RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 64 charted matches · 2015–2026

Maria Sakkari

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 59.2% ±2.6 raw 57.7% · tour 56.3% · 4,682 points
Return points won 46.1% ±2.6 raw 41.6% · tour 43.7% · 4,521 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 +0.01 ±0.06 better than 54% of WTA · raw −0.01
Shot selection +0.36 ±0.08 better than 85% of WTA · raw +0.33
Execution −0.34 ±0.33 better than 42% of WTA · raw −0.57
Tactical adaptability +0.04 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 63 matches
Adaptation speed +0.02 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.52 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 63% 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 23,827 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Maria Sakkari 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 · 1,514 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 49% 46.6%±3.0 47.6%
BH through the middle 29% 46.5%±3.8 43.3%
BH down the line 8% 49.6%±6.8 46.8%
BH slice crosscourt 3% 45.0%±9.9 40.4%
FH inside-in 3% 61.9%±10.3 55.6%
FH inside-out 2% 51.8%±10.9 52.5%
BH slice through the middle 2% 29.8%±10.6 34.4%
FH through the middle 2% 39.6%±12.3 45.1%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 1,499 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 25% 53.5%±4.1 52.7%
FH down the line 20% 49.4%±4.5 52.2%
FH through the middle 19% 42.0%±4.6 45.8%
BH through the middle 16% 48.5%±5.1 46.2%
BH crosscourt 11% 51.2%±6.0 50.9%
BH down the line 3% 48.4%±10.3 50.0%
BH slice through the middle 1% 56.0%±12.8 44.8%
BH slice crosscourt 1% 66.4%±13.5 49.5%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 1,172 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 41% 46.1%±3.7 46.7%
FH through the middle 31% 44.5%±4.2 41.3%
FH down the line 19% 46.5%±5.3 44.9%
FH slice through the middle 4% 21.3%±8.4 29.2%
FH slice crosscourt 3% 30.2%±10.6 31.9%
FH drop shot down the line 1% 53.7%±14.5 50.9%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 802 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 26% 52.4%±5.5 52.3%
FH through the middle 21% 45.0%±5.9 46.5%
FH down the line 19% 49.5%±6.3 53.0%
BH through the middle 17% 46.7%±6.5 46.2%
BH crosscourt 10% 58.4%±8.0 50.8%
BH down the line 3% 51.4%±12.5 50.6%
BH slice through the middle 2% 56.4%±14.0 45.9%
BH slice crosscourt 1% 42.0%±14.6 45.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied Maria Sakkari's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 530 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 45% 64% / 66%
Body 17% 9% ▼ 59% / 57%
T 42% 46% 73% / 68%

2,294 normal · 126 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 37% 39% 62% / 66%
Body 15% 15% 61% / 56%
T 48% 46% 69% / 64%

1,845 normal · 404 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
Wide41% 56.0%±2.5 n=1,000 30% ▼
Body16% 57.1%±3.9 n=397 13% ▼
T42% 58.0%±2.5 n=1,023 57% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.63).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide37% 57.7%±2.8 n=831 37%
Body15% 56.3%±4.3 n=338 0% ▼
T48% 59.6%±2.4 n=1,080 63% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.42).
Optimal mix: +0.7 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.43 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: −1.0±2.4 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. (1,642 repeats, 2,899 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 219 43% −0.5±5.2
1stAd courtT 545 33% −2.7±3.2
1stAd courtWide 584 34% −0.8±3.1
1stDeuce courtBody 323 43% +0.4±4.3
1stDeuce courtT 558 31% −1.2±3.1
1stDeuce courtWide 627 37% +3.3±3.1
2ndAd courtBody 357 58% +2.7±4.1
2ndAd courtT 132 48% −6.6±6.5
2ndAd courtWide 310 47% −6.5±4.5
2ndDeuce courtBody 406 52% −2.1±3.9
2ndDeuce courtT 256 55% −1.2±4.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 187 50% −3.5±5.6

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.3% · won 59% · −1.7±6.2 vs own baseline
  2. Body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle used 2.2% · won 57% · −3.7±7.3 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 57% · −4.1±7.5 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.2% · won 53% · −7.8±7.3 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 52% · −8.9±7.5 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 2.2% · won 59% · +16.3±7.6 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.2% · won 53% · +10.2±6.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 2.0% · won 56% · +12.5±7.9 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 4.9% · won 51% · +8.1±5.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.2% · won 54% · +11.3±7.7 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 57% · +9.1±7.1 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 3.5% · won 55% · +6.2±5.9 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.5% · won 53% · +4.6±5.3 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.7% · won 54% · +5.9±6.5 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.5% · won 52% · +3.8±5.3 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH through the middle → FH through the middle → BH through the middle used 0.3% · won 60% · +12.3±10.1 vs own baseline · +21.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Coco Gauff (5/6), Elina Svitolina (6/6)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 55% · +6.8±6.7 vs own baseline · +2.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Bianca Andreescu (3/8), Elena Rybakina (5/11)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 55% · +7.1±7.9 vs own baseline · +3.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jessica Pegula (4/7), Coco Gauff (8/10)
  4. T serve → BH through the middle return, deep → FH crosscourt used 0.2% · won 60% · +12.0±11.4 vs own baseline · +22.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 0.4% · won 55% · +7.1±9.8 vs own baseline · +11.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Iga Swiatek (3/6), Viktoriya Tomova (4/7)
  6. BH crosscourt → BH slice through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 55% · +7.4±10.1 vs own baseline · ±0.0 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 · serve +1+3.0561
Wide 2nd serve · ad court+2.0278
T 2nd serve · ad court+1.3148
BH to their backhand · return +1+1.2427
FH to the middle · return +1+0.9406

Most exposed to

T 2nd serve · ad court−2.4132
Wide 2nd serve · ad court−2.3310
Wide 2nd serve · deuce court−2.2187
T 2nd serve · deuce court−1.9256
BH to their forehand · serve +1−1.6284

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Sara Sorribes Tormo +2.14, Caroline Wozniacki +1.95, Daria Kasatkina +1.32, Sara Errani +1.21, Angelique Kerber +1.13

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +1.38, Angelique Kerber +1.05, Marie Bouzkova +1.04, Linda Fruhvirtova +0.68, Elina Avanesyan +0.67

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Serena Williams, Caroline Wozniacki, Ons Jabeur, Karolina Muchova, Clara Tauson

Tactical fingerprint

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

T serves · ad48%
Through the middle32%
T serves · deuce42%
Run-around forehands12%
Forehand share56%
Unforced errors / shot11.4%
Drop shots / shot1.7%
Point-ending shots24.7%
Wide serves · deuce41%
Avg rally length4.0
Serve & volley0%
1st serve in61%
Chipped returns8%
Backhand slice9%
Points at net5%
Wide serves · ad37%
Deep returns30%
FH down the line26%
BH down the line13%

Plays most like

  1. Heather Watson 2014–2024 plan v
  2. Nadia Podoroska 2020–2026 plan v
  3. Elina Svitolina 2013–2026 plan v
  4. Jasmine Paolini 2016–2026 plan v
  5. Anna Bondar 2017–2026 plan v
  6. Maya Joint 2024–2026 plan v
  7. Andrea Petkovic 2010–2022 plan v
  8. Xin Yu Wang 2019–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010
  2. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  3. Anastasia Myskina 2002–2006

Charted matches