BJK Cup Group I · RR · Clay · 10 Apr 2026
Anouk Koevermans v Katja Wiersholm
68–47 in points · Anouk Koevermans won
Why it went the way it did
Anouk Koevermans won 10.9 more points than Katja Wiersholm relative to what the serve alone predicted. Katja Wiersholm's biggest leaks: slice shot selection −3.7, touch execution −1.5, touch shot selection −1.2.
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 | Anouk Koevermans | Katja Wiersholm | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | Dir | Sel | Exec | Total | |
| Serve 1st | −0.2 | ±0.0 | −0.7 | −0.9 | −0.7 | ±0.0 | +0.5 | −0.3 |
| Serve 2nd | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −1.0 | −1.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −1.1 | −1.1 |
| Return | +0.3 | +0.7 | +3.2 | +4.2 | +0.1 | +0.3 | −0.4 | ±0.0 |
| Forehand | +0.9 | +5.3 | +3.6 | +9.9 | +0.2 | +2.3 | +3.4 | +5.9 |
| Backhand | −0.5 | +0.9 | −0.9 | −0.5 | +0.1 | +0.8 | −0.3 | +0.5 |
| Slice | ±0.0 | −1.5 | ±0.0 | −1.6 | −0.4 | −3.7 | +1.0 | −3.1 |
| Net | +0.4 | +0.6 | −1.2 | −0.3 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 |
| Touch | ±0.0 | −0.6 | +0.7 | +0.1 | ±0.0 | −1.2 | −1.5 | −2.6 |
| Other | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | ±0.0 | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.3 |
| All shots | +0.9 | +5.4 | +3.6 | +9.9 | −0.7 | −1.6 | +1.3 | −1.0 |
Set by set
| Set | Anouk Koevermans | Katja Wiersholm | Net, Anouk | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +1.2 | −6.5 | +7.7 | |
| 2 | +8.7 | +5.5 | +3.2 |
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.
Anouk Koevermans serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 50% 88% | 19% 100% | 31% 40% |
| 2 | 39% 40% | 34% 46% | 26% 70% |
Within sets +1.61 per 100 first serves, every two to three service games
Katja Wiersholm serving
| Set | Wide | Body | T |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 37% 43% | 32% 17% | 32% 33% |
| 2 | 24% 40% | 57% 42% | 19% 50% |
Within sets −2.55 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.
Anouk Koevermans
7.8 points left on the table across 366 shots 2.14 per 100 shots
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×16; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.69 pts
- Return +1: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×10; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.48 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×9; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.47 pts
- Return of a 1st serve, T, deuce court hit FH through the middle ×2; FH inside-out rates higher · 0.43 pts
Katja Wiersholm
8.7 points left on the table across 353 shots 2.47 per 100 shots
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side hit BH through the middle ×14; BH crosscourt rates higher · 0.73 pts
- Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×9; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.50 pts
- Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side hit FH through the middle ×9; FH crosscourt rates higher · 0.49 pts
- Return of a 1st serve, T, deuce court hit FH down the line ×2; FH inside-out rates higher · 0.45 pts