How to Beat the #1 Doubles Team in the World: A WTA Doubles Scouting Report

Since the start of the WTA Finals, less than four months ago, Barbora Krejcikova and Katerina Siniakova, the #1 doubles team on the WTA Tour, have lost a total of four sets. They’ve won 23 sets during that time for a match record of 12-1 (retirement in Qatar on February 23).

Siniakova also won the Gippsland Trophy in Melbourne with Bernarda Pera.

It’s become quite clear, the Czech duo are the best doubles team on the WTA Tour, and clear favorites going into Indian Wells.

🏆 2022 Australian Open Champions 🏆@K_Siniakova @AustralianOpen pic.twitter.com/lhPbW5VrYW

— Barbora Krejcikova (@BKrejcikova) February 3, 2022

They won the 2022 Australian Open, only dropping one set, in the finals, the entire tournament.

So how do you beat the #1 doubles team in the world?

For two of the four sets the Czechs lost, I provided a scouting report for the opposition. And it worked… for a set.

Below, I’ll show you the scouting report I provided to both teams. My hope is that you’ll not only understand how to beat this specific team (if you are lucky enough to face them), but you’ll be able to use this framework to create a game plan to beat other doubles teams, no matter your skill level.

To dive straight into the scouting report, skip to Creating the Right Serve Strategy below.

For the story about how this came to be, read on.

---

How I (almost) Helped Beat the #1 Doubles Team in the World

Since 2016 I’ve had a mild obsession with doubles strategy.

I’m convinced that shot selection, positioning, and movement are way more important to winning doubles matches than most players and coaches realize.

I had never coached doubles strategy at the time, but after spending the better part of the next 5 years playing, watching, writing about, and studying doubles, I began analyzing the best players in the world.

In late 2020, I began scouting for Nicole Melichar and her partner Xu Yifan who made the US Open Final. Last year, I provided match reports and game plans for Nicole Melichar and Demi Schuurs during four summer tournaments including Wimbledon and the French Open.

Last fall, I decided to take on a new project that I hope will move doubles forward.

My goal was simple. To understand the best doubles teams in the world better than they knew each other.

When it’s put that way, it seems a bit pretentious. After all, most of these players have more experience playing professional doubles than I could ever dream of. Heck, the past 4 years I’ve been an NTRP 4.5 level doubles player (I finally got bumped to 5.0 💪). For those of you not in the US, that means I’m a slightly above-average club-level player.

But there is one area that I knew I could get a leg up on the players – not to mention most of the coaches.

Analytics.

Doubles Data at the Pro Level is Lacking

In singles, players have been using data for years and it’s become commonplace in the top 50. But from what I can tell, doubles hasn’t had the time, money, or resources to pull together any relevant data.

I’d like to help change that.

I’ve worked with Warren Pretorius and Craig O’Shannessy, two analytics leaders in our sport, for the past four years. Having majored in math during college, the language they use to talk about tennis makes sense to me.

I’ve absorbed the vast amounts of tennis knowledge they both offer, and much of this article should be credited to them.

Charting Matches for All 16 WTA & ATP Finals Teams

I first had this idea in September of 2021. My experience scouting at the pro level, as mentioned above, was infrequent up to this point. And I knew to really take it to the next level, I needed a lot more data.

The plan was to get five hard court matches of data for each of the 16 teams in the WTA Finals and ATP Finals.

I knew if I could get five competitive matches of data on each team, I could uncover tendencies, strengths, and weaknesses that they may not even know they had.

With the help of Warren Pretorius and his team at Tennis Analytics, I found match footage of 61 hard court matches from 2021. This meant I would have five matches of data for each team.

To save time and money, I used matches where they faced each other when I could find them. For example, on the men’s side, Nikola Mektic and Mate Pavic faced Rajeev Ram and Joe Salisbury at the Miami Open and Canadian Open last year.

Use the Data to Create Game Plans

Once I had the data, I reached back out to Nicole Melichar and her coach, with a clear game plan for any team they’d face during the WTA Finals in Guadalajara.

After they defeated one of the hottest doubles teams on the WTA tour, US Open Champions Sam Stosur and Zhang Shuai, 6-2 6-2, I could see it starting to work.

They went on to finish 2-1 in their group and made the semifinals where they would face Krejcikova and Siniakova. The top-seeded Czechs had dismantled their group, dropping only one (insignificant) set in their third match – they had already clinched their spot in the semis.

As soon as I knew that was the matchup, I dove into the data.

The scouting report below is part of what I delivered to Nicole and her coach. I also included video clips not seen here.

You need all the knowledge and tools you can get when you want to beat the best team in the world.

Nicole Melichar – 10 Career WTA Doubles Titles, 2018 Wimbledon Mixed Doubles Champion.

---

Creating the Right Serve Strategy vs Krejcikova & Siniakova

I always start with serve strategy because it’s the one thing the other team can’t control, therefore, it’s the easiest to execute.

For example, I can tell you to move Siniakova to the deuce court during the rally by lobbing Krejcikova, but that’s a lot easier said than done. However, if I tell you to serve to Krejcikova’s forehand, there’s nothing they can do to stop you.

Serving vs Krejcikova in the Deuce Court

There are several elements to serve strategy that I always consider.

• Is it better to serve wide, body, or T?
• Is it better to use I-formation or regular formation?
• Does the strategy change for second serves?

First Serves to Krejcikova

I start with first serves because most points will be “first serve points” since your first serve percentage should be around 65-70% in doubles.

Before looking at formations and error rates, I start with serve locations. From the five matches, Krejcikova saw 116 first serves from her opponents.

vs 1st Serves	Wide	Body	T
Won	17	16	17
Played	40	34	42
Win %	42.5%	47.1%	40.5%

This means her opponents served wide to Krejcikova’s forehand 40 times. Krejcikova and Siniakova won 17 of those 40 points.

You can see that Krejcikova wins over 40% of points returning against first serves, and she is slightly worse returning a T-serve to her backhand.

Side note on the importance of video: relying solely on the data can be dangerous. At this point in the analysis, I might have said to hit first serves down the T and out wide, while slightly favoring the T serve. I’d have been wrong.

When I find a pattern in the data, I always go to the video to see if anything else stands out. In this case, what I found was two left-handed servers – Jil Teichmann and Bernarda Pera. Both lefties served down the T and had a very high win percentage against Krejcikova.

Since Melichar and Schuurs are both right-handed, I decided to omit Teichmann and Pera’s first serves from the data to see if the numbers changed.

Here were the new numbers.

vs 1st Serves*	Wide	Body	T
Won	12	14	16
Played	33	29	35
Win %	36.4%	48.3%	45.7%

BINGO!

Most right-handed players served down the T to the Krejcikova backhand, however, the wide serve was far more effective.

Next, I wanted to look at her return error rate on both sides. That is, the percentage of forehand and backhand returns that she misses. This can reinforce the strategy of serving to a particular location, or add a bit of complexity to the strategy.

vs 1st Serves*	Krejcikova
Backhand Error Rate	16.98%
Forehand Error Rate	29.27%

This was the single biggest discovery in the scouting report. Serve to Krejcikova’s forehand!

• First Serve Strategy vs Krejcikova: The data isn’t always this overwhelming, but in this case, I would serve 70-80% to her forehand while saving the T-serve as a secondary 20-30% pattern.

Second Serves to Krejcikova

Second serve points typically make up only 30-35% of all points. However, this is often where matches are decided. Winning over 50% of these is a good benchmark.

vs 2nd Serves	Wide	Body	T
Won	3	11	15
Played	8	17	25
Win %	37.5%	64.7%	60%

---

vs 2nd Serves*	Wide	Body	T
Won	1	10	13
Played	5	14	18
Win %	20%	71.4%	72.2%

Krejcikova, again, is struggling with forehand returns here.

Because the sample size of the wide serve is small, it’s important to stay aware during the match of what’s working and what’s not. You don’t want to serve her forehand return into a rhythm.

That said, the T-serve against Krejcikova clearly doesn’t work as a primary pattern for second serves. Yet, that’s what most teams do.

• Second Serve Strategy vs Krejcikova: Serve wide to her forehand.

Krejcikova Returning vs I-formation

I also like to see how each opponent returns against the I-formation. You can often find a deadly combination of a serve location and formation that they really struggle against, but most teams never figure out.

With two right-handed players, it can be risky to run I-formation in the deuce court. It’s worth looking at though.

vs 1st Serves	I-formation	Regular
Won	18	32
Played	38	78
Win %	47.4%	41.0%

For first serves, it’s best to primarily use regular formation when serving to Krejcikova.

vs 2nd Serves	I-formation	Regular
Won	3	26
Played	7	43
Win %	42.9%	60.5%

For second serves, the sample size is too small for I-formation, but I did go to the video to see what worked.

Sure enough, the lefty, Jil Teichmann, won 4/5 points (aces are not included in the data above) playing I-formation on second serves in the deuce court.

For second serves, right-handed players should stay in regular formation.

Serving vs Siniakova in the Ad Court

Next, I looked at Siniakova’s return stats from the ad side.

First Serves to Siniakova

Again, we’ll start with first serve points against Siniakova.

vs 1st Serves	Wide	Body	T
Won	6	12	18
Played	22	27	52
Win %	27.3%	44.4%	34.6%

Serving wide seems to be the best strategy, but I wanted to check the data for right-handed servers only.

vs 1st Serves*	Wide	Body	T
Won	4	8	17
Played	17	21	46
Win %	23.5%	38.1%	37.0%

The wide serve becomes even more effective for right-handed servers.

Based on this data, you’d expect her error rate to be higher on her backhand return. You’d be incorrect.

vs 1st Serves*	Siniakova
Backhand Error Rate	11.11%
Forehand Error Rate	21.82%

This actually isn’t as uncommon as you’d think. A lot of players seem to “go for more” on their forehand return. That means they miss more, but when it does land in, good luck winning the point.

Still, win percentage is more important than error rate.

• First Serve Strategy vs Siniakova: Serve primarily wide to her backhand. On “low risk” points, like up 40-0, for example, you might try to get a free error on the forehand side.

Second Serves vs Siniakova

Against second serves, the strategy flips.

vs 2nd Serves	Wide	Body	T
Won	4	4	1
Played	11	15	10
Win %	36.4%	26.7%	10.0%

---

vs 2nd Serves*	Wide	Body	T
Won	3	2	1
Played	8	9	10
Win %	23.5%	38.1%	10.0%

Again because of the small sample size, it’s important to watch the match video during the scouting process, and pay attention during your match to know what’s working.

It’s the job of the server’s partner to study the returner, including how comfortable they look and where they’re hitting, to develop an effective serve strategy.

Regardless, trust the data to start.

• Second Serve Strategy vs Siniakova: Serve T to the forehand.

Siniakova Returning vs I-formation

Again, I’ll cross-reference the serve location data with the serve formation data to look for a winning combination.

Siniakova may win a lower percentage of points against the wide serve, but is there a difference between regular and I-formation? Is she comfortable with hitting her backhand return both crosscourt and down the line?

Side Note on observing weaknesses & tendencies: When I play in a USTA tournament, I can usually tell by just watching someone for a few games which shots make them uncomfortable. Many players hit their backhand crosscourt with ease but can’t hit the down-the-line backhand to save their life.

At the pro level though, answering these questions isn’t so obvious because their weaknesses and margins are so much smaller.

Siniakova might prefer her crosscourt backhand return, but only by 5% or so. There’s no way to know this from watching the match. You have to measure it.

vs 1st Serves	I-formation	Regular
Won	8	28
Played	26	75
Win %	30.8%	37.3%

---

vs 1st Serves*	I-formation	Regular
Won	7	22
Played	19	65
Win %	36.8%	33.8%

For right-handed servers, regular formation was 3% more effective, so I recommended using that as a primary strategy.

A left-handed server might try more I-formation. For them, I’d run the numbers and watch the video we have of Teichmann and Pera to see what combination of location and formation is best.

In our data set, no one played I-formation vs Siniakova on a second serve point.

---

The Czech’s Serve Patterns

Next, I looked at Krejcikova and Siniakova’s serve patterns.

In this case, it’s important to look at both serve locations and formations.

Many teams have tendencies that you can find. For example, they may serve down the T 80% of the time when they run I-formation on the ad side.

I also want to know how often they’re running I-formation on each side so the coach and team can create a game plan for that.

Krejcikova Serving

	Deuce I-formation	Deuce Regular	Ad I-formation	Ad Regular
Won	12	46	42	5
Played	18	71	70	9
Win %	66.7%	64.8%	60.0%	55.6%

Krejcikova runs I-formation on both first and second serves, mostly in the ad court.

This allows her to rally from the deuce court where she is more comfortable when Siniakova moves left out of the I-formation.

1st Serves	Deuce Wide	Deuce Body	Deuce T	Ad T	Ad Body	Ad Wide
Won	12	11	17	14	6	10
Played	17	15	26	20	6	18
Win %	70.6%	73.3%	65.4%	70.0%	100%	55.6%

She tends to serve down the T more often, especially in the deuce court.

From here, I’d like to know how the formation impacts her likelihood to serve to a given location. To do this, I have to cross reference the data with pivot tables which is boring so I won’t show it here.

What I found though was helpful.

• In the deuce court, Krejcikova served wide only 1/14 times in I-formation on first serves.

So if you’re the deuce returner and see I-formation, you can move left early knowing she probably isn’t going wide.

I won’t get into the second serve data here, but the process is the same.

Siniakova Serving

The formations are a little less predictable when Siniakova is serving.

1st Serves	Deuce I-formation	Deuce Regular	Ad I-formation	Ad Regular
Won	24	6	17	8
Played	32	11	32	12
Win %	75.0%	54.5%	53.1%	66.7%

2nd Serves	Deuce I-formation	Deuce Regular	Ad I-formation	Ad Regular
Won	8	6	–	8
Played	17	8	0	21
Win %	47.1%	75%	–	38.1%

She runs a lot of I-formation on both sides for first serves, and also uses it in the deuce court for second serves.

This allows her to rally from the ad court where she is more comfortable when Krejcikova moves right out of the I-formation.

1st Serves	Deuce Wide	Deuce Body	Deuce T	Ad T	Ad Body	Ad Wide
Won	6	13	11	19	5	1
Played	7	19	17	27	14	3
Win %	85.7%	68.4%	64.7%	70.4%	35.7%	33.3%

Siniakova rarely serves wide, especially in the ad court.

You might shift towards the middle early in the match to force her into the less comfortable serve.

---

Rally Data for the #1 Doubles Pair

Serve and return strategy is the largest component of doubles strategy. Still, it’s important to know the strengths and weaknesses of the opponents during the longer points.

For rally data, I look at winners and errors for each stroke. When I combine that with the match video, I can recommend a strategy. The match video is crucial here because you can’t measure everything during a rally as well as you can on serves and returns.

Ideally, we’d measure winners, errors, and attempts for each shot, but we do the best we can.

Groundstrokes	Krejcikova	Siniakova
Forehand Errors	39	7
Forehand Winners	10	2
Backhand Errors	19	28
Backhand Winners	2	6

Volleys	Krejcikova	Siniakova
Forehand Errors	8	15
Forehand Winners	11	29
Backhand Errors	15	11
Backhand Winners	10	20

In this case, I determine Krejcikova is the “weaker” net player while Siniakova is the “weaker” baseliner.

• Krejcikova prefers to rally in the deuce court.
• Siniakova prefers to rally in the ad court.
• Siniakova likes to move forward.

Combining this knowledge along with knowing your own team’s strengths can help you develop the best strategy.

A lob down the line from the deuce court, for example, can move Krejcikova to the ad court where she is less comfortable and improve your chances of winning the point. However, Siniakova is not short and has an excellent overhead so you have to decide if the risk is worth it, and how often you want to try it.

---

The Final Ingredient You Need to Beat the #1 Doubles Team in the World

In this case, Melichar and Schuurs took the first set but ultimately fell to the Czechs, 3-6, 6-3, 10-6.

The top seeds went on to win the finals in straight sets against Elise Mertens and Hsieh Su-wei to clinch the 2021 year-end trophy.

Having already won Roland Garros and the Olympics, @BKrejcikova and @K_Siniakova capped a dream year by winning the WTA Finals in Guadalajara last week.@Van_Sias dives into the year-end doubles championships for both tours.

HERBERT & MAHUT WIN IN TURIN: https://t.co/LrTKCDUeOk pic.twitter.com/3oFWy8lBGr

— TENNIS (@Tennis) November 25, 2021

Even with the right game plan, execution against the WTA’s #1 team is a tall task. It’s one thing to figure out that you need to lob Krejcikova from the ad court to move Siniakova to her weaker deuce side. It’s a whole different test to redirect that lob off of a blistering 75MPH Siniakova backhand.

To beat the #1 doubles team in the world, you need the game plan.

You need to play well.

And the last ingredient… you may need a bit of luck.

A few months later, I stumbled upon a connection to the coach of Anna Danilina and Beatriz Haddad-Maia two days before the 2022 Australian Open Final against the Czechs. I sent their coach the same scouting report, and again, they lost in a third after taking the first set, 6-7, 6-4, 6-4.

---

Post-Match Analysis = Next Match Adjustments

There are often things that the data doesn’t show and things I miss in the video analysis. Making note of these can improve the odds of winning next time.

In this match, I found three adjustments to make for next time.

1. I had told Melichar and Schuurs to rally to Siniakova to keep her at the baseline and try to move forward when possible. After watching Siniakova smoke several backhands through the middle of the court, I made note for the next match to approach to Siniakova’s forehand.
   
2. Siniakova beat Schuurs with a T-serve in the ad court five times. She beat her wide zero times. This tendency was in the scouting report, but Schuurs didn’t adjust her return position.
   
3. Another thing I noticed was that Melichar and Schuurs ran I-formation on big points (once on a 2nd serve). This can be a losing proposition because of the risk involved.
   
   On a deciding point, for example, I-formation may give you the best win percentage at 60%. But it’s very dependent on a return error. If the opponent hits the down-the-line return, it will likely be a winner or at least put you in a very tough spot. Save it for low-risk points.

Questions or feedback? Comment below or contact me here.