RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 14 charted matches · 2016–2026

Cristina Bucsa

Archetype: Forehand line-changer · Backhand line-changer

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 57.9% ±3.4 raw 55.2% · tour 56.3% · 881 points
Return points won 44.9% ±3.4 raw 41.9% · tour 43.7% · 934 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 −0.16 ±0.12 better than 24% of WTA · raw −0.16
Shot selection +0.13 ±0.15 better than 59% of WTA · raw +0.13
Execution −0.73 ±0.87 better than 26% of WTA · raw −0.69
Tactical adaptability −0.01 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 13 matches
Adaptation speed +0.10 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.81 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 23% 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 4,714 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Cristina Bucsa 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 · 302 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 25% 56.9%±8.4 52.2%
FH through the middle 20% 49.6%±9.1 45.8%
FH crosscourt 19% 57.1%±9.2 52.7%
BH through the middle 16% 44.5%±9.9 46.2%
BH crosscourt 9% 42.9%±11.9 50.9%
BH down the line 9% 42.6%±11.9 50.0%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 243 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 40% 50.3%±7.6 46.7%
FH through the middle 27% 40.3%±8.8 41.3%
FH down the line 21% 43.6%±9.7 44.9%
FH slice crosscourt 7% 28.9%±12.4 31.9%
FH slice through the middle 6% 31.0%±12.9 29.2%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 202 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH through the middle 35% 52.4%±8.6 43.3%
BH crosscourt 33% 53.5%±8.8 47.6%
BH down the line 22% 48.2%±10.2 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 5% 32.9%±14.1 34.4%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 156 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 22% 53.6%±11.1 52.3%
FH through the middle 22% 52.4%±11.2 46.5%
FH down the line 20% 44.3%±11.4 53.0%
BH through the middle 16% 42.8%±12.1 46.2%
BH down the line 12% 58.2%±13.2 50.6%
BH crosscourt 8% 55.0%±14.2 50.8%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +1 How much less varied Cristina Bucsa's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 112 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 29% ▼ 66% / 66%
Body 25% 36% ▲ 47% / 57%
T 33% 36% 66% / 68%

432 normal · 28 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 52% 52% 57% / 66%
Body 17% 14% 53% / 56%
T 31% 33% 63% / 64%

335 normal · 84 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% 58.5%±5.5 n=186 52% ▲
Body26% 49.5%±6.7 n=120 11% ▼
T33% 56.0%±6.0 n=154 37% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.14).
Optimal mix: +0.9 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide52% 53.4%±5.2 n=218 52%
Body16% 56.3%±8.2 n=68 1% ▼
T32% 57.0%±6.4 n=133 47% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.69).
Optimal mix: +0.5 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.74 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: −4.2±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. (280 repeats, 571 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 70 46% +2.3±8.2
1stAd courtT 94 33% −2.7±6.9
1stAd courtWide 113 32% −2.8±6.4
1stDeuce courtBody 84 38% −5.1±7.5
1stDeuce courtT 72 35% +2.8±7.8
1stDeuce courtWide 149 32% −2.1±5.7
2ndAd courtBody 77 53% −2.2±7.9
2ndAd courtT 25 59% +4.1±10.9
2ndAd courtWide 69 56% +2.1±8.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 94 50% −4.2±7.4
2ndDeuce courtT 48 57% +1.4±9.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 39 54% ±0.0±9.9

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.5% · won 62% · +3.4±10.9 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.9% · won 59% · +0.4±11.5 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 59% · +0.1±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 4.0% · won 57% · −1.6±10.8 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 3.5% · won 55% · −4.0±11.2 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.6% · won 54% · +10.2±11.4 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 5.0% · won 47% · +2.6±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 6.0% · won 46% · +2.0±10.7 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.8% · won 44% · −0.3±11.3 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.6% · won 35% · −9.1±11.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.6% · won 59% · +5.5±9.3 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.9% · won 59% · +6.2±10.1 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 3.2% · won 59% · +6.4±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 58% · +5.5±10.7 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 3.3% · won 56% · +3.4±11.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 58% · +8.1±11.6 vs own baseline · +18.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 58% · +8.3±12.5 vs own baseline · +17.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.1% · won 55% · +5.0±11.6 vs own baseline · +12.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 52% · +2.2±12.3 vs own baseline · +2.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.8% · won 51% · +1.1±12.4 vs own baseline · +8.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 51% · +1.2±12.7 vs own baseline · −0.9 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

BH to their backhand · rally+1.0160
BH to the middle · rally+0.6193
FH to their forehand · rally+0.6244
FH to their backhand · rally+0.4281
FH to the middle · rally+0.3196

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · return−3.0162
FH to the middle · return−2.4158
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.9177
BH to the middle · return−0.9237
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.1237

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Sara Sorribes Tormo, Paula Badosa, Daria Kasatkina, Caroline Wozniacki, Elina Avanesyan

Tactical fingerprint

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

BH down the line27%
Wide serves · ad52%
Forehand share57%
Through the middle33%
FH down the line33%
1st serve in66%
Points at net8%
Point-ending shots25.0%
Drop shots / shot1.6%
Unforced errors / shot10.8%
Avg rally length4.1
Wide serves · deuce40%
Serve & volley0%
Run-around forehands6%
Chipped returns7%
Backhand slice9%
T serves · deuce33%
T serves · ad32%
Deep returns29%

Plays most like

  1. Victoria Mboko 2022–2026 plan v
  2. Leylah Fernandez 2020–2026 plan v
  3. Irina Camelia Begu 2015–2024 plan v
  4. Coco Gauff 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Nao Hibino 2016–2025 plan v
  6. Shelby Rogers 2014–2024 plan v
  7. Marta Kostyuk 2018–2026 plan v
  8. Sorana Cirstea 2014–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010
  2. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  3. Martina Hingis 1996–2007

Charted matches