RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 18 charted matches · 2021–2025

Arianne Hartono

Archetype: Ad-court T server · Rallies through the middle

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 53.5% ±3.2 raw 52.5% · tour 56.3% · 1,340 points
Return points won 43.8% ±3.2 raw 42.6% · tour 43.7% · 1,337 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 +0.04 ±0.11 better than 61% of WTA · raw +0.06
Shot selection +0.33 ±0.09 better than 82% of WTA · raw +0.38
Execution −2.16 ±0.52 better than 3% of WTA · raw −1.84
Tactical adaptability −0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 18 matches
Adaptation speed −0.01 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.25 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 90% 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 6,437 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Arianne Hartono 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 · 401 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 37% 59.6%±6.2 52.7%
BH crosscourt 18% 56.6%±8.4 50.9%
FH down the line 16% 52.9%±9.0 52.2%
BH through the middle 15% 49.1%±9.1 46.2%
FH through the middle 9% 43.9%±11.0 45.8%
BH down the line 5% 56.4%±13.1 50.0%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 349 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 47% 48.4%±6.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 36% 40.0%±6.7 43.3%
BH down the line 9% 41.1%±11.2 46.8%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 279 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 38% 52.6%±7.3 54.0%
BH crosscourt 21% 50.0%±9.3 52.5%
BH through the middle 14% 52.1%±10.6 46.3%
FH through the middle 11% 38.7%±11.1 45.5%
FH down the line 10% 58.5%±11.6 53.3%
BH down the line 5% 53.5%±14.1 51.0%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 262 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 52% 47.4%±6.6 46.7%
FH through the middle 29% 46.1%±8.4 41.3%
FH down the line 19% 52.1%±9.9 44.9%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index ±0 How much less varied Arianne Hartono's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 176 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 29% 30% 60% / 66%
Body 27% 30% 57% / 57%
T 44% 41% 60% / 68%

641 normal · 54 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 33% 43% ▲ 62% / 66%
Body 26% 25% 55% / 56%
T 42% 32% ▼ 59% / 64%

518 normal · 122 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
Wide29% 52.3%±5.4 n=204 44% ▲
Body27% 53.4%±5.6 n=186 12% ▼
T44% 51.8%±4.5 n=305 44%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.91).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide35% 56.2%±5.1 n=222 50% ▲
Body26% 48.5%±5.9 n=164 10% ▼
T40% 52.4%±4.9 n=254 40%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.18).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.57 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: +1.5±5.9 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. (494 repeats, 805 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 113 40% −3.9±6.7
1stAd courtT 142 37% +1.5±6.1
1stAd courtWide 150 40% +5.7±6.0
1stDeuce courtBody 123 38% −4.8±6.4
1stDeuce courtT 130 29% −3.0±5.9
1stDeuce courtWide 184 27% −6.8±5.0
2ndAd courtBody 104 59% +3.6±7.0
2ndAd courtT 41 54% −0.8±9.7
2ndAd courtWide 87 56% +2.1±7.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 140 63% +8.1±6.1
2ndDeuce courtT 61 54% −2.4±8.6
2ndDeuce courtWide 60 45% −9.2±8.6

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 56% · −0.4±8.9 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.7% · won 54% · −2.3±8.9 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.0% · won 53% · −3.7±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 52% · −4.7±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 52% · −4.0±9.1 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.9% · won 62% · +15.2±10.8 vs own baseline
  2. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.8% · won 57% · +10.8±11.1 vs own baseline
  3. vs body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.7% · won 57% · +10.0±11.2 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.0% · won 55% · +8.8±11.0 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 2.3% · won 56% · +9.4±11.6 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 7.6% · won 61% · +7.2±7.9 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 9.0% · won 60% · +6.4±7.4 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 4.6% · won 61% · +7.7±9.4 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → FH down the line used 2.7% · won 60% · +6.6±10.9 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 7.7% · won 57% · +3.6±8.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 64% · +15.0±10.2 vs own baseline · +19.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Taylah Preston (4/6)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 58% · +9.9±8.2 vs own baseline · +8.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Katrina Scott (3/7), Amanda Anisimova (3/6)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 60% · +11.8±12.7 vs own baseline · +28.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.8% · won 57% · +8.8±11.6 vs own baseline · +13.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. Body serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 54% · +5.9±10.6 vs own baseline · +5.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 54% · +5.5±11.4 vs own baseline · +6.8 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

FH to their backhand · rally+3.1234
Body 1st serve · ad court−0.1164
Body 1st serve · deuce court−0.1186
BH to the middle · return−0.2304
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.3222

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · rally−2.0214
FH to the middle · return−1.6263
FH to their forehand · rally−1.5300
Body 2nd serve · deuce court−1.1140
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.0275

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Sara Sorribes Tormo +2.92, Caroline Wozniacki +2.54, Daria Kasatkina +1.93, Tatjana Maria +1.87, Angelique Kerber +1.84

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +0.54, Angelique Kerber −0.03, Marie Bouzkova −0.11, Elina Avanesyan −0.22, Katie Volynets −0.24

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Clara Burel, Victoria Jimenez Kasintseva, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Angelique Kerber, Jelena Ostapenko

Tactical fingerprint

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

Unforced errors / shot15.2%
Point-ending shots31.4%
T serves · deuce44%
Deep returns35%
Run-around forehands9%
T serves · ad40%
Forehand share54%
Through the middle29%
Serve & volley0%
1st serve in60%
Chipped returns5%
Backhand slice6%
Points at net4%
Wide serves · ad35%
Drop shots / shot0.7%
Avg rally length3.6
FH down the line23%
Wide serves · deuce29%
BH down the line11%

Plays most like

  1. Caroline Garcia 2013–2025 plan v
  2. Camila Giorgi 2013–2024 plan v
  3. Lulu Sun 2022–2025 plan v
  4. Ashlyn Krueger 2023–2026 plan v
  5. Coco Vandeweghe 2014–2018 plan v
  6. Eugenie Bouchard 2013–2023 plan v
  7. Anett Kontaveit 2015–2023 plan v
  8. Heather Watson 2014–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  2. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006
  3. Marion Bartoli 2003–2013

Charted matches