RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 13 charted matches · 2016–2026

Elena Gabriela Ruse

Archetype: First-strike aggressor · Short-point player

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 54.8% ±3.2 raw 52.3% · tour 56.3% · 819 points
Return points won 45.3% ±3.3 raw 43.1% · tour 43.7% · 812 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 +0.07 ±0.12 better than 68% of WTA · raw +0.07
Shot selection +0.17 ±0.22 better than 61% of WTA · raw +0.17
Execution −1.82 ±0.59 better than 6% of WTA · raw −1.78
Tactical adaptability −0.06 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 13 matches
Adaptation speed −0.03 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.36 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 79% 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 4,054 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Elena Gabriela Ruse 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 · 237 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 23% 47.4%±9.5 52.7%
BH crosscourt 19% 51.1%±10.2 50.9%
BH through the middle 16% 43.5%±10.7 46.2%
FH through the middle 15% 42.1%±11.0 45.8%
BH down the line 13% 45.1%±11.5 50.0%
FH down the line 12% 53.0%±11.9 52.2%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 219 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 54% 47.9%±7.0 47.6%
BH through the middle 21% 48.0%±10.1 43.3%
BH down the line 17% 44.5%±10.8 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 5% 32.9%±14.1 34.4%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 192 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 50.8%±7.9 46.7%
FH through the middle 27% 39.8%±9.6 41.3%
FH down the line 17% 43.4%±11.2 44.9%
FH slice through the middle 7% 29.0%±12.8 29.2%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 126 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 20% 52.1%±12.2 52.3%
BH crosscourt 19% 48.1%±12.4 50.8%
BH through the middle 17% 38.7%±12.4 46.2%
FH through the middle 17% 41.2%±12.5 46.5%
FH down the line 15% 50.2%±13.2 53.0%
BH down the line 11% 62.1%±13.7 50.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +8 How much less varied Elena Gabriela Ruse's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 119 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 47% 52% 64% / 66%
Body 15% 19% 60% / 57%
T 38% 30% ▼ 69% / 68%

398 normal · 27 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 35% 36% 61% / 66%
Body 13% 7% 48% / 56%
T 53% 58% 65% / 64%

295 normal · 92 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
Wide47% 52.7%±5.4 n=200 38% ▼
Body16% 56.8%±8.3 n=66 9% ▼
T37% 54.5%±6.0 n=159 53% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.71).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide35% 50.1%±6.4 n=135 43% ▲
Body11% 44.0%±9.5 n=44 0% ▼
T54% 51.5%±5.3 n=208 57% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.33).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.29 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: +7.1±7.1 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. (255 repeats, 531 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 83 47% +3.2±7.7
1stAd courtT 93 37% +1.6±7.2
1stAd courtWide 63 30% −4.0±7.9
1stDeuce courtBody 59 45% +2.1±8.7
1stDeuce courtT 84 28% −4.4±6.9
1stDeuce courtWide 119 32% −1.7±6.3
2ndAd courtBody 57 50% −5.0±8.8
2ndAd courtT 34 55% +0.4±10.2
2ndAd courtWide 50 53% −1.0±9.2
2ndDeuce courtBody 71 56% +1.3±8.1
2ndDeuce courtT 56 58% +1.9±8.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 35 57% +3.4±10.1

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 63% · +5.9±11.2 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 55% · −1.9±10.5 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 3.2% · won 54% · −2.8±11.7 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 3.3% · won 53% · −3.9±11.6 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 53% · −4.0±11.3 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 6.7% · won 55% · +7.3±11.1 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 5.4% · won 53% · +4.8±11.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 7.8% · won 52% · +3.5±10.7 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 5.4% · won 49% · +0.8±11.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 5.4% · won 49% · +0.8±11.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 57% · +6.5±11.3 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 7.1% · won 54% · +3.6±9.9 vs own baseline
  3. BH down the line → FH crosscourt used 4.6% · won 54% · +3.6±11.2 vs own baseline
  4. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 53% · +2.6±11.1 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.9% · won 51% · +0.7±10.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 57% · +9.3±12.6 vs own baseline · +23.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 55% · +7.2±13.0 vs own baseline · +18.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.7% · won 52% · +4.9±10.9 vs own baseline · +8.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Pauline Parmentier (5/7)
  4. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 52% · +4.1±11.4 vs own baseline · +11.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Pauline Parmentier (2/6), Mirra Andreeva (4/6)
  5. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 50% · +2.2±12.4 vs own baseline · +4.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 1.1% · won 49% · +1.1±12.0 vs own baseline · +6.1 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 the middle · return−0.7185
FH to their forehand · rally−0.8237
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.0200
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.1135
FH to the middle · return−1.2180

Most exposed to

FH to the middle · return−2.2127
BH to the middle · rally−1.0146
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.7175
BH to their backhand · rally−0.5187
T 1st serve · ad court+0.5145

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Elina Avanesyan, Caroline Wozniacki, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Lin Zhu, Qiang Wang

Tactical fingerprint

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

T serves · ad54%
Unforced errors / shot13.7%
Deep returns38%
Point-ending shots28.8%
Wide serves · deuce47%
BH down the line23%
Drop shots / shot1.9%
T serves · deuce37%
Serve & volley0%
FH down the line28%
Through the middle28%
Chipped returns7%
Backhand slice8%
Run-around forehands4%
Points at net5%
Wide serves · ad35%
Avg rally length3.7
1st serve in54%
Forehand share46%

Plays most like

  1. Naomi Osaka 2016–2026 plan v
  2. Veronika Kudermetova 2018–2025 plan v
  3. Serena Williams 1998–2026 plan v
  4. Danielle Collins 2018–2025 plan v
  5. Anastasia Potapova 2017–2026 plan v
  6. Karolina Pliskova 2013–2026 plan v
  7. Ekaterina Alexandrova 2017–2026 plan v
  8. Clara Tauson 2020–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  2. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006
  3. Anastasia Myskina 2002–2006

Charted matches