WTA 1000 · Quarterfinals · Cincinnati
Final score & match stats
Playing styles and historical archetype record
Stephens
⚙️ Grinder
Goerges
🤖 Servebot
Matchup analysis
The 🤖 Servebot archetype wins about 60% vs ⚙️ Grinder across 1,639 matches in our dataset. That is a small stylistic lean for Julia Goerges here.
Servebot players often use high ace rate and dominant service 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 | Stephens | Goerges |
|---|---|---|
| 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
Stephens
0
Goerges
Aug 28, 2017
US Open
H Hard · Round of 16
Aug 14, 2017
Cincinnati
H Hard · Quarterfinals
Jan 4, 2016
Auckland
H Hard · Final
Serve and return comparison · Last 90 days
| Stat | Stephens | Goerges |
|---|---|---|
| Serve | ||
| 1st Serve In % | 65.6% | 0% |
| 1st Serve Pts Won % | 48.7% | 0% |
| 2nd Serve Pts Won % | 46.8% | 0% |
| Aces / Match | 0.8 | 0 |
| Double Faults / Match | 2.3 | 0 |
| Break Points Saved % | 56.2% | 0% |
| Return | ||
| 1st Return Pts Won % | 25.1% | 0% |
| 2nd Return Pts Won % | 39.4% | 0% |
| BP Converted % | 49.1% | 0% |
| Rally | ||
| Winners / Match | 0 | 0 |
| Unforced Errors / Match | 0 | 0 |
| Net Pts Won % | 0% | 0% |
| Total Pts Won % | 40.1% | 0% |
| Surface (Hard) | ||
| Hard Win % | 0% | 0% |
Last five matches per player
Matchup overview
Sloane Stephens and Julia Goerges face off in the Quarterfinals at Cincinnati on Hard.
Sloane Stephens leads 3-0 over 3 previous meetings.
Sloane Stephens is 1-4 over the last 5 matches. Latest result: L vs Sara Bejlek (May 25).
Julia Goerges is 2-3 over the last 5 matches. Latest result: L vs Laura Siegemund (Sep 28).
Share this match
