WTA · Right-handed · 8 charted matches · 2014–2025
Zarina Diyas
Archetype: Rarely serves the T · Patient builder
Against an average opponent
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
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 2,528 shots.
Shot expected value
The share of points Zarina Diyas 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 middle
position worth 50% to the average player · 190 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH down the line | 25% | 55.9%±10.0 | 52.2% |
| FH through the middle | 24% | 41.1%±10.0 | 45.8% |
| BH through the middle | 18% | 56.8%±11.0 | 46.2% |
| BH crosscourt | 13% | 49.3%±12.3 | 50.9% |
| FH crosscourt | 11% | 56.4%±12.9 | 52.7% |
| BH down the line | 9% | 51.4%±13.5 | 50.0% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side
position worth 43% to the average player · 145 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH crosscourt | 38% | 47.1%±9.5 | 46.7% |
| FH through the middle | 32% | 39.8%±9.9 | 41.3% |
| FH down the line | 27% | 45.7%±10.7 | 44.9% |
Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side
position worth 45% to the average player · 137 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| BH crosscourt | 41% | 42.8%±9.3 | 47.6% |
| BH through the middle | 30% | 33.9%±10.0 | 43.3% |
| BH down the line | 17% | 52.0%±12.5 | 46.8% |
Serve +1: mid-depth return to your middle
position worth 51% to the average player · 90 shots
| Option | Used | Win % | Tour |
|---|---|---|---|
| FH down the line | 29% | 51.4%±12.1 | 53.3% |
| BH through the middle | 18% | 45.2%±13.6 | 46.3% |
| FH crosscourt | 17% | 45.2%±13.8 | 54.0% |
| FH through the middle | 16% | 53.3%±14.1 | 45.5% |
| BH down the line | 11% | 57.3%±14.9 | 51.0% |
Serve under pressure
Pressure predictability index +1 How much less varied Zarina Diyas's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 63 break-point first serves.
Deuce court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 38% | 27% ▼ | 66% / 66% |
| Body | 28% | 20% ▼ | 54% / 57% |
| T | 33% | 53% ▲ | 61% / 68% |
225 normal · 15 break-point 1st serves
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Break pt | Won when in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 28% | 33% | 53% / 66% |
| Body | 41% | 33% | 52% / 56% |
| T | 31% | 33% | 67% / 64% |
178 normal · 48 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 serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 38% | 57.8%±7.4 n=90 | 53% ▲ |
| Body | 28% | 52.6%±8.3 n=67 | 13% ▼ |
| T | 35% | 50.4%±7.7 n=83 | 34% |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.37).
Optimal mix: +0.8 per 100 first serves.
Ad court
| 1st serve | Usage | Points won | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wide | 29% | 45.7%±8.4 n=65 | 29% |
| Body | 39% | 47.7%±7.5 n=89 | 24% ▼ |
| T | 32% | 54.0%±8.1 n=72 | 47% ▲ |
Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.28).
Optimal mix: +0.9 per 100 first serves.
Exploitability 0.82 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: +1.3±6.9 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. (174 repeats, 276 switches.)
Return by serve direction
Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.
| Serve | Court | Direction | Points | Won | vs tour | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | Ad court | Body | 23 | 47% | +3.6±11.3 | |
| 1st | Ad court | T | 72 | 35% | −0.6±7.8 | |
| 1st | Ad court | Wide | 39 | 34% | −0.6±9.4 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Body | 28 | 43% | +0.1±10.7 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | T | 40 | 37% | +4.5±9.5 | |
| 1st | Deuce court | Wide | 69 | 32% | −2.5±7.7 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Body | 28 | 58% | +2.7±10.7 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | T | 18 | 61% | +6.4±11.6 | |
| 2nd | Ad court | Wide | 20 | 52% | −1.4±11.6 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Body | 49 | 56% | +1.7±9.2 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | T | 20 | 54% | −2.4±11.6 | |
| 2nd | Deuce court | Wide | 8 | 48% | −6.1±13.3 |
Signature patterns
Recurring sequences that win more than Zarina Diyas's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.
Serve → +1
- Body serve (ad court) → FH down the line used 6.8% · won 52% · −4.5±11.8 vs own baseline
- Body serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle used 7.5% · won 50% · −6.5±11.5 vs own baseline
Return
- Not enough data
Rally, consecutive own shots
- FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 4.1% · won 55% · +3.4±11.7 vs own baseline
- FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 4.6% · won 53% · +1.3±11.5 vs own baseline
- FH down the line → BH crosscourt used 5.8% · won 52% · +1.0±10.8 vs own baseline
- BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 5.6% · won 52% · +0.2±10.9 vs own baseline
- BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 6.0% · won 52% · +0.1±10.7 vs own baseline
Discovered sequences
Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Zarina Diyas wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.
- FH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt used 1.2% · won 49% · +2.7±12.7 vs own baseline · +6.2 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Kiki Bertens (3/6)
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 1.1% · won 49% · +2.7±13.0 vs own baseline · +10.1 vs tour on the same sequence
- FH crosscourt → FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 1.5% · won 48% · +1.8±12.0 vs own baseline · +2.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Kiki Bertens (6/11)
- BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.3% · won 47% · +0.5±12.4 vs own baseline · −1.3 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Matilde Jorge (2/6), Maria Sharapova (3/6)
- FH down the line → BH crosscourt → BH crosscourt used 1.5% · won 42% · −4.6±11.8 vs own baseline · −12.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Catherine Cartan Bellis (3/7), Maria Sharapova (3/7)
- BH through the middle → FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 1.3% · won 41% · −5.4±12.4 vs own baseline · −5.7 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 · rally | +2.1 | 155 |
| BH to their backhand · rally | +1.1 | 157 |
| FH to the middle · rally | −1.4 | 144 |
| BH to the middle · rally | −1.5 | 125 |
| FH to their backhand · rally | −3.1 | 170 |
Most exposed to
| BH to their backhand · rally | −1.2 | 136 |
| FH to their forehand · rally | −1.1 | 197 |
| BH to the middle · rally | +0.1 | 139 |
Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Maja Chwalinska, Sara Sorribes Tormo, Yulia Putintseva, Elsa Jacquemot, Caroline Wozniacki
Tactical fingerprint
Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the WTA average, in standard deviations.
| FH down the line | 37% | |
| 1st serve in | 69% | |
| Through the middle | 35% | |
| Avg rally length | 4.7 | |
| Deep returns | 37% | |
| Drop shots / shot | 2.1% | |
| Forehand share | 56% | |
| BH down the line | 23% | |
| Serve & volley | 0% | |
| Backhand slice | 11% | |
| T serves · deuce | 35% | |
| Wide serves · deuce | 38% | |
| T serves · ad | 32% | |
| Points at net | 5% | |
| Chipped returns | 2% | |
| Run-around forehands | 2% | |
| Unforced errors / shot | 8.7% | |
| Point-ending shots | 18.3% | |
| Wide serves · ad | 29% |
Plays most like
- Kateryna Baindl 2017–2023 plan v
- Victoria Azarenka 2009–2025 plan v
- Alison Riske Amritraj 2014–2022 plan v
- Emma Navarro 2019–2026 plan v
- Jaqueline Cristian 2021–2026 plan v
- Viktorija Golubic 2017–2026 plan v
- Caroline Wozniacki 2008–2024 plan v
- Coco Gauff 2019–2026 plan v
Closest from another era
- Elena Dementieva 1999–2010
- Jennifer Capriati 1990–2002
- Martina Hingis 1996–2007
Charted matches
- Zarina Diyas v Matilde Jorge W ITF Palma Del Rio R32 · Hard · 25 Jun 2025
- Zarina Diyas v Bianca Andreescu Phillip Island Trophy R16 · Hard · 16 Feb 2021
- Zarina Diyas v Kiki Bertens L Australian Open R32 · Hard · 25 Jan 2020
- Maria Sharapova v Zarina Diyas L Wimbledon R16 · Grass · 6 Jul 2015
- Zarina Diyas v Sabine Lisicki W Stuttgart R32 · Clay · 22 Apr 2015
- Zarina Diyas v Maria Sharapova L Australian Open R32 · Hard · 23 Jan 2015
- Zarina Diyas v Alison Riske Amritraj L Hobart QF · Hard · 15 Jan 2015
- Zarina Diyas v Catherine Cartan Bellis W US Open R64 · Hard · 28 Aug 2014