2 | +3.3 | +6.5 |
Set by set
| Set | Veronika Erjavec | Suzan Lamens | Net, Veronika | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −3.9 | +2.6 | −6.6 | |
| 2 | +1.4 | +0.4 | +1.0 | |
| 3 | −2.8 | +3.5 | −6.2 |
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.
Veronika Erjavec serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52% 59% | 9% 67% | 39% 31% |
| 2 | 36% 58% | 9% 67% | 55% 67% |
| 3 | 38% 33% | – | 63% 50% |
Set to set −2.30 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets −1.51 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Suzan Lamens serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 38% 78% | 4% 100% | 58% 64% |
| 2 | 44% 36% | 4% 100% | 52% 85% |
| 3 | 55% 73% | 5% 100% | 40% 75% |
Set to set −0.76 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets −0.65 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.
Veronika Erjavec
7.2 points left on the table across 361 shots 1.99 per 100 shots
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your middle, you at net hit BH volley through the middle ×2; BH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.57 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×8; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.42 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×6; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.33 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side, opponent at net, you at net hit FH volley through the middle ×1; FH volley crosscourt rates higher · 0.31 pts
Suzan Lamens
7.5 points left on the table across 363 shots 2.07 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×24; BH crosscourt rates higher · 1.03 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×9; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.47 pts
- Return +1: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×7; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.33 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side, opponent at net hit BH through the middle ×2; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.25 pts