WTA Finals · Semifinals · Parma
Final score & match stats
Playing styles and historical archetype record
Wang
💥 Big Hitter
Stephens
⚙️ Grinder
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 Qiang Wang here.
Big Hitter players often use power groundstrokes and high winner count to pressure the grinder's relentless consistency. On Clay, that can swing with conditions.
Hypothetical if you put 1u on each player to win every one of their matches · Last 90 days
| Metric | Wang | Stephens |
|---|---|---|
| W-L | - | 1–4 |
| Avg odds | - | 3.74 |
| ROI % | - | -68.2% |
| Units P/L | - | -3.41u |
Small sample: ROI stabilizes with more matches; fewer than 10 in the window is noisy.
Prior meetings and scores · 3 career meetings
3
Wang
0
Stephens
May 17, 2021
Parma
C Clay · Semifinals
Sep 25, 2017
Wuhan
H Hard · Round of 64
Jan 18, 2016
Australian Open
H Hard · Round of 128
Serve and return comparison · Last 90 days
| Stat | Wang | Stephens |
|---|---|---|
| Serve | ||
| 1st Serve In % | 0% | 65.6% |
| 1st Serve Pts Won % | 0% | 48.7% |
| 2nd Serve Pts Won % | 0% | 46.8% |
| Aces / Match | 0 | 0.8 |
| Double Faults / Match | 0 | 2.3 |
| Break Points Saved % | 0% | 56.2% |
| Return | ||
| 1st Return Pts Won % | 0% | 25.1% |
| 2nd Return Pts Won % | 0% | 39.4% |
| BP Converted % | 0% | 49.1% |
| Rally | ||
| Winners / Match | 0 | 0 |
| Unforced Errors / Match | 0 | 0 |
| Net Pts Won % | 0% | 0% |
| Total Pts Won % | 0% | 40.1% |
| Surface (Clay) | ||
| Clay Win % | 0% | 17% |
Last five matches per player
Matchup overview
Qiang Wang and Sloane Stephens face off in the Semifinals at Parma on Clay.
Qiang Wang leads 3-0 over 3 previous meetings.
Qiang Wang is 0-5 over the last 5 matches. Latest result: L vs Jiaqi Wang (Oct 6).
Sloane Stephens is 1-4 over the last 5 matches. Latest result: L vs Sara Bejlek (May 25).
Share this match
