RallyIQ

Game plan

Varvara Gracheva v Sara Sorribes Tormo

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

Forecast

Varvara Gracheva wins, best of 3 31%90%: 7%–69% · best of 5: 26%
Serve points won 45.7% / 49.5% Varvara / Sara · tour 55.0%
Strengths only, no similarity priors 24%serve 45.3% / 50.5%

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 At least one of them is no longer active or has too little charted in the last three seasons, so both are compared on their careers.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 Varvara Gracheva's record against Sara Sorribes Tormo's tactical lookalikes and in their charted head-to-heads (lookalikes: +5.0 on serve, +10.5 on return vs expectation (227 points); head-to-head: +1.3 on serve, +2.9 on return vs expectation (242 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

CareerVarvaraSara
Direction choice+0.06 ±0.12
better than 65%
−0.48 ±0.10
better than 0%
Shot selection+0.04 ±0.19
better than 49%
−0.84 ±0.19
better than 5%
Execution−0.42 ±0.65
better than 37%
+2.10 ±0.36
better than 99%
Points left on the table2.32 ±0.17
lower than 84%
3.12 ±0.13
lower than 7%

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: Varvara Gracheva +0.12, Sara Sorribes Tormo +3.79. 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.

Varvara Gracheva serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowVarvara winsv SaraMatchupOptimal
Wide40%64%62%60.2%±7.840%
Body30%52%51%45.9%±8.115% ▼
T30%64%60%55.8%±9.145% ▲

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +1.0±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix. Serving wide every time would read +5.7 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowVarvara winsv SaraMatchupOptimal
Wide35%60%60%54.4%±9.050% ▲
Body27%48%55%46.2%±9.127%
T38%56%57%47.4%±8.723% ▼

Optimal v Sara Sorribes Tormo: +0.7±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +4.9 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Sara Sorribes Tormo serving

Deuce court

1st serveNowSara winsv VarvaraMatchupOptimal
Wide44%61%65%59.8%±7.459% ▲
Body41%51%51%45.1%±8.626% ▼
T15%59%66%57.2%±10.515%

Optimal v Varvara Gracheva: +0.9±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving wide every time would read +6.4 per 100 first serves in before the returner adjusts.

Ad court

1st serveNowSara winsv VarvaraMatchupOptimal
Wide24%58%62%54.3%±8.837% ▲
Body52%53%60%57.1%±8.837% ▼
T24%54%66%56.2%±9.126% ▲

Optimal v Varvara Gracheva: +0.4±1.0 per 100 first serves (faults included) over the current mix, inside the 90% margin. Serving body every time would read +0.9 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.

Varvara Gracheva returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
FH through the middle46%+4.2+1.0+1.5+6.7±2.5
FH crosscourt22%+5.3+0.4+3.5+9.3±4.0
FH down the line16%+1.5−1.7+2.4+2.3±4.2
FH slice through the middle9%−6.7−0.7+0.9−6.6±2.3
FH slice crosscourt5%−6.6+1.0±0.0−5.6±1.5

Lean FH crosscourt: +5.0±3.4 per 100 returns v the current mix (223 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
BH through the middle42%+6.0+0.8+1.6+8.5±2.5
BH crosscourt32%+7.7+2.2+0.5+10.4±3.3
BH down the line10%+2.2−0.7−0.6+0.9±4.3
BH slice through the middle9%−6.2−0.6−0.1−6.9±2.2
BH slice crosscourt7%−4.2+0.1+0.1−3.9±2.6

Lean BH crosscourt: +4.4±2.5 per 100 returns v the current mix (183 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
FH through the middle44%−3.2−0.3+3.0−0.5±2.7
FH crosscourt41%+0.5−1.5+0.2−0.8±3.9
FH down the line15%−0.6+2.8+5.1+7.3±4.2

Lean FH through the middle: −1.0±2.3 per 100 returns v the current mix (41 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv SaraValue
BH through the middle45%−2.6+0.2+1.6−0.8±2.8
BH crosscourt38%+1.5+1.4+1.0+3.8±3.7
BH down the line16%−0.5−0.9+1.6+0.2±4.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +2.7±2.7 per 100 returns v the current mix (99 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

Sara Sorribes Tormo returning

1st serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv VarvaraValue
FH through the middle55%+4.2+3.8+3.3+11.3±2.5
FH down the line19%+1.5+2.0+1.1+4.7±4.6
FH crosscourt14%+5.3+3.1−2.1+6.3±4.3
FH slice through the middle8%−6.7+0.1+2.4−4.2±2.5
FH slice crosscourt4%−6.6+0.1+0.3−6.3±2.2

Lean FH through the middle: +4.0±1.6 per 100 returns v the current mix (518 returns charted)

1st serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv VarvaraValue
BH through the middle49%+6.0+2.4+0.3+8.8±2.4
BH crosscourt22%+7.7+4.0+0.8+12.5±3.5
BH down the line12%+2.2+3.2−0.1+5.3±4.7
BH slice through the middle8%−6.2+1.9+0.7−3.7±2.4
BH slice crosscourt3%−4.2−0.8±0.0−5.0±1.9

Lean BH crosscourt: +5.2±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (530 returns charted)

2nd serve to the forehand

ReturnNowTourOwnv VarvaraValue
FH through the middle50%−3.2+1.6+0.6−0.9±3.1
FH crosscourt27%+0.5±0.0+3.2+3.7±4.4
FH down the line23%−0.6+1.9+0.5+1.8±5.1

Lean FH crosscourt: +2.8±3.8 per 100 returns v the current mix (113 returns charted, inside the 90% margin)

2nd serve to the backhand

ReturnNowTourOwnv VarvaraValue
FH inside-out34%+1.4+0.7+0.5+2.5±4.3
FH through the middle31%−2.7+2.4+0.6+0.3±2.6
BH through the middle18%−2.6+1.7−0.1−1.0±2.8
BH crosscourt8%+1.5−0.1−1.1+0.3±3.5
BH down the line3%−0.5−1.9−2.5−4.9±4.6

Lean FH inside-out: +2.0±3.0 per 100 returns v the current mix (261 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 clay. Each player's clay record is shrunk toward their all-surface one, so a thin sample on it moves the numbers only a little.

Varvara Gracheva

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to the middle · return+3.9±3.1+2.5+1.3
FH to their forehand · return +1+3.7±4.8+1.1+2.5
BH to their backhand · return +1+3.0±4.0+1.4+1.6
BH to the middle · return+2.5±3.2+0.4+2.1
FH to their forehand · return+2.4±4.6−0.4+2.8
BH to the middle · serve +1+2.4±3.1−0.6+3.0

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their forehand · rally−5.6±3.7−4.2−1.4
BH to their forehand · rally−4.6±5.0−3.2−1.4
BH to the middle · rally−3.8±2.7−3.2−0.6
FH to their backhand · rally−2.6±3.9−1.2−1.4
FH to their forehand · serve +1−2.3±5.0−2.9+0.7

Sara Sorribes Tormo

Favour

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
FH to their backhand · return +1+8.6±5.0+2.2+6.4
FH to the middle · return+6.5±3.1+3.3+3.2
BH to their backhand · rally+6.3±3.7+3.9+2.4
BH to the middle · return+6.3±3.1+3.8+2.5
BH to their forehand · rally+6.2±5.5+6.5−0.3
FH to their forehand · rally+5.9±4.0+4.0+1.8

Avoid

ShotEdgeOwnTheirs
BH to their forehand · serve +1−2.0±6.7+1.4−3.4
BH slice to their backhand · rally−0.5±2.7−0.7+0.2
BH to their backhand · return +1−0.3±4.8+1.7−2.0
BH to their forehand · return+0.6±5.5+2.6−2.0
BH to their backhand · serve +1+2.0±5.1−0.2+2.2

Against Sara Sorribes Tormo-like opponents

Varvara Gracheva vMatchesServe pts wonReturn pts won
All charted opponents–50.8%43.8%
Players most similar to Sara Sorribes Tormo2 55.8%57.9%
Sara Sorribes Tormo (charted head-to-head)1 51.5%52.2%

Similar by tactical fingerprint: Tamara Zidansek, Marie Bouzkova, Viktorija Golubic, Daria Kasatkina, Katie Volynets, Sara Errani, Alize Cornet, Madison Brengle, Saisai Zheng, Jennifer Capriati. When two players have rarely met, their records against these lookalikes fill the gap.

Charted head-to-head