RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 22 charted matches · 2009–2022

Sabine Lisicki

Archetype: First-strike aggressor · Short-point player

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 58.3% ±2.8 raw 57.7% · tour 56.3% · 1,696 points
Return points won 44.6% ±2.9 raw 42.4% · tour 43.7% · 1,711 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 +0.02 ±0.12 better than 56% of WTA · raw +0.03
Shot selection +0.35 ±0.13 better than 83% of WTA · raw +0.37
Execution −1.31 ±0.65 better than 13% of WTA · raw −1.19
Tactical adaptability +0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 21 matches
Adaptation speed +0.10 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.61 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 50% 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 7,560 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Sabine Lisicki 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 · 387 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 39% 45.3%±6.3 47.6%
BH through the middle 28% 34.4%±6.9 43.3%
BH down the line 17% 37.2%±8.5 46.8%
BH slice through the middle 4% 34.8%±12.9 34.4%
BH slice crosscourt 4% 41.4%±13.9 40.4%
FH inside-out 3% 57.8%±14.4 52.5%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 303 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 29% 40.9%±7.7 52.7%
FH down the line 21% 59.3%±8.8 52.2%
FH through the middle 16% 42.2%±9.8 45.8%
BH through the middle 13% 48.7%±10.8 46.2%
BH crosscourt 10% 47.3%±11.7 50.9%
BH down the line 9% 47.9%±11.9 50.0%

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

position worth 43% to the average player · 268 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 52% 40.3%±6.4 46.7%
FH down the line 23% 49.3%±9.3 44.9%
FH through the middle 18% 44.5%±9.9 41.3%
FH slice through the middle 5% 40.1%±14.3 29.2%

Return +1: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 221 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 39% 50.5%±8.0 47.8%
BH through the middle 31% 40.0%±8.5 43.0%
BH down the line 15% 39.3%±10.9 46.2%
BH slice through the middle 5% 27.9%±13.2 33.2%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index ±0 How much less varied Sabine Lisicki's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 172 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 46% 44% 69% / 66%
Body 19% 12% 60% / 57%
T 36% 44% ▲ 75% / 68%

826 normal · 41 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 34% 73% / 66%
Body 18% 21% 50% / 56%
T 42% 45% 65% / 64%

671 normal · 131 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
Wide46% 60.6%±3.9 n=397 57% ▲
Body18% 55.6%±6.0 n=158 3% ▼
T36% 60.0%±4.4 n=312 40% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.40).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide40% 57.8%±4.4 n=317 55% ▲
Body18% 50.8%±6.2 n=147 3% ▼
T42% 56.8%±4.2 n=338 42%

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.21).
Optimal mix: +1.1 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.90 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: +0.3±3.6 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. (533 repeats, 1,092 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 165 41% −2.8±5.8
1stAd courtT 176 37% +1.7±5.5
1stAd courtWide 178 33% −1.1±5.4
1stDeuce courtBody 156 38% −5.1±5.8
1stDeuce courtT 175 35% +3.3±5.5
1stDeuce courtWide 234 31% −2.9±4.7
2ndAd courtBody 154 58% +3.4±6.0
2ndAd courtT 40 55% ±0.0±9.8
2ndAd courtWide 103 52% −1.6±7.1
2ndDeuce courtBody 177 53% −1.6±5.7
2ndDeuce courtT 84 59% +2.6±7.6
2ndDeuce courtWide 54 55% +1.1±8.9

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.0% · won 62% · −2.5±10.6 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH down the line used 3.0% · won 62% · −2.6±9.5 vs own baseline
  3. T serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 58% · −6.4±9.9 vs own baseline
  4. Body serve (deuce court) → BH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 56% · −8.2±10.4 vs own baseline
  5. Body serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 2.8% · won 56% · −8.8±9.9 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.6% · won 52% · +10.1±10.5 vs own baseline
  2. vs T serve (ad court) → FH down the line, mid used 2.1% · won 52% · +10.3±11.1 vs own baseline
  3. vs T serve (ad court) → FH through the middle, mid used 2.5% · won 51% · +9.3±10.6 vs own baseline
  4. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 3.3% · won 48% · +6.3±9.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.2% · won 49% · +7.6±11.0 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.4% · won 55% · +10.0±10.7 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 6.0% · won 51% · +6.2±9.0 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 6.4% · won 51% · +5.5±8.8 vs own baseline
  4. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 51% · +5.7±10.1 vs own baseline
  5. BH through the middle → BH crosscourt used 4.0% · won 49% · +4.2±10.2 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 51% · +6.2±11.1 vs own baseline · +2.8 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 51% · +5.2±10.6 vs own baseline · +5.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Jelena Jankovic (3/6), Dinara Safina (3/6)
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.5% · won 52% · +6.7±12.9 vs own baseline · +8.9 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.8% · won 51% · +5.4±11.9 vs own baseline · +3.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  5. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.4% · won 48% · +2.2±9.9 vs own baseline · +1.1 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (2/7), Serena Williams (3/8)
  6. FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 0.9% · won 48% · +2.5±11.3 vs own baseline · +1.6 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 backhand · return+3.5198
FH to their backhand · rally+2.5234
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+1.9397
BH to their backhand · return +1+1.6132
Wide 2nd serve · deuce court+1.3134

Most exposed to

BH to the middle · serve +1−1.4178
BH to their backhand · rally−0.7298
BH to their backhand · return−0.7230
FH to their forehand · rally−0.6284
FH to their backhand · return−0.4145

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Sara Sorribes Tormo, Marie Bouzkova, Tamara Zidansek, Magda Linette, Su Wei Hsieh

Tactical fingerprint

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

Drop shots / shot3.6%
Point-ending shots32.9%
Unforced errors / shot14.6%
Wide serves · deuce46%
T serves · ad42%
BH down the line22%
Run-around forehands9%
FH down the line30%
Points at net8%
Deep returns33%
Through the middle29%
Serve & volley0%
T serves · deuce36%
Forehand share53%
Wide serves · ad40%
Backhand slice10%
Chipped returns5%
1st serve in59%
Avg rally length3.3

Plays most like

  1. Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova 2014–2026 plan v
  2. Clara Tauson 2020–2026 plan v
  3. Viktoria Hruncakova 2018–2026 plan v
  4. Linda Noskova 2022–2026 plan v
  5. Kristina Mladenovic 2015–2023 plan v
  6. Aliaksandra Sasnovich 2015–2025 plan v
  7. Veronika Kudermetova 2018–2025 plan v
  8. Daniela Hantuchova 2002–2015 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Lindsay Davenport 1995–2006
  2. Monica Seles 1990–2003
  3. Jennifer Capriati 1990–2002

Charted matches