RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 36 charted matches · 2014–2026

Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova

Archetype: First-strike aggressor · Short-point player

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 56.3% ±2.9 raw 53.7% · tour 56.3% · 2,350 points
Return points won 42.4% ±3.0 raw 39.9% · tour 43.7% · 2,263 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 +0.01 ±0.08 better than 55% of WTA · raw +0.01
Shot selection +0.45 ±0.08 better than 92% of WTA · raw +0.44
Execution −1.55 ±0.63 better than 10% of WTA · raw −1.61
Tactical adaptability +0.05 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 35 matches
Adaptation speed −0.03 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.57 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 55% 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 10,190 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova 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 middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 491 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 29% 50.0%±6.4 52.7%
FH down the line 19% 54.9%±7.7 52.2%
FH through the middle 15% 38.5%±8.3 45.8%
BH through the middle 13% 49.1%±8.9 46.2%
BH crosscourt 11% 37.8%±9.4 50.9%
BH down the line 9% 40.3%±10.2 50.0%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 448 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 47% 48.2%±5.4 46.7%
FH down the line 25% 42.4%±7.1 44.9%
FH through the middle 23% 35.8%±7.2 41.3%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 397 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 42% 40.9%±5.9 47.6%
BH through the middle 25% 43.4%±7.5 43.3%
BH down the line 21% 34.3%±7.7 46.8%
BH drop shot down the line 6% 47.2%±12.7 49.1%
BH slice through the middle 3% 35.1%±14.1 34.4%
BH slice down the line 3% 27.8%±13.5 31.7%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 320 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 28% 52.3%±7.9 52.3%
FH down the line 17% 49.5%±9.6 53.0%
BH through the middle 15% 39.2%±9.8 46.2%
BH crosscourt 13% 55.1%±10.4 50.8%
FH through the middle 13% 51.3%±10.5 46.5%
BH down the line 12% 56.4%±10.8 50.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 287 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 39% 59% ▲ 65% / 66%
Body 19% 20% 53% / 57%
T 41% 21% ▼ 65% / 68%

1,148 normal · 61 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 38% 65% / 66%
Body 20% 19% 59% / 56%
T 34% 43% ▲ 59% / 64%

902 normal · 226 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
Wide40% 60.3%±3.5 n=488 55% ▲
Body19% 50.2%±5.1 n=235 4% ▼
T40% 53.0%±3.6 n=486 41%

Off equilibrium (p = 0.004): serve wide more. Gap 4.9 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide45% 52.3%±3.6 n=503 54% ▲
Body20% 49.0%±5.2 n=224 5% ▼
T36% 53.0%±4.0 n=401 41% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.50).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.60 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: +2.4±3.5 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. (815 repeats, 1,450 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 132 41% −3.0±6.4
1stAd courtT 236 35% −0.7±4.8
1stAd courtWide 264 28% −6.4±4.3
1stDeuce courtBody 163 35% −8.0±5.6
1stDeuce courtT 234 25% −7.3±4.4
1stDeuce courtWide 311 35% +0.9±4.2
2ndAd courtBody 185 51% −4.1±5.6
2ndAd courtT 75 47% −7.9±8.0
2ndAd courtWide 173 56% +2.7±5.7
2ndDeuce courtBody 238 50% −4.0±5.0
2ndDeuce courtT 111 58% +2.0±6.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 119 50% −3.3±6.7

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 62% · +3.3±8.8 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 53% · −5.7±9.4 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 51% · −7.0±9.6 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 2.2% · won 51% · −7.0±9.6 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 51% · −7.0±9.6 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 2.0% · won 60% · +19.6±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.2% · won 54% · +14.3±9.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.4% · won 51% · +10.7±9.9 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.4% · won 48% · +8.2±8.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.0% · won 50% · +10.0±10.4 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.9% · won 56% · +10.1±8.6 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 8.3% · won 53% · +6.7±7.1 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → FH down the line used 1.9% · won 59% · +13.3±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 52% · +5.7±9.3 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 3.4% · won 51% · +5.2±9.8 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova 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 0.4% · won 55% · +10.1±12.3 vs own baseline · +10.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.8% · won 50% · +4.7±8.1 vs own baseline · +3.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Maria Sharapova (1/6), Belinda Bencic (3/7)
  3. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.4% · won 54% · +9.2±12.8 vs own baseline · +15.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 50% · +5.3±9.8 vs own baseline · −0.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Karolina Pliskova (4/8)
  5. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 52% · +6.5±12.0 vs own baseline · +2.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.5% · won 52% · +6.5±12.0 vs own baseline · +17.9 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

FH to their forehand · rally+0.7545
Wide 2nd serve · deuce court+0.5134
Body 1st serve · deuce court+0.5235
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.2488
FH to the middle · serve +1+0.2206

Most exposed to

BH to their forehand · serve +1−4.4141
BH to their backhand · serve +1−3.0204
BH to their backhand · rally−3.0308
FH to their backhand · rally−2.9316
FH to their forehand · rally−1.9443

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Caroline Wozniacki +3.32, Sara Sorribes Tormo +3.14, Daria Kasatkina +2.61, Angelique Kerber +2.56, Sara Errani +2.49

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +1.02, Angelique Kerber +0.63, Elina Avanesyan +0.41, Marie Bouzkova +0.37, Katie Volynets +0.19

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Iga Swiatek, Belinda Bencic, Leylah Fernandez, Coco Gauff, Linda Noskova

Tactical fingerprint

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

Point-ending shots31.4%
Unforced errors / shot13.1%
Forehand share57%
Drop shots / shot2.3%
BH down the line24%
FH down the line32%
T serves · deuce40%
Wide serves · ad45%
Points at net8%
Wide serves · deuce40%
Serve & volley0%
T serves · ad36%
Through the middle28%
Chipped returns7%
Run-around forehands4%
Deep returns30%
1st serve in60%
Backhand slice6%
Avg rally length3.3

Plays most like

  1. Aliaksandra Sasnovich 2015–2025 plan v
  2. Sabine Lisicki 2009–2022 plan v
  3. Eugenie Bouchard 2013–2023 plan v
  4. Viktoria Hruncakova 2018–2026 plan v
  5. Veronika Kudermetova 2018–2025 plan v
  6. Anett Kontaveit 2015–2023 plan v
  7. Ekaterina Alexandrova 2017–2026 plan v
  8. Daniela Hantuchova 2002–2015 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  2. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006
  3. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010

Charted matches