Rome · R16 · Clay · 12 May 2025
Qinwen Zheng v Bianca Andreescu
68–48 in points · Qinwen Zheng won
Why it went the way it did
Qinwen Zheng won 9.6 more points than Bianca Andreescu relative to what the serve alone predicted. Bianca Andreescu's biggest leaks: slice shot selection −2.1, touch shot selection −2.0, forehand execution −1.9.
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 | Qinwen Zheng | Bianca Andreescu | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | +0.2 | ±0.0 | −1.8 | −1.6 | −0.5 | ±0.0 | +0.2 | −0.3 |
| Serve 2nd | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −2.7 | −2.7 | +0.1 | ±0.0 | +1.0 | +1.1 |
| Return | ±0.0 | +0.6 | +0.7 | +1.4 | −0.1 | −0.3 | +0.3 | −0.2 |
| Forehand | +0.4 | +1.5 | +3.7 | +5.6 | −0.8 | +2.1 | −1.9 | −0.6 |
| Backhand | +0.1 | −0.1 | −0.3 | −0.3 | −0.4 | ±0.0 | −0.6 | −1.0 |
| Slice | ±0.0 | −0.8 | +0.5 | −0.4 | −0.2 | −2.1 | −0.8 | −3.1 |
| Net | +0.2 | +0.7 | +0.8 | +1.7 | +0.1 | +0.2 | +0.6 | +0.9 |
| Touch | ±0.0 | −0.3 | +0.5 | +0.2 | ±0.0 | −2.0 | −0.7 | −2.7 |
| Other | −0.1 | −0.3 | ±0.0 | −0.4 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 |
| All shots | +0.8 | +1.3 | +1.5 | +3.6 | −1.9 | −2.0 | −2.1 | −6.0 |
Set by set
| Set | Qinwen Zheng | Bianca Andreescu | Net, Qinwen | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +0.9 | −3.1 | +4.0 | |
| 2 | +2.7 | −2.9 | +5.6 |
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.
Qinwen Zheng serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 35% 42% | 18% 50% | 47% 69% |
| 2 | 43% 60% | 9% 50% | 48% 64% |
Set to set −0.29 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets −0.13 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Bianca Andreescu serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 23% 20% | 42% 56% | 35% 53% |
| 2 | 47% 29% | 40% 33% | 13% 0% |
Set to set −5.00 per 100 first serves in sets 2+
Within sets −1.07 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.
Qinwen Zheng
4.9 points left on the table across 244 shots 2.02 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×6; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.33 pts
- Return +1: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×4; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.25 pts
- Serve +1: short return to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×3; BH down the line rates higher · 0.25 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle hit FH through the middle ×3; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.21 pts
Bianca Andreescu
7.2 points left on the table across 226 shots 3.18 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×10; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.43 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×7; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.38 pts
- Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle hit FH through the middle ×4; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.34 pts
- Return +1: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×4; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.25 pts