RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 19 charted matches · 2024–2026

Maya Joint

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 57.4% ±3.1 raw 54.6% · tour 56.3% · 1,252 points
Return points won 45.1% ±3.3 raw 42.0% · tour 43.7% · 1,199 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 −0.21 ±0.12 better than 16% of WTA · raw −0.20
Shot selection +0.13 ±0.15 better than 59% of WTA · raw +0.14
Execution −0.78 ±0.58 better than 24% of WTA · raw −0.72
Tactical adaptability −0.08 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 19 matches
Adaptation speed −0.05 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.76 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 28% 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 6,131 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Maya Joint 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 · 432 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH down the line 22% 55.2%±7.6 52.2%
FH crosscourt 21% 58.3%±7.8 52.7%
FH through the middle 20% 45.9%±7.9 45.8%
BH crosscourt 16% 49.6%±8.8 50.9%
BH through the middle 15% 47.3%±9.0 46.2%
BH down the line 7% 37.3%±11.1 50.0%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 339 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 46% 46.6%±6.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 32% 41.9%±7.2 43.3%
BH down the line 12% 52.3%±10.6 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 4% 27.8%±13.0 34.4%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 305 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 39% 51.0%±7.0 46.7%
FH through the middle 35% 47.1%±7.3 41.3%
FH down the line 16% 42.0%±9.8 44.9%
FH slice through the middle 4% 30.8%±13.4 29.2%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 234 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH through the middle 26% 52.2%±9.1 46.3%
FH through the middle 23% 53.6%±9.6 45.5%
FH crosscourt 18% 56.1%±10.4 54.0%
FH down the line 15% 56.5%±10.9 53.3%
BH crosscourt 14% 58.6%±11.2 52.5%
BH down the line 4% 40.6%±14.8 51.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +12 How much less varied Maya Joint's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 143 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 37% 48% ▲ 62% / 66%
Body 19% 12% 61% / 57%
T 43% 39% 65% / 68%

613 normal · 33 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 43% 54% ▲ 62% / 66%
Body 18% 7% ▼ 48% / 56%
T 39% 39% 55% / 64%

493 normal · 110 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% 55.2%±4.9 n=245 36% ▼
Body19% 59.2%±6.6 n=122 15% ▼
T43% 55.3%±4.7 n=279 49% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.59).
Optimal mix: ±0.0 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide45% 54.6%±4.7 n=273 60% ▲
Body16% 48.4%±7.3 n=97 1% ▼
T39% 53.6%±5.1 n=233 39%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.36).
Optimal mix: +0.6 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.28 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: −2.1±4.3 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. (348 repeats, 863 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 75 46% +2.0±8.0
1stAd courtT 114 32% −3.8±6.4
1stAd courtWide 164 28% −6.4±5.3
1stDeuce courtBody 88 45% +2.1±7.5
1stDeuce courtT 152 30% −2.1±5.6
1stDeuce courtWide 162 31% −2.7±5.5
2ndAd courtBody 90 61% +6.2±7.3
2ndAd courtT 35 59% +4.2±10.0
2ndAd courtWide 94 50% −3.5±7.4
2ndDeuce courtBody 113 55% +1.0±6.8
2ndDeuce courtT 64 58% +2.3±8.4
2ndDeuce courtWide 46 58% +4.3±9.3

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 69% · +11.4±9.9 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 58% · +1.3±11.0 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 3.6% · won 57% · −0.5±9.8 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.1% · won 56% · −1.1±11.4 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 3.5% · won 55% · −2.6±9.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, deep used 4.4% · won 59% · +16.3±10.5 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 4.8% · won 51% · +8.6±10.4 vs own baseline
  3. vs body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 3.9% · won 51% · +8.8±11.0 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 3.0% · won 52% · +8.9±11.7 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.0% · won 52% · +8.9±11.7 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.0% · won 60% · +9.4±9.1 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 57% · +6.3±9.8 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → BH down the line used 2.7% · won 57% · +6.1±11.0 vs own baseline
  4. FH down the line → BH through the middle used 2.3% · won 54% · +3.6±11.4 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 53% · +2.3±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 Maya Joint wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 59% · +11.6±12.5 vs own baseline · +22.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. T serve → BH through the middle return, mid → BH through the middle used 0.7% · won 55% · +7.7±12.2 vs own baseline · +18.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 53% · +5.3±12.0 vs own baseline · +10.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Emma Raducanu (5/7)
  4. BH through the middle → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 53% · +5.3±12.0 vs own baseline · +10.1 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 53% · +5.3±12.0 vs own baseline · +5.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.9% · won 51% · +3.1±11.5 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

FH to their forehand · serve +1+2.4143
FH to their backhand · serve +1+1.2126
Body 1st serve · deuce court+0.2122
T 1st serve · deuce court+0.2279
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.1273

Most exposed to

FH to the middle · return−2.7248
BH to their backhand · return−2.3193
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.4259
BH to their backhand · rally−1.2241
BH to the middle · return−1.1309

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Sara Sorribes Tormo +2.48, Caroline Wozniacki +2.27, Daria Kasatkina +1.70, Angelique Kerber +1.64, Sara Errani +1.59

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +1.21, Angelique Kerber +0.95, Marie Bouzkova +0.86, Elina Avanesyan +0.56, Katie Volynets +0.52

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Elina Avanesyan, Caroline Wozniacki, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Lin Zhu, Qiang Wang

Tactical fingerprint

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

Through the middle38%
Unforced errors / shot12.8%
T serves · deuce43%
Deep returns36%
1st serve in65%
Wide serves · ad45%
Point-ending shots25.8%
T serves · ad39%
Forehand share53%
Serve & volley0%
Run-around forehands6%
Chipped returns7%
Wide serves · deuce38%
Avg rally length3.9
Backhand slice8%
FH down the line27%
Drop shots / shot1.0%
Points at net5%
BH down the line17%

Plays most like

  1. Irina Camelia Begu 2015–2024 plan v
  2. Bernarda Pera 2017–2025 plan v
  3. Jasmine Paolini 2016–2026 plan v
  4. Robin Montgomery 2022–2026 plan v
  5. Shuai Zhang 2009–2026 plan v
  6. Rebecca Marino 2018–2024 plan v
  7. Yue Yuan 2023–2026 plan v
  8. Anett Kontaveit 2015–2023 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Dinara Safina 2007–2011
  2. Marion Bartoli 2003–2013
  3. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010

Charted matches