RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 14 charted matches · –

R

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

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 55.9% ±5.3 raw 58.6% · tour 56.3% · 983 points
Return points won 44.1% ±5.3 raw 41.4% · tour 43.7% · 983 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 +0.09 ±0.26 better than 71% of WTA · raw +0.12
Shot selection +0.24 ±0.21 better than 72% of WTA · raw +0.31
Execution −6.35 ±0.39 better than 0% of WTA · raw −5.86
Points left on the table 2.35 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 82% 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 5,191 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points R 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 forehand side

position worth 43% to the average player · 299 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 38% 52.9%±7.1 46.7%
FH through the middle 26% 49.8%±8.4 41.3%
FH down the line 24% 43.9%±8.6 44.9%
FH slice through the middle 4% 38.9%±14.0 29.2%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 288 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 42% 47.6%±6.9 47.6%
BH through the middle 24% 45.7%±8.7 43.3%
BH down the line 11% 48.8%±11.4 46.8%
BH slice crosscourt 10% 47.1%±11.7 40.4%
BH slice through the middle 9% 48.6%±12.3 34.4%
BH slice down the line 4% 30.1%±13.6 31.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 267 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 32% 54.8%±8.0 52.7%
BH crosscourt 16% 47.9%±10.4 50.9%
BH through the middle 15% 50.4%±10.6 46.2%
FH down the line 14% 47.3%±10.8 52.2%
FH through the middle 13% 51.2%±11.1 45.8%
BH down the line 7% 50.0%±13.0 50.0%

Return +1: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 162 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 29% 48.5%±10.0 52.3%
BH crosscourt 19% 50.3%±11.6 50.8%
BH through the middle 16% 54.9%±12.1 46.2%
FH through the middle 15% 41.6%±12.2 46.5%
FH down the line 11% 51.6%±13.3 53.0%
BH down the line 10% 35.5%±12.9 50.6%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +2 How much less varied R's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 84 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 43% 30% ▼ 74% / 66%
Body 23% 30% 53% / 57%
T 34% 39% 75% / 68%

496 normal · 23 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 33% 33% 67% / 66%
Body 25% 20% 51% / 56%
T 42% 48% 59% / 64%

403 normal · 61 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
Wide42% 67.8%±4.9 n=218 57% ▲
Body24% 55.1%±6.6 n=123 9% ▼
T34% 63.7%±5.5 n=178 34%

Off equilibrium (p = 0.013): serve wide more. Gap 4.4 points per 100 first serves.
Optimal mix: +1.2 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide33% 58.9%±6.0 n=153 48% ▲
Body24% 48.7%±6.9 n=113 9% ▼
T43% 52.1%±5.4 n=198 43%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.09).
Optimal mix: +1.0 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 1.12 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±3.3 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. (334 repeats, 635 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 80 49% +5.4±7.8
1stAd courtT 121 41% +5.3±6.6
1stAd courtWide 84 33% −1.7±7.2
1stDeuce courtBody 95 47% +4.4±7.3
1stDeuce courtT 94 25% −7.4±6.4
1stDeuce courtWide 138 26% −8.3±5.5
2ndAd courtBody 96 58% +3.3±7.2
2ndAd courtT 43 50% −5.0±9.6
2ndAd courtWide 40 52% −2.0±9.8
2ndDeuce courtBody 101 49% −5.3±7.2
2ndDeuce courtT 34 56% −0.1±10.2
2ndDeuce courtWide 57 46% −7.6±8.8

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle used 7.7% · won 71% · +11.2±7.6 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 2.6% · won 70% · +10.7±10.6 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 7.1% · won 64% · +3.8±8.3 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 7.1% · won 61% · +1.6±8.4 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 7.9% · won 61% · +1.3±8.0 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 4.2% · won 58% · +11.1±11.4 vs own baseline
  2. vs body serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.8% · won 54% · +7.4±11.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 4.8% · won 51% · +4.3±11.1 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 5.3% · won 50% · +3.4±10.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs body serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 4.0% · won 47% · +0.4±11.6 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → BH through the middle used 2.3% · won 50% · ±0.0±8.1 vs own baseline
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 5.6% · won 50% · ±0.0±5.6 vs own baseline
  3. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle used 5.6% · won 50% · ±0.0±5.6 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → BH down the line used 2.6% · won 50% · ±0.0±7.7 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 6.0% · won 50% · ±0.0±5.4 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 58% · +6.7±10.5 vs own baseline · +18.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by R (22/35)
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 57% · +5.2±11.4 vs own baseline · +12.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by R (16/26)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → BH through the middle used 0.7% · won 57% · +5.4±12.6 vs own baseline · +17.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by R (11/17)
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 55% · +3.2±10.4 vs own baseline · +8.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by R (21/37)
  5. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 55% · +3.6±11.9 vs own baseline · +3.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by R (13/22)
  6. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 0.9% · won 55% · +3.4±11.7 vs own baseline · +19.3 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

BH to their backhand · serve +1+4.5141
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+1.7218
Wide 1st serve · ad court+1.6153
T 1st serve · deuce court+0.5178
BH to the middle · rally+0.1175

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · serve +1−4.5141
Wide 1st serve · deuce court−1.7218
Wide 1st serve · ad court−1.6153
T 1st serve · deuce court−0.5178
BH to the middle · rally−0.1175

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Caroline Wozniacki, Coco Gauff, Belinda Bencic, Angelique Kerber, Marie Bouzkova

Tactical fingerprint

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

Deep returns40%
T serves · ad43%
Drop shots / shot2.0%
Run-around forehands9%
Points at net8%
Wide serves · deuce42%
Avg rally length4.2
Chipped returns12%
Through the middle29%
Serve & volley1%
1st serve in62%
Backhand slice15%
Point-ending shots23.7%
BH down the line19%
T serves · deuce34%
Forehand share52%
Unforced errors / shot9.5%
FH down the line26%
Wide serves · ad33%

Plays most like

  1. Varvara Gracheva 2021–2026 plan v
  2. Jessica Pegula 2015–2026 plan v
  3. Emma Navarro 2019–2026 plan v
  4. Anna Blinkova 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Anastasia Potapova 2017–2026 plan v
  6. Shuai Zhang 2009–2026 plan v
  7. Kimberly Birrell 2016–2026 plan v
  8. Lin Zhu 2016–2025 plan v

Charted matches