RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 8 charted matches · 2024–2026

Jessica Bouzas Maneiro

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 55.4% ±3.9 raw 51.0% · tour 56.3% · 498 points
Return points won 42.5% ±3.8 raw 37.0% · tour 43.7% · 495 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 +0.09 ±0.21 better than 71% of WTA · raw +0.08
Shot selection +0.31 ±0.34 better than 80% of WTA · raw +0.30
Execution −2.12 ±1.18 better than 3% of WTA · raw −2.19

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 2,519 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Jessica Bouzas Maneiro 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 · 146 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 32% 45.6%±10.0 52.7%
FH down the line 20% 56.0%±11.7 52.2%
FH through the middle 18% 37.3%±11.7 45.8%
BH crosscourt 13% 46.6%±13.1 50.9%
BH through the middle 10% 41.9%±13.9 46.2%
BH down the line 8% 58.1%±14.6 50.0%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 127 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 50% 41.4%±8.9 46.7%
FH through the middle 31% 46.2%±10.7 41.3%
FH down the line 20% 37.7%±11.9 44.9%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 124 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 44% 43.4%±9.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 31% 35.6%±10.3 43.3%
BH down the line 16% 48.4%±13.0 46.8%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 93 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 30% 44.7%±11.8 52.3%
BH crosscourt 22% 40.4%±12.8 50.8%
BH through the middle 15% 44.8%±14.0 46.2%
FH through the middle 13% 44.7%±14.5 46.5%
FH down the line 12% 53.5%±14.7 53.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Jessica Bouzas Maneiro's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 64 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 53% 44% ▼ 54% / 66%
Body 18% 25% 63% / 57%
T 29% 31% 72% / 68%

243 normal · 16 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 31% 31% 61% / 66%
Body 25% 19% 57% / 56%
T 44% 50% 54% / 64%

191 normal · 48 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
Wide53% 53.2%±6.4 n=137 53%
Body18% 58.6%±9.2 n=47 3% ▼
T29% 53.3%±8.0 n=75 44% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.58).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide31% 45.9%±8.0 n=74 46% ▲
Body24% 49.0%±8.8 n=57 9% ▼
T45% 47.2%±7.0 n=108 45%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.86).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.25 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: −2.7±6.0 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. (144 repeats, 338 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 23 40% −4.0±11.1
1stAd courtT 60 33% −2.6±8.2
1stAd courtWide 57 34% −0.7±8.3
1stDeuce courtBody 30 38% −4.6±10.3
1stDeuce courtT 37 23% −8.8±8.5
1stDeuce courtWide 92 25% −9.3±6.4
2ndAd courtBody 44 57% +2.4±9.5
2ndAd courtT 17 54% −0.8±12.0
2ndAd courtWide 34 49% −5.0±10.3
2ndDeuce courtBody 46 53% −1.4±9.4
2ndDeuce courtT 26 57% +0.8±10.9
2ndDeuce courtWide 28 47% −7.0±10.8

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 8.4% · won 52% · −3.6±11.1 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 7.1% · won 47% · −9.3±11.6 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 7.7% · won 47% · −9.2±11.4 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, deep used 13.9% · won 35% · −2.1±11.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 10.8% · won 47% · +7.1±10.1 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 7.0% · won 42% · +2.5±11.3 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 6.4% · won 42% · +2.2±11.6 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 7.0% · won 40% · +0.6±11.3 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 7.6% · won 39% · −0.9±11.0 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Jessica Bouzas Maneiro 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 through the middle used 2.3% · won 48% · +5.8±11.3 vs own baseline · +10.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Elena Rybakina (3/7)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 44% · +1.6±13.0 vs own baseline · −7.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Marta Kostyuk (3/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 41% · −1.4±10.9 vs own baseline · −8.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Solana Sierra (0/6), Marta Kostyuk (5/10)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 39% · −3.4±12.7 vs own baseline · −16.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.6% · won 39% · −3.3±12.0 vs own baseline · −13.6 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Mirra Andreeva (4/7)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 36% · −6.7±10.9 vs own baseline · −18.1 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

FH to their forehand · rally+1.3188
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.9137
BH to their backhand · rally−2.0131

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−1.6171
FH to the middle · return−0.4143
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.7138

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.

Wide serves · deuce53%
T serves · ad45%
Forehand share56%
Point-ending shots26.1%
Unforced errors / shot11.4%
Deep returns34%
Chipped returns12%
Through the middle29%
Serve & volley0%
Run-around forehands6%
BH down the line19%
Points at net5%
Backhand slice8%
Avg rally length3.8
FH down the line24%
T serves · deuce29%
Drop shots / shot0.4%
Wide serves · ad31%
1st serve in57%

Plays most like

  1. Iva Jovic 2024–2026 plan v
  2. Anastasia Potapova 2017–2026 plan v
  3. Louisa Chirico 2015–2017 plan v
  4. Kimberly Birrell 2016–2026 plan v
  5. Maria Sharapova 2003–2020 plan v
  6. Jennifer Brady 2016–2023 plan v
  7. Varvara Gracheva 2021–2026 plan v
  8. Shelby Rogers 2014–2024 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Anastasia Myskina 2002–2006
  2. Marion Bartoli 2003–2013
  3. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010

Charted matches