RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 16 charted matches · 2022–2026

Peyton Stearns

Archetype: Runs around the backhand · Forehand-dominant

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 56.5% ±3.2 raw 54.3% · tour 56.3% · 1,222 points
Return points won 45.3% ±3.2 raw 43.1% · tour 43.7% · 1,159 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 ±0.13 better than 55% of WTA · raw +0.02
Shot selection +0.40 ±0.24 better than 90% of WTA · raw +0.41
Execution −1.43 ±0.74 better than 12% of WTA · raw −1.34
Tactical adaptability +0.05 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 15 matches
Adaptation speed +0.10 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.46 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 68% 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 5,358 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Peyton Stearns 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 · 335 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 32% 44.2%±7.2 47.6%
BH through the middle 30% 42.7%±7.4 43.3%
BH down the line 9% 36.0%±11.1 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 6% 19.7%±10.3 34.4%
FH inside-out 6% 41.3%±12.8 52.5%
FH inside-in 5% 55.9%±13.6 55.6%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 31.5%±13.5 40.4%
FH through the middle 3% 42.0%±14.6 45.1%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 247 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 34% 57.3%±8.0 52.7%
FH down the line 30% 52.6%±8.5 52.2%
FH through the middle 14% 45.7%±11.1 45.8%
BH through the middle 10% 47.2%±12.2 46.2%
BH crosscourt 8% 55.5%±12.9 50.9%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 200 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 34% 47.0%±8.8 46.7%
FH down the line 34% 46.6%±8.7 44.9%
FH through the middle 24% 37.7%±9.7 41.3%
FH slice down the line 5% 22.9%±12.6 24.3%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 165 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 32% 43.2%±9.5 47.8%
BH through the middle 29% 43.5%±9.9 43.0%
FH inside-out 10% 55.8%±13.6 55.4%
BH down the line 9% 46.4%±13.9 46.2%
BH slice through the middle 8% 31.3%±13.1 33.2%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +3 How much less varied Peyton Stearns's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 147 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 38% 37% 58% / 66%
Body 33% 29% 59% / 57%
T 29% 34% 62% / 68%

600 normal · 38 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 41% 61% / 66%
Body 24% 17% 54% / 56%
T 34% 41% 54% / 64%

475 normal · 109 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% 55.3%±5.0 n=242 38%
Body33% 58.4%±5.2 n=210 18% ▼
T29% 56.2%±5.6 n=186 44% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.73).
Optimal mix: +0.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide41% 53.2%±5.0 n=242 57% ▲
Body23% 54.6%±6.4 n=134 17% ▼
T36% 48.5%±5.3 n=208 26% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.33).
Optimal mix: +0.4 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.29 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: +0.9±5.2 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. (430 repeats, 760 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 80 43% −1.0±7.8
1stAd courtT 99 39% +3.7±7.1
1stAd courtWide 155 37% +3.0±5.9
1stDeuce courtBody 106 38% −4.5±6.8
1stDeuce courtT 142 28% −4.4±5.6
1stDeuce courtWide 127 31% −3.3±6.1
2ndAd courtBody 79 60% +5.1±7.7
2ndAd courtT 29 52% −3.3±10.7
2ndAd courtWide 110 50% −3.5±7.0
2ndDeuce courtBody 111 54% −0.3±6.9
2ndDeuce courtT 77 61% +4.5±7.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 43 58% +3.9±9.5

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 3.7% · won 65% · +6.6±9.6 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 65% · +6.7±11.2 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 2.7% · won 61% · +2.2±10.7 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.2% · won 61% · +2.3±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 5.3% · won 60% · +1.3±8.8 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 4.5% · won 56% · +8.4±11.2 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 4.8% · won 54% · +6.4±11.0 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 3.9% · won 52% · +3.9±11.6 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 5.8% · won 50% · +2.0±10.5 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 5.6% · won 49% · +1.2±10.6 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 7.8% · won 58% · +8.2±8.8 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 55% · +5.3±10.6 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 3.4% · won 54% · +5.0±11.3 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 4.9% · won 52% · +2.7±10.3 vs own baseline
  5. FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 51% · +1.2±10.9 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, deep → FH crosscourt used 0.7% · won 62% · +15.4±12.2 vs own baseline · +33.3 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 60% · +13.5±11.9 vs own baseline · +19.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.8% · won 57% · +10.4±12.2 vs own baseline · +16.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. Body serve → BH through the middle return, mid → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 56% · +9.7±12.6 vs own baseline · +17.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH down the line → BH slice crosscourt → FH inside-out used 0.6% · won 54% · +7.6±13.0 vs own baseline · +10.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Tatjana Maria (4/7)
  6. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 51% · +4.8±11.9 vs own baseline · +2.7 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+0.9203
Wide 1st serve · ad court+0.8233
Body 1st serve · ad court+0.6128
Body 1st serve · deuce court+0.4200
FH to their forehand · rally+0.2336

Most exposed to

FH to their forehand · return−3.7152
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.7236
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.2198
BH to their backhand · serve +1−1.2121
T 1st serve · ad court−0.7163

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Sara Sorribes Tormo +2.34, Caroline Wozniacki +2.19, Tatjana Maria +1.69, Daria Kasatkina +1.55, Sara Errani +1.53

Favourable matchups

Sara Errani +1.01, Angelique Kerber +0.81, Marie Bouzkova +0.48, Elina Avanesyan +0.46, Linda Fruhvirtova +0.15

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Caroline Wozniacki, Su Wei Hsieh, Anhelina Kalinina, Ashlyn Krueger, Katie Boulter

Tactical fingerprint

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

Run-around forehands32%
Forehand share64%
FH down the line36%
Point-ending shots29.4%
Deep returns38%
1st serve in66%
Unforced errors / shot12.4%
Drop shots / shot2.0%
Wide serves · ad41%
Backhand slice13%
Serve & volley0%
T serves · ad36%
Wide serves · deuce38%
Chipped returns6%
BH down the line17%
Points at net4%
Through the middle25%
Avg rally length3.7
T serves · deuce29%

Plays most like

  1. Tamara Zidansek 2019–2026 plan v
  2. Xin Yu Wang 2019–2026 plan v
  3. Lulu Sun 2022–2025 plan v
  4. Daria Saville 2015–2024 plan v
  5. Katie Boulter 2018–2025 plan v
  6. Jule Niemeier 2021–2025 plan v
  7. Nao Hibino 2016–2025 plan v
  8. Madison Keys 2014–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Daniela Hantuchova 2002–2015
  2. Jelena Dokic 2000–2009
  3. Dinara Safina 2007–2011

Charted matches