RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 155 charted matches · 2008–2024

Caroline Wozniacki

Archetype: Rarely serves the T · Patient builder

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 60.2% ±2.4 raw 59.9% · tour 56.3% · 10,411 points
Return points won 48.8% ±2.5 raw 48.8% · tour 43.7% · 10,567 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 +0.03 ±0.05 better than 59% of WTA · raw +0.04
Shot selection +0.06 ±0.06 better than 52% of WTA · raw +0.08
Execution +2.22 ±0.16 better than 100% of WTA · raw +2.37
Tactical adaptability +0.07 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 155 matches
Adaptation speed +0.08 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.40 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 76% 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 61,156 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Caroline Wozniacki 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 forehand side

position worth 43% to the average player · 4,204 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 41% 52.3%±2.0 46.7%
FH through the middle 27% 47.3%±2.4 41.3%
FH down the line 24% 52.0%±2.5 44.9%
FH slice through the middle 3% 26.9%±6.5 29.2%
FH slice crosscourt 1% 34.9%±9.6 31.9%
FH lob through the middle 1% 27.1%±9.0 29.4%
FH slice down the line 1% 16.4%±8.8 24.3%
FH down the line + approach 1% 66.0%±12.2 65.4%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 3,881 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 50% 51.7%±1.9 47.6%
BH through the middle 25% 52.1%±2.6 43.3%
BH down the line 12% 57.5%±3.7 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 6% 35.0%±5.0 34.4%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 41.6%±6.8 40.4%
BH slice down the line 2% 32.2%±8.3 31.7%
BH lob through the middle 1% 20.7%±8.6 27.1%
FH inside-out 0% 62.5%±13.3 52.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 3,816 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 25% 56.2%±2.6 52.7%
FH down the line 19% 57.1%±3.0 52.2%
FH through the middle 16% 50.0%±3.2 45.8%
BH crosscourt 16% 58.5%±3.2 50.9%
BH through the middle 13% 54.9%±3.6 46.2%
BH down the line 9% 60.6%±4.3 50.0%
FH down the line + approach 1% 66.8%±11.8 68.6%
BH slice through the middle 1% 44.9%±12.9 44.8%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 2,859 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 40% 49.9%±2.4 47.0%
FH down the line 28% 55.2%±2.9 46.4%
FH through the middle 23% 45.8%±3.1 41.5%
FH slice through the middle 3% 26.7%±7.0 29.3%
FH lob through the middle 1% 38.8%±10.6 30.6%
FH slice crosscourt 1% 22.4%±9.2 31.6%
FH down the line + approach 1% 67.9%±11.4 67.7%
FH slice down the line 1% 23.2%±11.1 25.3%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −1 How much less varied Caroline Wozniacki's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 1035 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 42% 39% 67% / 66%
Body 25% 29% 62% / 57%
T 33% 33% 71% / 68%

5,116 normal · 249 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 35% 38% 68% / 66%
Body 24% 26% 59% / 56%
T 41% 36% 63% / 64%

4,164 normal · 786 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
Wide42% 62.0%±1.7 n=2,234 57% ▲
Body25% 58.5%±2.2 n=1,351 10% ▼
T33% 61.9%±1.9 n=1,780 33%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.06).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide35% 59.9%±1.9 n=1,740 50% ▲
Body24% 56.4%±2.3 n=1,202 9% ▼
T41% 59.0%±1.8 n=2,008 41%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.12).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.63 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: −2.3±2.0 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. (2,535 repeats, 7,470 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 612 53% +8.8±3.2
1stAd courtT 1,332 41% +5.9±2.2
1stAd courtWide 1,203 40% +5.3±2.3
1stDeuce courtBody 670 50% +7.2±3.1
1stDeuce courtT 927 37% +5.3±2.6
1stDeuce courtWide 1,801 40% +5.7±1.9
2ndAd courtBody 838 61% +5.8±2.7
2ndAd courtT 441 56% +0.5±3.8
2ndAd courtWide 642 60% +6.4±3.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 919 59% +5.0±2.6
2ndDeuce courtT 386 61% +5.0±3.9
2ndDeuce courtWide 738 59% +5.4±2.9

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 63% · +0.3±4.6 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 58% · −4.3±4.9 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.1% · won 57% · −5.3±5.2 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 56% · −6.2±5.3 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 56% · −6.3±5.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, deep used 2.5% · won 64% · +14.6±4.9 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 4.3% · won 60% · +11.0±3.9 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.6% · won 60% · +11.0±4.8 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.4% · won 59% · +10.4±5.0 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.2% · won 59% · +10.4±5.2 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 59% · +6.8±3.6 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.7% · won 56% · +3.8±2.5 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 3.1% · won 57% · +5.0±3.4 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.5% · won 55% · +2.8±2.6 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 56% · +3.5±3.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 60% · +7.3±4.8 vs own baseline · +3.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Ekaterina Alexandrova (2/7), Agnieszka Radwanska (4/11)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 60% · +7.3±4.9 vs own baseline · +7.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Samantha Stosur (2/7), Belinda Bencic (2/6)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 63% · +10.1±6.9 vs own baseline · +5.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Sara Errani (2/6), Samantha Stosur (5/10)
  4. Wide serve → FH through the middle return, mid → BH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 65% · +12.4±8.0 vs own baseline · +13.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH down the line → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 64% · +11.3±7.7 vs own baseline · +3.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Samantha Stosur (8/14), Carla Suarez Navarro (8/8)
  6. FH down the line → BH slice through the middle → FH down the line used 0.1% · won 67% · +14.2±9.3 vs own baseline · +13.5 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

FH to the middle · return+4.22,330
FH to their forehand · return+4.11,022
BH to their forehand · rally+4.01,961
FH to their backhand · return+3.61,027
Wide 2nd serve · ad court+3.5458

Most exposed to

BH volley to their backhand · rally−3.2213
FH to their backhand · serve +1−3.01,543
FH slice to their forehand · rally−2.9228
FH to their backhand · return−2.8985
T 2nd serve · ad court−2.3441

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Sara Sorribes Tormo +3.79, Daria Kasatkina +2.82, Angelique Kerber +2.79, Sara Errani +2.59, Maja Chwalinska +2.53

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +4.52, Angelique Kerber +4.17, Marie Bouzkova +4.14, Elina Avanesyan +3.73, Alexandra Eala +3.67

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Bianca Andreescu

Tactical fingerprint

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

Avg rally length5.0
1st serve in67%
Deep returns37%
FH down the line31%
T serves · ad41%
BH down the line21%
Wide serves · deuce42%
Serve & volley0%
Points at net6%
Through the middle27%
Chipped returns7%
Forehand share52%
Backhand slice9%
T serves · deuce33%
Wide serves · ad35%
Run-around forehands1%
Drop shots / shot0.4%
Point-ending shots16.2%
Unforced errors / shot5.7%

Plays most like

  1. Daria Kasatkina 2015–2026 plan v
  2. Linda Fruhvirtova 2022–2025 plan v
  3. Marie Bouzkova 2018–2026 plan v
  4. Emma Navarro 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Agnieszka Radwanska 2007–2018 plan v
  6. Victoria Azarenka 2009–2025 plan v
  7. Alison Riske Amritraj 2014–2022 plan v
  8. Anna Karolina Schmiedlova 2014–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jennifer Capriati 1990–2002
  2. Monica Seles 1990–2003
  3. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006

Charted matches