WTA · Right-handed · 3 charted matches · 2019–2022
Indy De Vroome
Against an average opponent
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.
Shot expected value
The share of points Indy De Vroome 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 · 97 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 24% | 44.6%±12.5 | 50.9% |
| BH through the middle | 20% | 46.8%±13.1 | 46.2% |
| FH crosscourt | 18% | 60.9%±13.2 | 52.7% |
| FH down the line | 16% | 45.7%±13.7 | 52.2% |
| FH through the middle | 13% | 39.9%±14.0 | 45.8% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side
position worth 43% to the average player · 70 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 46% | 41.1%±11.2 | 46.7% |
| FH through the middle | 31% | 34.0%±12.0 | 41.3% |
| FH down the line | 23% | 47.2%±13.7 | 44.9% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side
position worth 45% to the average player · 70 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 60% | 49.2%±10.4 | 47.6% |
| BH through the middle | 29% | 54.2%±13.0 | 43.3% |
Return +1: drive to your middle
position worth 50% to the average player · 61 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH down the line | 28% | 62.5%±13.1 | 50.6% |
| BH through the middle | 18% | 58.8%±14.5 | 46.2% |
| FH crosscourt | 16% | 41.6%±14.8 | 52.3% |
| BH crosscourt | 16% | 57.2%±14.9 | 50.8% |
Serve under pressure
Pressure predictability index −2 How much less varied Indy De Vroome's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 44 break-point first serves.
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 39% | 18% ▼ | 71% / 66% |
| Body | 46% | 27% ▼ | 59% / 57% |
| T | 15% | 55% ▲ | 70% / 68% |
201 normal · 11 break-point 1st serves
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 7% | 6% | 67% / 66% |
| Body | 31% | 39% ▲ | 61% / 56% |
| T | 63% | 55% ▼ | 71% / 64% |
169 normal · 33 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 serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 38% | 64.0%±7.5 n=80 | 53% ▲ |
| Body | 45% | 59.8%±7.2 n=95 | 30% ▼ |
| T | 17% | 55.5%±10.0 n=37 | 17% |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.35).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 6% | 52.7%±12.5 n=13 | 22% ▲ |
| Body | 32% | 55.1%±8.4 n=65 | 17% ▼ |
| T | 61% | 50.8%±6.6 n=124 | 61% |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.73).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.
Exploitability 0.64 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: −6.3±12.5 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. (164 repeats, 244 switches.)
Return by serve direction
Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.
| Serve | Court | Direction | Points | Won | vs tour | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | Ad court | Body | 63 | 51% | +6.8±8.5 | |
| 1st | Ad court | T | 32 | 37% | +1.0±10.1 | |
| 1st | Ad court | Wide | 27 | 41% | +6.5±10.7 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Body | 65 | 42% | −0.7±8.3 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | T | 13 | 34% | +1.9±11.9 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Wide | 79 | 33% | −0.8±7.4 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Body | 42 | 56% | +1.2±9.6 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | T | 10 | 46% | −8.8±13.0 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Wide | 24 | 63% | +9.5±10.8 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Body | 32 | 59% | +4.2±10.3 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | T | 14 | 54% | −1.9±12.4 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Wide | 13 | 51% | −2.3±12.5 |
Signature patterns
Recurring sequences that win more than Indy De Vroome's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.
Serve → +1
- Body serve (deuce court) → BH down the line used 10.8% · won 62% · −6.7±11.2 vs own baseline
Return
- Not enough data
Rally, consecutive own shots
- Not enough data
Discovered sequences
Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Indy De Vroome wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 51% · +1.1±12.7 vs own baseline · +5.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Urszula Radwanska (3/11), Dalma Galfi (6/6)
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 | −0.5 | 133 |
| T 1st serve · ad court | −1.4 | 124 |
Most exposed to
| FH to the middle · return | +3.3 | 122 |
Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Elina Avanesyan, Caroline Wozniacki, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Lin Zhu, Qiang Wang