RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 23 charted matches · 1994–2005

Mary Pierce

Archetype: Forehand line-changer · Backhand line-changer

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 60.6% ±2.9 raw 58.4% · tour 56.3% · 1,491 points
Return points won 44.7% ±3.0 raw 43.7% · tour 43.7% · 1,581 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 +0.30 ±0.11 better than 95% of WTA · raw +0.30
Shot selection +0.22 ±0.17 better than 71% of WTA · raw +0.22
Execution +0.69 ±0.50 better than 85% of WTA · raw +0.69
Tactical adaptability ±0.00 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 22 matches
Adaptation speed ±0.00 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 87% 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 7,732 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Mary Pierce 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 · 464 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 43% 46.8%±5.5 47.6%
BH down the line 26% 49.2%±7.0 46.8%
BH through the middle 19% 36.1%±7.6 43.3%
BH slice crosscourt 5% 40.7%±12.5 40.4%
BH slice through the middle 3% 33.0%±13.5 34.4%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 403 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 46% 47.7%±5.7 46.7%
FH down the line 27% 42.2%±7.2 44.9%
FH through the middle 18% 37.7%±8.4 41.3%
FH slice through the middle 3% 29.8%±13.1 29.2%
FH down the line + approach 3% 62.7%±14.1 65.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 362 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 21% 53.2%±8.4 52.7%
FH down the line 20% 53.2%±8.5 52.2%
BH crosscourt 17% 50.2%±9.2 50.9%
BH down the line 16% 35.9%±8.9 50.0%
FH through the middle 11% 48.6%±10.6 45.8%
BH through the middle 9% 37.7%±11.2 46.2%
FH down the line + approach 3% 67.9%±13.6 68.6%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 250 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH down the line 21% 55.1%±9.6 51.0%
FH crosscourt 19% 54.9%±10.0 54.0%
FH down the line 17% 54.3%±10.4 53.3%
BH crosscourt 16% 55.8%±10.5 52.5%
BH through the middle 11% 45.3%±11.9 46.3%
FH through the middle 9% 38.3%±12.3 45.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index −7 How much less varied Mary Pierce's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 162 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 44% 41% 61% / 66%
Body 23% 20% 60% / 57%
T 33% 39% 65% / 68%

707 normal · 49 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 60% 50% ▼ 66% / 66%
Body 13% 18% 54% / 56%
T 27% 33% 63% / 64%

580 normal · 113 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
Wide44% 55.3%±4.3 n=331 44%
Body23% 59.6%±5.7 n=174 8% ▼
T33% 59.7%±4.8 n=251 48% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.36).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide58% 58.0%±3.9 n=405 57% ▼
Body13% 55.0%±7.4 n=93 0% ▼
T28% 61.3%±5.3 n=195 43% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.39).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.57 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: +3.3±4.4 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. (574 repeats, 829 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 91 52% +8.3±7.5
1stAd courtT 208 35% −0.4±5.1
1stAd courtWide 171 36% +1.5±5.6
1stDeuce courtBody 125 50% +6.9±6.6
1stDeuce courtT 166 26% −5.8±5.2
1stDeuce courtWide 219 35% +0.6±5.0
2ndAd courtBody 86 52% −2.9±7.6
2ndAd courtT 83 54% −1.5±7.7
2ndAd courtWide 114 58% +4.1±6.8
2ndDeuce courtBody 99 54% −0.7±7.2
2ndDeuce courtT 59 57% +1.1±8.6
2ndDeuce courtWide 130 56% +2.6±6.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 68% · +7.3±9.7 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.5% · won 66% · +5.1±10.0 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (deuce court) → BH down the line used 2.9% · won 64% · +3.1±9.7 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (ad court) → BH down the line used 2.1% · won 63% · +2.1±10.6 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.9% · won 62% · +1.0±9.0 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.6% · won 56% · +9.3±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 5.8% · won 54% · +7.1±8.8 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt, deep used 2.1% · won 58% · +11.1±11.5 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 4.2% · won 54% · +7.3±9.7 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH down the line, mid used 2.1% · won 56% · +9.1±11.6 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.9% · won 54% · +9.0±7.8 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.5% · won 52% · +6.2±8.1 vs own baseline
  3. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 3.0% · won 49% · +4.1±9.9 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 5.7% · won 48% · +2.8±8.0 vs own baseline
  5. FH crosscourt → BH down the line used 2.7% · won 49% · +3.3±10.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 61% · +12.7±10.7 vs own baseline · +18.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Gabriela Sabatini (7/11), Conchita Martinez (5/6)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 53% · +4.5±9.1 vs own baseline · +4.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Elena Dementieva (3/7), Amelie Mauresmo (3/7)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 54% · +6.3±12.1 vs own baseline · +8.5 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH down the line → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 51% · +3.0±8.2 vs own baseline · +4.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Barbara Schett (2/7), Elena Dementieva (6/12)
  5. FH through the middle → FH down the line → BH down the line used 0.4% · won 54% · +5.6±12.8 vs own baseline · +19.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (3/6), Martina Hingis (4/7)
  6. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.6% · won 52% · +4.1±11.9 vs own baseline · +3.5 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 · return +1+3.7139
FH to their forehand · return+3.3239
BH to their backhand · serve +1+2.8207
FH to their backhand · return +1+2.7120
BH to their forehand · return +1+2.1138

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−3.5511
BH slice to their backhand · rally−2.5149
BH to their forehand · rally−2.1180
FH to the middle · return−1.8240
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.3344

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.

BH down the line37%
Wide serves · ad58%
1st serve in70%
FH down the line36%
Points at net12%
Point-ending shots27.1%
Wide serves · deuce44%
Avg rally length4.2
Serve & volley1%
Unforced errors / shot10.1%
Chipped returns6%
T serves · deuce33%
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Backhand slice6%
Run-around forehands3%
T serves · ad28%
Forehand share48%
Through the middle19%
Deep returns21%

Plays most like

  1. Martina Hingis 1996–2007 plan v
  2. Mona Barthel 2012–2021 plan v
  3. Cristina Bucsa 2016–2026 plan v
  4. Elena Vesnina 2007–2016 plan v
  5. Svetlana Kuznetsova 2004–2021 plan v
  6. Sorana Cirstea 2014–2026 plan v
  7. Jelena Jankovic 2004–2016 plan v
  8. Victoria Mboko 2022–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Mona Barthel 2012–2021
  2. Cristina Bucsa 2016–2026
  3. Sorana Cirstea 2014–2026

Charted matches