WTA · Right-handed · 8 charted matches · 2024–2026
Antonia Ruzic
Archetype: Rarely serves the T · Patient builder
Against an average opponent
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
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 2,635 shots.
Shot expected value
The share of points Antonia Ruzic 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 · 161 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 35% | 48.1%±9.4 | 52.7% |
| BH crosscourt | 20% | 52.3%±11.4 | 50.9% |
| BH through the middle | 19% | 50.5%±11.6 | 46.2% |
| FH through the middle | 14% | 40.8%±12.5 | 45.8% |
| FH down the line | 7% | 53.1%±14.7 | 52.2% |
| BH down the line | 6% | 53.3%±15.0 | 50.0% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side
position worth 45% to the average player · 146 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 53% | 52.6%±8.3 | 47.6% |
| BH through the middle | 22% | 51.3%±11.4 | 43.3% |
| BH down the line | 12% | 44.2%±13.4 | 46.8% |
| BH slice through the middle | 7% | 29.6%±13.7 | 34.4% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side
position worth 43% to the average player · 143 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 50% | 46.5%±8.6 | 46.7% |
| FH down the line | 24% | 40.0%±10.9 | 44.9% |
| FH through the middle | 17% | 37.0%±12.0 | 41.3% |
Return +1: drive to your middle
position worth 50% to the average player · 99 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 29% | 54.0%±11.7 | 52.3% |
| FH through the middle | 19% | 57.2%±13.0 | 46.5% |
| BH crosscourt | 16% | 53.2%±13.7 | 50.8% |
| BH through the middle | 12% | 32.0%±13.6 | 46.2% |
| FH down the line | 12% | 45.6%±14.5 | 53.0% |
| BH down the line | 11% | 52.0%±14.8 | 50.6% |
Serve under pressure
Pressure predictability index ±0 How much less varied Antonia Ruzic's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 84 break-point first serves.
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 52% | 50% | 60% / 66% |
| Body | 18% | 32% ▲ | 52% / 57% |
| T | 30% | 18% ▼ | 66% / 68% |
237 normal · 28 break-point 1st serves
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 33% | 23% ▼ | 50% / 66% |
| Body | 18% | 25% | 50% / 56% |
| T | 48% | 52% | 55% / 64% |
186 normal · 56 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 serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 52% | 52.6%±6.3 n=138 | 62% ▲ |
| Body | 19% | 45.6%±9.1 n=51 | 4% ▼ |
| T | 29% | 49.9%±8.0 n=76 | 34% ▲ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.42).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 31% | 45.5%±8.0 n=75 | 31% |
| Body | 20% | 48.8%±9.3 n=48 | 5% ▼ |
| T | 49% | 55.6%±6.7 n=119 | 64% ▲ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.13).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.
Exploitability 0.53 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: +4.7±6.0 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. (187 repeats, 304 switches.)
Return by serve direction
Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.
| Serve | Court | Direction | Points | Won | vs tour | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | Ad court | Body | 48 | 39% | −5.2±9.1 | |
| 1st | Ad court | T | 53 | 42% | +6.2±8.9 | |
| 1st | Ad court | Wide | 51 | 35% | +0.5±8.7 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Body | 70 | 36% | −6.8±7.9 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | T | 46 | 34% | +1.6±8.9 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Wide | 63 | 34% | −0.5±8.1 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Body | 22 | 57% | +1.7±11.3 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | T | 25 | 50% | −5.0±11.1 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Wide | 35 | 59% | +5.0±10.1 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Body | 36 | 55% | +0.6±10.1 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | T | 18 | 50% | −6.4±11.9 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Wide | 21 | 55% | +1.4±11.5 |
Signature patterns
Recurring sequences that win more than Antonia Ruzic's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.
Serve → +1
- Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 5.7% · won 47% · −7.7±11.7 vs own baseline
- T serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 6.0% · won 46% · −8.6±11.6 vs own baseline
Return
- Not enough data
Rally, consecutive own shots
- BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 5.3% · won 60% · +4.9±11.4 vs own baseline
- FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 59% · +4.1±11.6 vs own baseline
- FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 5.6% · won 57% · +1.9±11.4 vs own baseline
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 8.1% · won 54% · −0.8±10.4 vs own baseline
- BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 7.4% · won 53% · −1.5±10.7 vs own baseline
Discovered sequences
Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Antonia Ruzic wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 51% · +3.1±11.5 vs own baseline · +5.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Amarissa Kiara Toth (6/9), Tyra Caterina Grant (5/6)
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 1.3% · won 51% · +3.2±12.6 vs own baseline · +12.3 vs tour on the same sequence
- BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 1.2% · won 51% · +3.3±12.9 vs own baseline · +12.3 vs tour on the same sequence
- BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 50% · +2.1±12.1 vs own baseline · −1.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Amarissa Kiara Toth (2/6)
- BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 49% · +1.2±10.9 vs own baseline · +1.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Mirra Andreeva (1/7), Tyra Caterina Grant (4/7)
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.3% · won 45% · −3.3±10.9 vs own baseline · −5.8 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 backhand · rally | +0.2 | 170 |
| Wide 1st serve · deuce court | +0.2 | 138 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | +0.2 | 209 |
| BH to the middle · return | +0.1 | 126 |
Most exposed to
| FH to their forehand · rally | −2.8 | 159 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | −1.1 | 125 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −1.0 | 139 |
Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Linda Fruhvirtova, Maja Chwalinska, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Linda Klimovicova, Nadia Podoroska
Tactical fingerprint
Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the WTA average, in standard deviations.
| Drop shots / shot | 3.8% | |
| Wide serves · deuce | 52% | |
| 1st serve in | 68% | |
| T serves · ad | 49% | |
| Deep returns | 37% | |
| Avg rally length | 4.3 | |
| Unforced errors / shot | 10.7% | |
| Point-ending shots | 23.5% | |
| BH down the line | 20% | |
| Serve & volley | 0% | |
| Through the middle | 28% | |
| Chipped returns | 6% | |
| Backhand slice | 7% | |
| Run-around forehands | 3% | |
| Forehand share | 51% | |
| Points at net | 4% | |
| FH down the line | 24% | |
| T serves · deuce | 29% | |
| Wide serves · ad | 31% |
Plays most like
- R – plan v
- Sofia Kenin 2017–2026 plan v
- Su Wei Hsieh 2015–2024 plan v
- Lin Zhu 2016–2025 plan v
- Emma Raducanu 2018–2026 plan v
- Anastasija Sevastova 2011–2025 plan v
- Marie Bouzkova 2018–2026 plan v
- Camila Osorio 2021–2026 plan v
Closest from another era
- Marion Bartoli 2003–2013
- Elena Dementieva 1999–2010
- Anastasia Myskina 2002–2006
Charted matches
- Madison Keys v Antonia Ruzic L Toronto R64 · Hard · 4 Aug 2026
- Jelena Ostapenko v Antonia Ruzic L Wimbledon R64 · Grass · 1 Jul 2026
- Iva Jovic v Antonia Ruzic L Queens Club R32 · Grass · 9 Jun 2026
- Mirra Andreeva v Antonia Ruzic L Rome R64 · Clay · 7 May 2026
- Antonia Ruzic v Karolina Muchova L Indian Wells R32 · Hard · 9 Mar 2026
- Antonia Ruzic v Anastasia Zakharova W Dubai R32 · Hard · 17 Feb 2026
- Antonia Ruzic v Tyra Caterina Grant W Rome R128 · Clay · 7 May 2025
- Antonia Ruzic v Amarissa Kiara Toth W ITF Trnava QF · Hard · 22 Nov 2024