WTA 1000 · Round of 16 · Cincinnati
Final score & match stats
Playing styles and historical archetype record
Schmiedlova
⚙️ Grinder
Lepchenko
💥 Big Hitter
Matchup analysis
The 💥 Big Hitter archetype wins about 64% vs ⚙️ Grinder across 2,716 matches in our dataset. That is a small stylistic lean for Varvara Lepchenko here.
Big Hitter players often use power groundstrokes and high winner count to pressure the grinder's relentless consistency. On Hard, that can swing with conditions.
Hypothetical if you put 1u on each player to win every one of their matches · Last 90 days
| Metric | Schmiedlova | Lepchenko |
|---|---|---|
| W-L | - | 4–4 |
| Avg odds | - | 2.23 |
| ROI % | - | +27.5% |
| Units P/L | - | +2.20u |
Small sample: ROI stabilizes with more matches; fewer than 10 in the window is noisy.
Prior meetings and scores · 2 career meetings
1
Schmiedlova
1
Lepchenko
Jan 4, 2016
Brisbane
H Hard · Round of 32
Aug 17, 2015
Cincinnati
H Hard · Round of 16
Serve and return comparison · Last 90 days
| Stat | Schmiedlova | Lepchenko |
|---|---|---|
| Serve | ||
| 1st Serve In % | 0% | 61.7% |
| 1st Serve Pts Won % | 0% | 71.5% |
| 2nd Serve Pts Won % | 0% | 41.2% |
| Aces / Match | 0 | 2 |
| Double Faults / Match | 0 | 3.3 |
| Break Points Saved % | 0% | 61.5% |
| Return | ||
| 1st Return Pts Won % | 0% | 32.9% |
| 2nd Return Pts Won % | 0% | 56.3% |
| BP Converted % | 0% | 41.1% |
| Rally | ||
| Winners / Match | 0 | 0 |
| Unforced Errors / Match | 0 | 0 |
| Net Pts Won % | 0% | 0% |
| Total Pts Won % | 0% | 50.8% |
| Surface (Hard) | ||
| Hard Win % | 0% | 0% |
Last five matches per player
Matchup overview
Anna Karolina Schmiedlova and Varvara Lepchenko face off in the Round of 16 at Cincinnati on Hard.
Anna Karolina Schmiedlova leads 1-1 over 2 previous meetings.
Anna Karolina Schmiedlova is 1-4 over the last 5 matches. Latest result: L vs Marina Stakusic (Sep 9).
Varvara Lepchenko is 2-3 over the last 5 matches. Latest result: L vs Anastasia Gasanova (Jun 23).
Share this match
