RallyIQ

WTA · Right-handed · 12 charted matches · 2003–2020

Vera Zvonareva

Archetype: Forehand line-changer · Backhand line-changer

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 58.2% ±3.5 raw 56.6% · tour 56.3% · 834 points
Return points won 44.3% ±3.6 raw 42.2% · tour 43.7% · 799 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 54% of WTA · raw +0.01
Shot selection +0.03 ±0.15 better than 47% of WTA · raw +0.02
Execution +0.99 ±0.45 better than 92% of WTA · raw +0.97
Tactical adaptability +0.05 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 12 matches
Adaptation speed +0.25 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Points left on the table 2.43 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 71% 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 4,709 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Vera Zvonareva 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 · 316 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 42% 54.5%±6.6 46.7%
FH down the line 34% 42.0%±7.2 44.9%
FH through the middle 18% 49.0%±9.4 41.3%

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

position worth 45% to the average player · 297 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 35% 47.2%±7.4 47.6%
BH through the middle 31% 43.8%±7.7 43.3%
BH down the line 20% 52.3%±9.2 46.8%
BH slice down the line 6% 29.1%±12.0 31.7%
BH slice through the middle 3% 32.9%±14.1 34.4%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 50% to the average player · 296 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 23% 53.5%±8.8 52.7%
FH down the line 20% 54.3%±9.2 52.2%
BH crosscourt 17% 48.1%±9.8 50.9%
BH through the middle 16% 40.7%±9.9 46.2%
FH through the middle 12% 52.1%±11.0 45.8%
BH down the line 12% 50.9%±11.1 50.0%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 192 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 33% 51.3%±9.0 47.9%
BH through the middle 30% 35.8%±9.0 42.7%
BH down the line 23% 45.9%±10.2 46.7%
BH slice down the line 6% 27.5%±13.0 34.0%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +3 How much less varied Vera Zvonareva's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 96 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 29% 17% ▼ 64% / 66%
Body 21% 33% ▲ 54% / 57%
T 50% 50% 73% / 68%

406 normal · 24 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 41% 50% ▲ 61% / 66%
Body 23% 26% 56% / 56%
T 36% 24% ▼ 65% / 64%

325 normal · 72 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
Wide28% 56.9%±6.7 n=120 33% ▲
Body22% 55.2%±7.4 n=93 6% ▼
T50% 59.9%±5.1 n=217 61% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.58).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide43% 55.6%±5.8 n=169 42%
Body24% 53.1%±7.3 n=95 9% ▼
T34% 57.7%±6.4 n=133 49% ▲

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.65).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.78 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: −2.0±6.1 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. (275 repeats, 528 switches.)

Return by serve direction

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

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 54 44% +0.4±8.9
1stAd courtT 101 36% +0.1±6.9
1stAd courtWide 67 31% −3.2±7.7
1stDeuce courtBody 60 48% +4.9±8.7
1stDeuce courtT 75 29% −3.0±7.3
1stDeuce courtWide 136 36% +2.3±6.1
2ndAd courtBody 71 49% −6.0±8.2
2ndAd courtT 30 51% −4.2±10.6
2ndAd courtWide 57 48% −5.2±8.8
2ndDeuce courtBody 57 65% +10.3±8.4
2ndDeuce courtT 39 53% −2.7±9.9
2ndDeuce courtWide 51 48% −5.5±9.1

Signature patterns

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

Serve → +1

  1. T serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 4.7% · won 62% · +1.6±10.3 vs own baseline
  2. T serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 3.3% · won 61% · +0.7±11.3 vs own baseline
  3. Body serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 5.8% · won 60% · −0.4±9.8 vs own baseline
  4. T serve (deuce court) → BH down the line used 3.6% · won 59% · −1.6±11.2 vs own baseline
  5. T serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt used 4.3% · won 58% · −2.2±10.8 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs body serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, mid used 6.3% · won 53% · +4.6±11.8 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, deep used 9.2% · won 50% · +1.5±10.7 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, mid used 6.7% · won 48% · −0.4±11.6 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt, mid used 6.3% · won 47% · −1.4±11.8 vs own baseline
  5. vs T serve (ad court) → FH down the line, mid used 6.3% · won 47% · −1.4±11.8 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.7% · won 62% · +10.8±10.6 vs own baseline
  2. FH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 4.4% · won 58% · +6.6±9.3 vs own baseline
  3. FH down the line → BH down the line used 2.5% · won 59% · +7.6±10.9 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 5.3% · won 56% · +5.2±8.8 vs own baseline
  5. BH crosscourt → FH down the line used 2.4% · won 58% · +6.9±11.1 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

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

  1. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 61% · +12.5±11.8 vs own baseline · +20.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Elena Dementieva (4/6), Flavia Pennetta (5/6)
  2. BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.0% · won 59% · +10.4±11.3 vs own baseline · +24.7 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Flavia Pennetta (6/8)
  3. BH crosscourt → BH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.6% · won 57% · +7.8±12.8 vs own baseline · +15.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  4. FH crosscourt → FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 54% · +5.0±10.8 vs own baseline · +7.8 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Flavia Pennetta (10/18)
  5. BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.1% · won 53% · +4.4±11.3 vs own baseline · +8.5 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Flavia Pennetta (7/14)
  6. FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 2.3% · won 51% · +2.7±8.9 vs own baseline · +4.3 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

FH to their forehand · rally+2.6334
FH to the middle · return+2.5142
FH to the middle · rally+1.4141
BH to the middle · return+0.9164
Wide 1st serve · deuce court+0.9120

Most exposed to

BH to their backhand · serve +1−4.5127
FH to the middle · rally−3.3142
FH to their forehand · return +1−1.4123
T 1st serve · deuce court−1.3136
FH to their backhand · rally−1.2249

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.

T serves · deuce50%
FH down the line38%
BH down the line27%
Avg rally length4.8
Points at net9%
1st serve in64%
Deep returns34%
Wide serves · ad43%
Serve & volley0%
Chipped returns8%
Backhand slice10%
T serves · ad34%
Drop shots / shot0.9%
Through the middle26%
Forehand share50%
Run-around forehands1%
Unforced errors / shot8.3%
Point-ending shots18.6%
Wide serves · deuce28%

Plays most like

  1. Victoria Azarenka 2009–2025 plan v
  2. Simona Halep 2013–2022 plan v
  3. Linda Fruhvirtova 2022–2025 plan v
  4. Mona Barthel 2012–2021 plan v
  5. Dinara Safina 2007–2011 plan v
  6. Jelena Jankovic 2004–2016 plan v
  7. Kate Makarova 2007–2018 plan v
  8. Magdalena Frech 2021–2026 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Monica Seles 1990–2003
  2. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario 1988–2001
  3. Jennifer Capriati 1990–2002

Charted matches