RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 9 charted matches · 2017–2026

Fiona Ferro

Archetype: Ad-court slider · Avoids the wide serve

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 55.6% ±3.6 raw 51.7% · tour 56.3% · 588 points
Return points won 43.4% ±3.6 raw 40.8% · tour 43.7% · 595 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 −0.15 ±0.12 better than 26% of WTA · raw −0.15
Shot selection +0.21 ±0.23 better than 67% of WTA · raw +0.20
Execution −0.74 ±0.91 better than 26% of WTA · raw −0.76
Points left on the table 2.66 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 40% 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 3,184 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Fiona Ferro 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 backhand side

position worth 45% to the average player · 269 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 46% 47.6%±6.8 47.6%
BH through the middle 21% 44.3%±9.4 43.3%
BH down the line 9% 41.7%±12.2 46.8%
FH inside-out 9% 61.6%±12.2 52.5%
BH slice through the middle 5% 33.0%±13.5 34.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 200 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 33% 42.4%±8.8 52.2%
FH crosscourt 21% 50.1%±10.5 52.7%
FH through the middle 19% 41.6%±10.6 45.8%
BH through the middle 13% 40.5%±12.0 46.2%
BH crosscourt 7% 59.4%±13.9 50.9%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 135 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 38% 41.3%±9.6 46.7%
FH through the middle 27% 40.8%±10.7 41.3%
FH down the line 24% 49.0%±11.3 44.9%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 117 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 48% 44.2%±9.4 47.8%
BH through the middle 28% 44.5%±11.2 43.0%
BH down the line 12% 47.8%±14.1 46.2%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +5 How much less varied Fiona Ferro's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 73 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 34% 16% ▼ 61% / 66%
Body 28% 32% 42% / 57%
T 38% 53% ▲ 58% / 68%

274 normal · 19 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 54% 57% 59% / 66%
Body 26% 19% 54% / 56%
T 20% 24% 64% / 64%

220 normal · 54 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
Wide33% 48.9%±7.3 n=96 43% ▲
Body28% 44.0%±7.7 n=82 13% ▼
T39% 51.5%±6.8 n=115 44% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.37).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide54% 58.1%±6.1 n=149 63% ▲
Body25% 51.3%±8.3 n=68 10% ▼
T21% 56.3%±8.7 n=57 27% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.39).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.70 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: −1.3±6.7 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. (202 repeats, 347 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 33 45% +0.8±10.3
1stAd courtT 63 28% −7.9±7.6
1stAd courtWide 71 43% +8.5±8.1
1stDeuce courtBody 50 42% −0.4±9.1
1stDeuce courtT 72 32% −0.1±7.6
1stDeuce courtWide 76 24% −10.2±6.8
2ndAd courtBody 47 59% +4.1±9.2
2ndAd courtT 16 53% −1.8±12.1
2ndAd courtWide 44 49% −4.8±9.6
2ndDeuce courtBody 48 56% +1.1±9.3
2ndDeuce courtT 37 56% +0.4±10.0
2ndDeuce courtWide 24 50% −3.5±11.2

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 7.5% · won 58% · +1.4±10.8 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 5.8% · won 53% · −3.6±11.6 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 7.5% · won 51% · −5.6±10.9 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 5.8% · won 47% · −9.5±11.6 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 5.5% · won 46% · −10.5±11.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 11.9% · won 57% · +9.7±11.3 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 10.4% · won 46% · −0.9±11.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.3% · won 46% · +6.6±11.0 vs own baseline
  2. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 4.9% · won 46% · +6.4±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 8.2% · won 44% · +4.5±9.6 vs own baseline
  4. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 6.2% · won 43% · +3.5±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.7% · won 41% · +1.6±11.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 48% · +5.6±11.7 vs own baseline · +5.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Mirra Andreeva (3/7)
  2. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 48% · +5.3±12.9 vs own baseline · −0.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. BH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 48% · +5.3±12.9 vs own baseline · +10.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 47% · +4.1±12.7 vs own baseline · +4.7 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.9% · won 44% · +1.5±13.0 vs own baseline · −7.0 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 42% · −1.0±12.9 vs own baseline · −8.2 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+1.8121
BH to the middle · rally+1.3130
FH to their backhand · rally+1.2186
BH to their backhand · rally−0.1171
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.6149

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · rally−1.5182
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−0.4122
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.5127
FH to their forehand · rally+0.7173
BH to the middle · return+0.7133

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Maja Chwalinska, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Yulia Putintseva, Elsa Jacquemot, Caroline Wozniacki

Tactical fingerprint

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

Run-around forehands23%
Wide serves · ad54%
Unforced errors / shot13.6%
FH down the line33%
Avg rally length4.4
T serves · deuce39%
Point-ending shots25.5%
Drop shots / shot1.8%
Through the middle29%
Serve & volley0%
Forehand share53%
BH down the line19%
Backhand slice10%
Chipped returns7%
Deep returns31%
1st serve in60%
Points at net4%
Wide serves · deuce33%
T serves · ad21%

Plays most like

  1. Diana Shnaider 2022–2026 plan v
  2. Kaja Juvan 2018–2026 plan v
  3. Marta Kostyuk 2018–2026 plan v
  4. Svetlana Kuznetsova 2004–2021 plan v
  5. Nao Hibino 2016–2025 plan v
  6. Olga Danilovic 2019–2026 plan v
  7. Sara Bejlek 2022–2026 plan v
  8. Yue Yuan 2023–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010
  2. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  3. Monica Seles 1990–2003

Charted matches