RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 12 charted matches · 2020–2026

Nadia Podoroska

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 54.7% ±3.4 raw 52.5% · tour 56.3% · 753 points
Return points won 41.5% ±3.4 raw 37.7% · tour 43.7% · 766 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 −0.12 ±0.12 better than 33% of WTA · raw −0.12
Shot selection +0.26 ±0.15 better than 74% of WTA · raw +0.25
Execution −1.45 ±0.80 better than 11% of WTA · raw −1.48
Tactical adaptability −0.12 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 12 matches
Adaptation speed +0.04 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.72 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 30% 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 3,865 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Nadia Podoroska 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 · 248 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 35% 34.7%±7.5 47.6%
BH through the middle 31% 37.4%±8.0 43.3%
BH down the line 10% 37.2%±12.0 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 9% 25.9%±11.1 34.4%
BH slice crosscourt 6% 44.7%±13.6 40.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 189 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 31% 52.6%±9.2 52.7%
FH through the middle 25% 49.5%±10.0 45.8%
FH down the line 20% 53.4%±10.9 52.2%
BH through the middle 11% 39.6%±12.6 46.2%
BH crosscourt 8% 39.4%±13.4 50.9%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 169 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 48% 39.9%±8.0 46.7%
FH through the middle 33% 40.4%±9.3 41.3%
FH down the line 16% 38.2%±11.7 44.9%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 127 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 38% 42.0%±9.8 47.8%
BH through the middle 35% 50.2%±10.2 43.0%
BH slice through the middle 8% 35.5%±14.4 33.2%
BH slice crosscourt 8% 36.4%±14.5 39.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +7 How much less varied Nadia Podoroska's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 95 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 36% 33% 57% / 66%
Body 21% 21% 50% / 57%
T 43% 46% 66% / 68%

370 normal · 24 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 36% 25% ▼ 60% / 66%
Body 24% 18% 64% / 56%
T 40% 56% ▲ 55% / 64%

285 normal · 71 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
Wide36% 51.2%±6.3 n=141 36%
Body21% 46.8%±7.7 n=83 6% ▼
T43% 56.3%±5.8 n=170 58% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.15).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide34% 53.6%±6.7 n=121 49% ▲
Body23% 58.3%±7.7 n=82 23%
T43% 48.1%±6.1 n=153 28% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.11).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.61 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: −3.2±8.6 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. (245 repeats, 481 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 55 38% −6.0±8.7
1stAd courtT 71 36% +0.8±7.9
1stAd courtWide 114 30% −4.4±6.3
1stDeuce courtBody 73 35% −7.9±7.7
1stDeuce courtT 91 31% −1.0±6.9
1stDeuce courtWide 93 29% −5.4±6.7
2ndAd courtBody 43 47% −7.8±9.6
2ndAd courtT 17 52% −2.9±12.0
2ndAd courtWide 65 42% −11.4±8.3
2ndDeuce courtBody 64 59% +4.4±8.3
2ndDeuce courtT 55 57% +1.4±8.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 22 58% +4.2±11.3

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Nadia Podoroska'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 3.7% · won 58% · +3.1±11.5 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 4.6% · won 56% · +1.5±10.9 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 3.5% · won 55% · +0.2±11.7 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 5.1% · won 48% · −6.4±10.7 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 10.9% · won 42% · +6.9±10.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 8.8% · won 41% · +6.0±10.9 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 7.4% · won 36% · +1.4±11.2 vs own baseline
  4. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 7.0% · won 35% · +0.1±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 10.2% · won 30% · −5.2±9.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH through the middle → FH through the middle used 5.4% · won 47% · +6.9±11.6 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 5.2% · won 46% · +5.8±11.7 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 5.2% · won 44% · +3.8±11.7 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.7% · won 43% · +2.7±10.9 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 7.0% · won 42% · +1.9±10.8 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Nadia Podoroska 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 crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.9% · won 49% · +8.5±12.9 vs own baseline · +21.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH through the middle → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 47% · +6.2±12.5 vs own baseline · +9.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 1.1% · won 44% · +2.8±12.3 vs own baseline · +4.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 42% · +0.8±11.3 vs own baseline · −6.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Solana Sierra (4/6)
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 0.8% · won 38% · −2.8±12.7 vs own baseline · −10.6 vs tour on the same sequence
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 38% · −3.1±12.2 vs own baseline · −20.5 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 · rally+3.1215
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.3121
BH to the middle · return−0.1207
FH to their backhand · serve +1−0.2123
T 1st serve · ad court−0.4153

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · return−2.4121
FH to the middle · return−1.0152
BH to the middle · return−0.5171
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.4160
Wide 1st serve · ad court−0.2178

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Sara Sorribes Tormo, Paula Badosa, Daria Kasatkina, Caroline Wozniacki, Elina Avanesyan

Tactical fingerprint

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

Run-around forehands19%
Through the middle34%
1st serve in67%
Unforced errors / shot12.8%
T serves · deuce43%
Forehand share56%
T serves · ad43%
Point-ending shots25.3%
Points at net8%
Drop shots / shot1.6%
Backhand slice16%
Chipped returns10%
Avg rally length4.0
Serve & volley0%
FH down the line27%
Deep returns30%
Wide serves · deuce36%
Wide serves · ad34%
BH down the line15%

Plays most like

  1. Maria Sakkari 2015–2026 plan v
  2. Jasmine Paolini 2016–2026 plan v
  3. Bianca Andreescu 2017–2026 plan v
  4. Andrea Petkovic 2010–2022 plan v
  5. Maya Joint 2024–2026 plan v
  6. Dominika Cibulkova 2009–2019 plan v
  7. Ashlyn Krueger 2023–2026 plan v
  8. Diana Shnaider 2022–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Marion Bartoli 2003–2013
  2. Elena Dementieva 1999–2010
  3. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006

Charted matches