RallyIQ

Game plan

Sara Sorribes Tormo v Iga Swiatek

Every number combines what Sara Sorribes Tormo does well with what Iga Swiatek allows, each measured against the tour average and shrunk toward it when the sample is thin. Flip perspective

Forecast

Sara Sorribes Tormo wins, best of 3 1%90%: 0%–7% · best of 5: 0%
Serve points won 46.4% / 63.6% Sara / Iga · tour 58.1%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 2%serve 46.8% / 62.9%

Each player's serve and return strength is fitted against every opponent they were charted against, so a record built on weak opponents counts for less. At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers. The result is then nudged by Sara Sorribes Tormo's record against Iga Swiatek's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: −0.2 on serve, +0.8 on return vs expectation (377 points); head-to-head: −6.7 on serve, −14.4 on return vs expectation (180 points)). A game-by-game Markov chain turns point odds into match odds; the 90% range covers the uncertainty in the two strengths, not the nudges. Charted matches lean toward big events, so treat this as a scouting estimate, not a betting line.

Head to head, per 100 shots

CareerSaraIga
Direction choice−0.48 ±0.10
better than 0%
+0.17 ±0.03
better than 82%
Shot selection−0.84 ±0.19
better than 5%
+0.32 ±0.04
better than 81%
Execution+2.10 ±0.36
better than 99%
+0.91 ±0.19
better than 89%
Points left on the table3.12 ±0.13
lower than 7%
2.13 ±0.04
lower than 96%

Each player's career against an average tour player in the same position, adjusted for opponent strength, with a 90% margin (shots clustered by match). Points left on the table is the gap to the best-value direction for the same stroke, so lower is better. Percentiles are within each player's own tour. A side is highlighted only when the gap is larger than the margin on the difference.

Structural compatibility

Expected edge per 100 rally shots from style alone: Sara Sorribes Tormo +1.83, Iga Swiatek +1.74. Each player's shot mix weighted by their own skill with each shot and by how much the other gives up against it. This is why some rankings gaps don't hold in a given matchup.

Serve plan

The share of points the server wins when a first serve lands in that direction (hover a rate for its 90% interval; ± is the 90% margin). "Matchup" combines the server's rate with how this returner handles that serve. "Optimal" is the mix that wins most against this returner once they start reading a habit, at the response measured across the tour, and only within the range servers' habits actually vary. The gain over the current mix is how exploitable that mix is.

Sara Sorribes Tormo serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowSara winsv IgaMatchupOptimal
Wide44%61%60%55.2%±4.559% ▲
Body41%51%51%45.4%±4.726% ▼
T15%59%61%51.5%±7.315%

Optimal v Iga Swiatek: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.6 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowSara winsv IgaMatchupOptimal
Wide24%58%62%53.8%±5.840% ▲
Body52%53%51%47.8%±4.537% ▼
T24%54%59%49.0%±5.923%

Optimal v Iga Swiatek: +0.6±0.8 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.2 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Iga Swiatek serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowIga winsv SaraMatchupOptimal
Wide40%69%62%65.8%±4.441% ▲
Body28%64%51%57.5%±4.912% ▼
T32%73%60%65.6%±5.047% ▲

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +0.7±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +2.3 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowIga winsv SaraMatchupOptimal
Wide38%72%60%67.0%±4.553% ▲
Body29%63%55%61.1%±5.414% ▼
T33%68%57%60.5%±5.333%

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +0.6±0.7 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +3.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Return plan

Value of each return, in points per 100 returns against an average return of the same serve (direction, court, surface): the tour's result with that return, the returner's own edge with it, and what this server gives up when it comes back to that side. Returns with no charted direction are left out, so values compare with each other rather than with zero. Depth isn't a choice here: missed returns have no depth. Serve quality isn't charted, so a block through the middle partly reflects the serve that forced it.

Sara Sorribes Tormo returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv IgaValue
FH through the middle55%+4.2+3.8−1.2+6.8±1.8
FH down the line19%+1.5+2.0−3.6±0.0±3.6
FH crosscourt14%+5.3+3.1−0.6+7.8±3.4
FH slice through the middle8%−6.7+0.1−0.9−7.5±2.2
FH slice crosscourt4%−6.6+0.1−0.3−6.9±2.4

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.0±3.1 per 100 returns v the current mix (518 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv IgaValue
BH through the middle49%+6.0+2.4−1.3+7.1±1.7
BH crosscourt22%+7.7+4.0−1.2+10.6±2.6
BH down the line12%+2.2+3.2−2.7+2.7±3.7
BH slice through the middle8%−6.2+1.9−0.8−5.1±2.4
BH slice crosscourt3%−4.2−0.8−5.0−10.0±2.8

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.3±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (530 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv IgaValue
FH through the middle50%−3.2+1.6−0.4−1.9±2.5
FH crosscourt27%+0.5±0.0−2.3−1.8±3.6
FH down the line23%−0.6+1.9−0.2+1.1±4.3

Lean FH down the line: +2.3±3.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (113 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv IgaValue
FH inside-out34%+1.4+0.7−0.2+1.8±3.6
FH through the middle31%−2.7+2.4−0.4−0.7±2.1
BH through the middle18%−2.6+1.7±0.0−1.0±2.1
BH crosscourt8%+1.5−0.1−0.9+0.5±2.6
BH down the line3%−0.5−1.9−0.8−3.2±3.3

Lean FH inside-out: +2.0±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (261 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Iga Swiatek returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
FH through the middle51%+4.2+0.8+1.5+6.5±1.4
FH crosscourt25%+5.3+0.1+3.5+8.9±2.9
FH down the line15%+1.5−2.7+2.4+1.3±3.2
FH slice through the middle6%−6.7−0.5+0.9−6.4±2.2
FH slice crosscourt3%−6.6−3.5±0.0−10.1±1.9

Lean FH crosscourt: +4.0±2.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (3485 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
BH through the middle50%+6.0+0.4+1.6+8.1±1.6
BH crosscourt32%+7.7+0.7+0.5+8.9±2.3
BH down the line10%+2.2+2.9−0.6+4.5±3.9
BH slice through the middle4%−6.2−0.6−0.1−6.9±2.3
BH slice crosscourt3%−4.2−3.2+0.1−7.2±2.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.3±1.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (3016 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
FH through the middle41%−3.2+1.2+3.0+0.9±2.3
FH crosscourt40%+0.5−0.6+0.2+0.1±3.4
FH down the line17%−0.6−1.4+5.1+3.1±4.7
FH slice through the middle1%−15.2±0.0±0.0−15.2±1.6
FH slice crosscourt1%−14.9−0.1±0.0−15.0±1.5

Lean FH down the line: +2.5±4.2 per 100 returns v the current mix (1030 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
BH crosscourt47%+1.5+1.2+1.0+3.7±2.9
BH through the middle33%−2.6+0.2+1.6−0.8±2.2
BH down the line19%−0.5+4.4+1.6+5.5±4.5
FH inside-in1%+0.7−3.3+0.2−2.4±4.0
FH through the middle0%−2.7−1.1+3.0−0.8±2.0

Lean BH down the line: +3.1±3.9 per 100 returns v the current mix (1717 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Rally plan

Edge, in points per 100 shots: the hitter's skill with the shot (own) plus how much the receiver usually gives up against it (theirs), both measured against the tour average on grass. Each player's grass record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Sara Sorribes Tormo

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · serve +1+6.2±2.9+5.4+0.8
FH to the middle · rally+5.9±2.6+3.7+2.2
FH to the middle · return +1+5.6±3.3+4.7+0.9
FH to their backhand · return +1+5.6±5.2+3.2+2.4
BH slice to the middle · rally+4.9±2.5+3.3+1.6
BH to their backhand · rally+4.8±3.9+5.1−0.3

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH slice to their backhand · rally−5.3±4.3−0.5−4.8
FH lob to their backhand · rally−4.0±4.7+0.4−4.4
BH slice to their backhand · serve +1−2.8±4.5+1.5−4.3
FH to their backhand · return−1.5±5.0+3.3−4.8
BH to their forehand · serve +1−1.3±5.0+1.6−2.9

Iga Swiatek

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · serve +1+9.1±4.7+7.4+1.7
BH to their forehand · rally+8.6±4.6+3.4+5.2
BH to their forehand · return+7.4±5.6+3.0+4.4
BH to their backhand · serve +1+6.5±4.0+1.7+4.7
BH to the middle · return+5.9±2.9+1.7+4.3
BH to their backhand · return+5.8±4.1+2.4+3.4

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH slice to their backhand · rally−7.4±3.8−2.5−4.9
BH volley to their backhand · rally−6.8±5.6−2.6−4.2
BH slice to their forehand · rally−5.4±4.4−4.7−0.8
FH slice to the middle · rally−4.1±3.4−3.0−1.1
BH slice to the middle · rally−2.7±3.1−1.1−1.7

Against Iga Swiatek-like opponents

Sara Sorribes Tormo vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–50.6%48.1%
Players most similar to Iga Swiatek2 50.5%50.0%
Iga Swiatek (charted head-to-head)2 39.6%27.1%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Anastasia Potapova, Karolina Pliskova, Anna Kalinskaya, Anna Blinkova, Ekaterina Alexandrova, Sorana Cirstea, Shuai Zhang, Varvara Gracheva, Anett Kontaveit, Eugenie Bouchard. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head