RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 11 charted matches · 2014–2024

Heather Watson

Archetype: Ad-court T server · Rallies through the middle

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 59.6% ±3.3 raw 61.6% · tour 56.3% · 753 points
Return points won 43.0% ±3.4 raw 42.1% · tour 43.7% · 744 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 +0.13 ±0.21 better than 77% of WTA · raw +0.17
Shot selection +0.05 ±0.18 better than 51% of WTA · raw +0.12
Execution −0.49 ±0.88 better than 33% of WTA · raw +0.03
Tactical adaptability +0.20 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 11 matches
Adaptation speed +0.09 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.27 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 86% 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 3,959 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Heather Watson 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 · 242 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 52% 55.3%±6.7 46.7%
FH down the line 23% 53.3%±9.5 44.9%
FH through the middle 19% 40.7%±9.9 41.3%
FH slice through the middle 5% 20.7%±11.6 29.2%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 241 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 26% 60.4%±8.9 52.7%
FH through the middle 20% 45.1%±9.9 45.8%
BH through the middle 17% 52.9%±10.5 46.2%
BH crosscourt 15% 58.5%±10.9 50.9%
FH down the line 14% 54.5%±11.1 52.2%
BH down the line 8% 52.5%±13.0 50.0%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 198 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 59% 49.3%±7.0 47.6%
BH through the middle 24% 41.3%±9.9 43.3%
BH down the line 13% 54.1%±12.2 46.8%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 150 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 23% 56.4%±11.1 52.3%
BH crosscourt 21% 46.4%±11.4 50.8%
BH through the middle 21% 43.6%±11.4 46.2%
FH down the line 15% 47.9%±12.5 53.0%
FH through the middle 15% 48.3%±12.7 46.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −7 How much less varied Heather Watson's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 66 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 38% 46% ▲ 67% / 66%
Body 14% 15% 63% / 57%
T 48% 38% ▼ 76% / 68%

378 normal · 13 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 37% 34% 70% / 66%
Body 14% 25% ▲ 55% / 56%
T 49% 42% 69% / 64%

305 normal · 53 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
Wide38% 62.5%±6.0 n=149 37% ▼
Body14% 62.9%±8.6 n=56 0% ▼
T48% 65.0%±5.3 n=186 63% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.83).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide36% 61.5%±6.3 n=130 51% ▲
Body16% 57.4%±8.8 n=56 1% ▼
T48% 60.0%±5.7 n=172 48%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.74).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.66 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: −7.5±7.0 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. (220 repeats, 507 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 41 45% +1.4±9.7
1stAd courtT 88 39% +3.2±7.4
1stAd courtWide 70 37% +2.9±8.0
1stDeuce courtBody 64 30% −13.1±7.7
1stDeuce courtT 77 25% −7.2±6.9
1stDeuce courtWide 88 30% −4.2±6.9
2ndAd courtBody 93 53% −1.8±7.4
2ndAd courtT 17 54% −0.8±12.0
2ndAd courtWide 47 47% −6.7±9.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 85 63% +8.4±7.4
2ndDeuce courtT 41 56% ±0.0±9.7
2ndDeuce courtWide 31 53% −1.1±10.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 66% · −0.6±11.1 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 3.4% · won 64% · −2.6±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 63% · −3.7±10.8 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 58% · −8.5±10.9 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 4.8% · won 55% · −11.5±10.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 8.3% · won 56% · +5.7±8.6 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 7.6% · won 56% · +5.4±8.9 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 3.1% · won 57% · +6.8±11.5 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.5% · won 54% · +3.6±10.0 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 7.0% · won 53% · +3.1±9.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 58% · +8.2±11.0 vs own baseline · +21.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tamara Korpatsch (5/6)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 55% · +5.0±9.3 vs own baseline · +9.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Agnieszka Radwanska (3/6), Nicole Gibbs (13/22)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 57% · +6.9±12.4 vs own baseline · +15.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.4% · won 54% · +4.1±9.7 vs own baseline · +8.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Nicole Gibbs (9/17)
  5. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 55% · +4.5±11.1 vs own baseline · +4.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Nicole Gibbs (2/6), Alison Riske Amritraj (6/6)
  6. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 54% · +4.0±11.7 vs own baseline · +9.9 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+1.5277
T 1st serve · ad court+0.7172
BH to the middle · return+0.7151
BH to the middle · rally+0.6141
FH to their forehand · rally+0.3323

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−1.6269
BH to the middle · rally−1.5163
BH to their backhand · rally−0.9208
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.9152
FH to the middle · return−0.4141

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Linda Fruhvirtova, Maja Chwalinska, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Linda Klimovicova, Nadia Podoroska

Tactical fingerprint

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

T serves · deuce48%
T serves · ad48%
Avg rally length4.2
Unforced errors / shot10.8%
Through the middle29%
Point-ending shots24.0%
Serve & volley0%
Drop shots / shot1.3%
Deep returns31%
Wide serves · deuce38%
Run-around forehands5%
Points at net6%
Forehand share52%
Backhand slice8%
Wide serves · ad36%
Chipped returns4%
FH down the line26%
1st serve in58%
BH down the line14%

Plays most like

  1. Maria Sakkari 2015–2026 plan v
  2. Elina Svitolina 2013–2026 plan v
  3. Jessica Pegula 2015–2026 plan v
  4. Jaqueline Cristian 2021–2026 plan v
  5. Eugenie Bouchard 2013–2023 plan v
  6. Veronika Kudermetova 2018–2025 plan v
  7. Qiang Wang 2012–2024 plan v
  8. Anett Kontaveit 2015–2023 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006
  2. Anastasia Myskina 2002–2006
  3. Monica Seles 1990–2003

Charted matches