RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 5 charted matches · 2014–2019

Pauline Parmentier

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 59.0% ±4.0 raw 56.5% · tour 56.3% · 310 points
Return points won 41.1% ±4.1 raw 35.5% · tour 43.7% · 279 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.

Shot expected value

The share of points Pauline Parmentier 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 · 122 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 52% 35.6%±8.6 47.6%
BH through the middle 25% 47.3%±11.6 43.3%
BH slice through the middle 10% 30.9%±13.4 34.4%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 117 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 58% 36.8%±8.5 46.7%
FH through the middle 25% 35.2%±11.2 41.3%
FH down the line 17% 39.9%±12.7 44.9%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 87 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 41% 56.3%±10.9 52.7%
FH through the middle 20% 38.2%±13.1 45.8%
BH through the middle 16% 38.9%±13.8 46.2%
FH down the line 16% 54.3%±14.1 52.2%

Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 66 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 36% 42.7%±12.3 54.0%
FH down the line 18% 61.4%±14.2 53.3%
FH through the middle 18% 41.0%±14.3 45.5%
BH crosscourt 15% 51.6%±15.0 52.5%

Serve under pressure

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 40% 62% / 66%
Body 26% 0% ▼ 64% / 57%
T 27% 60% ▲ 67% / 68%

155 normal · 5 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 35% 41% 67% / 66%
Body 19% 15% 61% / 56%
T 46% 44% 65% / 64%

122 normal · 27 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 won
Wide46% 56.6%±8.0 n=74
Body26% 61.9%±9.5 n=41
T28% 54.6%±9.5 n=45

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.46).

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints won
Wide36% 55.6%±8.9 n=54
Body18% 55.4%±10.8 n=27
T46% 56.0%±8.2 n=68

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.99).

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 8 40% −4.0±13.1
1stAd courtT 30 33% −2.8±10.0
1stAd courtWide 51 29% −5.6±8.3
1stDeuce courtBody 23 37% −5.3±10.9
1stDeuce courtT 39 27% −5.1±8.8
1stDeuce courtWide 41 27% −7.0±8.7
2ndAd courtBody 12 58% +3.3±12.5
2ndAd courtT 8 62% +6.8±13.0
2ndAd courtWide 21 55% +1.5±11.5
2ndDeuce courtBody 25 46% −8.4±11.1
2ndDeuce courtT 13 62% +6.3±12.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 8 53% −0.8±13.3

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 20.0% · won 62% · −7.5±10.8 vs own baseline

Return

  1. Not enough data

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 9.7% · won 48% · +8.1±11.2 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 14.2% · won 43% · +3.0±9.9 vs own baseline
  3. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 8.1% · won 42% · +2.0±11.6 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 8.5% · won 41% · +1.1±11.5 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Pauline Parmentier 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 crosscourt used 3.9% · won 38% · −0.8±10.2 vs own baseline · −11.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Belinda Bencic (2/6), Garbine Muguruza (2/6)
  2. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.9% · won 37% · −1.3±12.3 vs own baseline · −12.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Elena Gabriela Ruse (3/7)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.9% · won 37% · −1.3±12.3 vs own baseline · −13.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Timea Bacsinszky (0/6), Belinda Bencic (3/6)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 2.4% · won 33% · −5.3±11.3 vs own baseline · −15.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Belinda Bencic (2/6), Kiki Bertens (2/6)
  5. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.7% · won 29% · −9.5±11.9 vs own baseline · −36.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Timea Bacsinszky (0/6)

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−1.3178

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · rally−2.6123

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Linda Fruhvirtova, Maja Chwalinska, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Linda Klimovicova, Nadia Podoroska

Charted matches