RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 50 charted matches · 2007–2016

Ana Ivanovic

Archetype: Runs around the backhand · Forehand-dominant

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 60.2% ±2.6 raw 59.3% · tour 56.3% · 3,524 points
Return points won 46.4% ±2.6 raw 43.6% · tour 43.7% · 3,604 points

Serve and return points won, refitted against every opponent at once so a record built on weak or strong opposition is put on the same scale. Career, all surfaces, with a 90% margin. Raw is the plain share of points won.

Value per 100 shots

Direction choice +0.22 ±0.06 better than 88% of WTA · raw +0.22
Shot selection +0.19 ±0.13 better than 64% of WTA · raw +0.18
Execution −0.07 ±0.34 better than 58% of WTA · raw −0.13
Tactical adaptability +0.03 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 48 matches
Adaptation speed +0.03 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.35 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 82% of WTA

Points gained per 100 shots compared with an average tour player in the same position, adjusted for the strength of the opponents faced, with a 90% margin (shots clustered by match). Raw is before the opponent adjustment. Built on 16,830 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Ana Ivanovic goes on to win after each option in the positions they face most often, shrunk toward tour average when the sample is small. Showing the 8 most-used options; teal marks the best one with at least 30 shots.

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side

position worth 45% to the average player · 1,271 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 31% 48.7%±4.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 21% 42.5%±4.8 43.3%
BH down the line 17% 44.4%±5.3 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 8% 29.5%±6.7 34.4%
FH inside-in 6% 63.3%±8.1 55.6%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 46.0%±8.9 40.4%
BH slice down the line 5% 39.4%±8.9 31.7%
FH inside-out 4% 56.4%±9.7 52.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 738 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 34% 52.6%±5.0 52.7%
FH down the line 22% 61.0%±5.9 52.2%
FH through the middle 13% 45.8%±7.6 45.8%
BH crosscourt 11% 54.1%±8.1 50.9%
BH through the middle 7% 47.6%±9.6 46.2%
BH down the line 6% 45.2%±10.4 50.0%
FH down the line + approach 3% 66.8%±12.2 68.6%
FH crosscourt + approach 1% 61.1%±14.4 69.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side

position worth 43% to the average player · 718 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 38% 44.3%±4.8 46.7%
FH down the line 28% 39.7%±5.5 44.9%
FH through the middle 18% 36.3%±6.6 41.3%
FH slice through the middle 9% 32.0%±8.4 29.2%
FH slice crosscourt 3% 37.5%±12.4 31.9%
FH down the line + approach 3% 55.2%±12.9 65.4%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 642 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 32% 40.2%±5.3 47.8%
BH through the middle 24% 40.1%±6.2 43.0%
BH down the line 18% 46.8%±7.1 46.2%
BH slice through the middle 7% 31.3%±9.4 33.2%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 33.2%±10.5 39.6%
BH slice down the line 5% 39.5%±11.4 28.7%
FH inside-out 3% 55.0%±12.6 55.4%
FH inside-in 3% 55.3%±12.9 55.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Ana Ivanovic's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 372 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 56% ▲ 72% / 66%
Body 19% 9% ▼ 59% / 57%
T 34% 34% 74% / 68%

1,728 normal · 96 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 48% 67% / 66%
Body 14% 16% 59% / 56%
T 45% 36% ▼ 71% / 64%

1,409 normal · 276 break-point 1st serves

Is the serve mix in equilibrium?

Game theory says a well-mixed server wins equally often with every direction they use. If one direction wins more, it's underused and points are being left behind. This is the minimax test Walker and Wooders ran on Wimbledon finals, applied to every charted first serve. Win rates include faults. "Optimal" allows for returners reading a habit. A direction loses 0.19 points per 100 serves for every 10 points of habitual usage, measured from WTA servers whose mix drifted between matches. Shifts stay within the range servers' habits actually vary, the only range that response was measured over.

Deuce court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide48% 61.9%±2.7 n=872 63% ▲
Body18% 57.9%±4.3 n=335 3% ▼
T34% 60.4%±3.2 n=617 34%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.35).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide42% 59.5%±3.0 n=709 57% ▲
Body14% 54.8%±5.0 n=241 0% ▼
T44% 57.5%±2.9 n=735 43%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.31).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.69 points per 100 first serves What the optimal mix would win over the current one, both courts. More exploitable than 100% of WTA servers. Tested on matches they weren't fitted on, WTA mixes picked this way win 0.42 per 100 first serves on average.

Repeating the previous direction to the same court: −2.9±3.2 points per 100 against switching. Negative means returners read repeats. Tour-wide, repeating costs women about 0.4 points per 100 and costs men nothing, so men's returners don't measurably anticipate direction. (1,240 repeats, 2,169 switches.)

Return by serve direction

Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 207 46% +2.6±5.3
1stAd courtT 314 34% −1.0±4.2
1stAd courtWide 561 35% +0.3±3.2
1stDeuce courtBody 265 48% +5.5±4.8
1stDeuce courtT 533 37% +4.7±3.3
1stDeuce courtWide 351 30% −4.0±3.9
2ndAd courtBody 176 58% +2.5±5.7
2ndAd courtT 112 48% −6.8±6.9
2ndAd courtWide 359 55% +1.2±4.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 297 58% +3.1±4.5
2ndDeuce courtT 279 56% −0.4±4.6
2ndDeuce courtWide 133 47% −7.1±6.4

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Ana Ivanovic's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 67% · +2.0±6.7 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 62% · −3.2±7.9 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 61% · −4.3±8.3 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 62% · −3.6±7.0 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.9% · won 58% · −7.4±7.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.9% · won 53% · +10.7±7.7 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.1% · won 55% · +12.0±8.5 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.8% · won 51% · +8.0±7.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.1% · won 48% · +5.4±8.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 2.3% · won 46% · +3.4±8.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH down the line → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 56% · +7.9±8.8 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 56% · +7.7±8.6 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 55% · +6.2±7.5 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → FH down the line used 1.3% · won 57% · +8.8±10.3 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 53% · +4.6±6.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Ana Ivanovic wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.

  1. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 64% · +15.5±10.1 vs own baseline · +17.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.4% · won 62% · +13.0±10.6 vs own baseline · +18.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH down the line → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 64% · +14.9±11.3 vs own baseline · +26.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → FH inside-in used 0.5% · won 60% · +10.9±10.1 vs own baseline · +8.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daria Saville (3/6), Kurumi Nara (5/7)
  5. T serve → FH through the middle return, deep → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 61% · +12.5±11.8 vs own baseline · +27.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 56% · +6.8±9.4 vs own baseline · +3.5 vs tour on the same sequence

Strengths and vulnerabilities

Value per 100 shots compared with the average player hitting (strengths) or facing (vulnerabilities) the same shot. Only shot types seen at least 120 times.

Hurts opponents most with

BH to their forehand · return+3.0223
BH to their backhand · return+2.8621
FH to their backhand · serve +1+2.1430
BH to their backhand · serve +1+2.0372
BH slice to their forehand · rally+1.6144

Most exposed to

BH to their forehand · rally−3.1323
Wide 2nd serve · deuce court−1.8133
BH to their forehand · serve +1−1.6221
FH to the middle · return +1−1.6155
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.2557

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Sara Sorribes Tormo, Alexandra Eala, Kayla Day, Caroline Wozniacki, Alize Cornet

Tactical fingerprint

Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the WTA average, in standard deviations.

Run-around forehands17%
Wide serves · deuce48%
FH down the line33%
Point-ending shots27.4%
BH down the line24%
T serves · ad44%
Unforced errors / shot11.6%
Backhand slice19%
Wide serves · ad42%
Points at net8%
Serve & volley0%
Forehand share53%
Drop shots / shot1.2%
T serves · deuce34%
Deep returns31%
Chipped returns6%
Avg rally length3.7
1st serve in58%
Through the middle24%

Plays most like

  1. Louisa Chirico 2015–2017 plan v
  2. Karolina Pliskova 2013–2026 plan v
  3. Svetlana Kuznetsova 2004–2021 plan v
  4. Ekaterina Alexandrova 2017–2026 plan v
  5. Eugenie Bouchard 2013–2023 plan v
  6. Shelby Rogers 2014–2024 plan v
  7. Anastasia Potapova 2017–2026 plan v
  8. Anna Bondar 2017–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jennifer Capriati 1990–2002
  2. Monica Seles 1990–2003
  3. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario 1988–2001

Charted matches