RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 63 charted matches · 2017–2026

Ekaterina Alexandrova

Archetype: First-strike aggressor · Short-point player

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 60.2% ±2.6 raw 58.5% · tour 56.3% · 4,733 points
Return points won 46.4% ±2.6 raw 43.0% · tour 43.7% · 4,854 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 ±0.04 better than 81% of WTA · raw +0.16
Shot selection +0.22 ±0.06 better than 70% of WTA · raw +0.22
Execution −0.41 ±0.36 better than 38% of WTA · raw −0.42
Tactical adaptability +0.12 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 63 matches
Adaptation speed −0.01 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.21 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 94% 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 22,964 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Ekaterina Alexandrova 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 · 1,304 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 25% 54.6%±4.4 52.7%
FH down the line 21% 57.1%±4.8 52.2%
BH through the middle 16% 46.7%±5.4 46.2%
BH down the line 13% 52.6%±5.9 50.0%
FH through the middle 12% 42.9%±6.2 45.8%
BH crosscourt 11% 51.0%±6.3 50.9%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 1,263 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 51% 49.0%±3.2 46.7%
FH down the line 24% 49.8%±4.6 44.9%
FH through the middle 19% 44.8%±5.1 41.3%
FH slice crosscourt 5% 25.2%±7.9 31.9%
FH slice through the middle 2% 37.4%±11.9 29.2%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 1,129 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 41% 50.2%±3.8 47.6%
BH through the middle 30% 45.1%±4.3 43.3%
BH down the line 20% 49.1%±5.2 46.8%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 25.6%±9.3 40.4%
BH slice through the middle 2% 25.3%±10.9 34.4%
BH slice down the line 1% 39.8%±14.5 31.7%
FH inside-out 1% 48.4%±15.0 52.5%
BH drop shot crosscourt 1% 55.0%±14.9 47.5%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 891 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 24% 52.1%±5.4 52.3%
FH down the line 18% 52.0%±6.1 53.0%
BH down the line 16% 49.5%±6.5 50.6%
BH through the middle 15% 52.7%±6.5 46.2%
BH crosscourt 14% 48.0%±6.9 50.8%
FH through the middle 13% 50.2%±7.1 46.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index ±0 How much less varied Ekaterina Alexandrova's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 475 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 45% 40% 70% / 66%
Body 21% 19% 59% / 57%
T 34% 41% 75% / 68%

2,351 normal · 111 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 46% 73% / 66%
Body 15% 16% 59% / 56%
T 39% 38% 63% / 64%

1,891 normal · 364 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
Wide44% 59.3%±2.4 n=1,093 44%
Body21% 57.1%±3.5 n=517 6% ▼
T35% 60.8%±2.7 n=852 50% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.33).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide46% 60.5%±2.5 n=1,035 61% ▲
Body15% 53.9%±4.2 n=347 0% ▼
T39% 55.6%±2.7 n=873 39%

Off equilibrium (p = 0.019): serve wide more. Gap 2.9 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +1.0 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.88 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±3.1 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. (1,339 repeats, 3,252 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 386 44% −0.1±4.0
1stAd courtT 428 34% −2.0±3.6
1stAd courtWide 621 36% +1.4±3.1
1stDeuce courtBody 429 41% −1.3±3.8
1stDeuce courtT 519 32% ±0.0±3.3
1stDeuce courtWide 584 33% −1.2±3.1
2ndAd courtBody 377 56% +1.4±4.0
2ndAd courtT 96 54% −0.7±7.3
2ndAd courtWide 420 51% −2.6±3.9
2ndDeuce courtBody 539 53% −1.1±3.4
2ndDeuce courtT 228 59% +2.8±5.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 217 52% −1.9±5.2

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 62% · −1.4±7.2 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 62% · −1.4±6.1 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 60% · −3.8±7.3 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.4% · won 58% · −5.8±7.0 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.7% · won 57% · −6.7±6.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.3% · won 57% · +14.0±7.3 vs own baseline
  2. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.3% · won 54% · +11.0±6.3 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, deep used 2.1% · won 56% · +13.2±7.5 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 3.0% · won 54% · +10.4±6.6 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.6% · won 53% · +9.4±7.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.0% · won 61% · +11.5±5.2 vs own baseline
  2. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 61% · +11.8±7.1 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.8% · won 58% · +8.5±6.7 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 7.2% · won 54% · +4.6±4.4 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → BH down the line used 2.7% · won 56% · +6.6±6.9 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Ekaterina Alexandrova 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 down the line used 1.4% · won 59% · +10.0±6.1 vs own baseline · +13.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daria Kasatkina (4/12), Caroline Wozniacki (3/9)
  2. FH down the line → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 67% · +18.0±10.5 vs own baseline · +18.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. Wide serve → BH crosscourt return, mid → BH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 64% · +14.6±10.2 vs own baseline · +24.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 59% · +9.6±8.3 vs own baseline · +9.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Daria Kasatkina (4/10), Emma Raducanu (4/7)
  5. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 60% · +10.6±9.7 vs own baseline · +8.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. FH crosscourt → FH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 64% · +14.5±11.7 vs own baseline · +19.9 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 backhand · return +1+1.4393
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+1.21,093
BH to their backhand · serve +1+1.1565
T 1st serve · deuce court+1.1852
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.81,035

Most exposed to

FH slice to the middle · return−2.2159
FH to the middle · return +1−2.1261
FH to their forehand · return−1.6288
BH to the middle · serve +1−1.2528
BH to the middle · rally−0.7834

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Sara Sorribes Tormo +2.72, Caroline Wozniacki +2.43, Daria Kasatkina +1.82, Sara Errani +1.70, Angelique Kerber +1.69

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +1.70, Angelique Kerber +1.13, Marie Bouzkova +0.93, Elina Avanesyan +0.90, Linda Fruhvirtova +0.67

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Barbora Krejcikova, Karolina Muchova, Tatjana Maria, Marketa Vondrousova, Daria Kasatkina

Tactical fingerprint

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

BH down the line27%
Deep returns37%
Point-ending shots27.8%
Wide serves · ad46%
Wide serves · deuce44%
FH down the line32%
Unforced errors / shot11.5%
T serves · ad39%
Serve & volley0%
Forehand share53%
T serves · deuce35%
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Run-around forehands4%
Backhand slice7%
Through the middle26%
Chipped returns3%
1st serve in59%
Avg rally length3.6
Points at net3%

Plays most like

  1. Sorana Cirstea 2014–2026 plan v
  2. Karolina Pliskova 2013–2026 plan v
  3. Anastasia Potapova 2017–2026 plan v
  4. Iga Swiatek 2018–2026 plan v
  5. Naomi Osaka 2016–2026 plan v
  6. Veronika Kudermetova 2018–2025 plan v
  7. Dayana Yastremska 2013–2026 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