Mary Stoiana vs Alana Smith: Edmond Final Analysis (ITF W75)
Stoiana secured her first pro title after taking 2 sets and 2 bee stings
Wild card Mary Stoiana (WTA #481), the No.1 ranked collegiate player with Texas A&M, defeated qualifier Alana Smith (WTA #503) in the OKTF W75 Edmond Open final to claim her first professional singles title.
Playing in her third career final, Stoiana went through yet another unusual experience when she suffered 2 bee stings while serving for the opening set at 5-4. Even if briefly, she must have had flashbacks to her disappointing first final at W15 Lakewood, last year. On that occasion, fatigue forced Stoiana to stop after just 2 games, in what is still her only retirement to date.
This time however, Stoiana kept on playing until she won the last point, like she had done in the quarters against Daria Vidmanova even after going match point down at 3-5 in the third set. Stoiana’s road to the Edmond title also included a win over 8th-seed Sophie Chang, her conquerer 3 months ago in the final at W75 Evansville (where the 21-year-old was 3 points away from victory during the second set tie-break).
The opening set of the Edmond Open final was characterized by a series of breaks. Three times Stoiana broke to move ahead (at 1-1, 3-3 and 4-4) only to have Smith break back immediately. At 5-5, Stoiana secured a 4th break and she finally sealed the opener with a backhand volley winner after recovering from a 0/30 deficit.
The story of the second set was looking similar when Stoiana broke in the 3rd game and Smith responded right away to level at 2-2. For once, Smith managed to rescue a serve hold after facing break point and moved ahead 3-2. Unfortunately for Smith, who was playing in a first career singles final, the workload caught up with her and she began showing physical discomfort. From that moment on, Stoiana won 17 of 20 points to take 4 games in a row and secure a maiden pro title.
The following three factors played a big role in deciding the outcome of the Edmond final:
Net play
Return performances
Break point creation
1. Net play
Both players were very active in gaining position at the net and did well once there. Stoiana finished 16-for-22 (73%) while Smith was a notch below at 60% (9/15) of net points won. This meant Stoiana was the more efficient player in the forecourt and also managed to play 7 more net points than Smith.
At the net, Stoiana missed a single volley while striking 11 winning volley/overheads (marked by green box, table below). Such consistency, combined with an eagerness to move forward, had Smith under pressure to produce quality passing shots in order to win points. She came up short in the end, despite 5 pass winners and another passing that forced a volley error.
2. Return Performances
A few of Stoiana’s net advances were “return & charge” plays. On other occasions, she just hit outright return winners. Not afraid to go for her shots, Stoiana totalled 6 return winners and 6 other returns that induced “serve+1” errors from Smith.
Smith was less prolific, ending the match with 2 return winners plus 2 forcing returns. On top of that, she also missed 1 more return (10 to 9).
Return Performance
Stoiana: 6 winners + 6 forcing shots / 9 errors = +3
Smith: 2 winners + 2 forcing shots / 10 errors = -6
Stoiana’s superior return performance resulted in a 15-6 edge in 2-shot rallies (marked by red box, below). It led to an equal 9-point gap in short points (40 to 31).
As the numbers and image below demonstrate, a large portion of Stoiana’s offensive production came off returns (orange box, on the left) and volley/overheads (yellow box, on the left).
Stoiana’s Winners and Forcing Shots
Returns: 35% of winners (6/17), 33% of forcing shots (6/18)
Net play: 47% of winners (8/17), 17% of forcing shots (3/18)
3. Break point creation
Throughout the match, both finalists were very proficient at breaking their opponent’s serve once they created break chances. While their conversion rates in relation to return games with break points were very high (Stoiana at 88%, Smith at 100%), it certainly made a huge difference that Stoiana reached break points in twice more games than Smith (8 to 4).
Breaks / Return games with break points
Stoiana: 7 / 8 (88%)
Smith: 4 / 4 (100%)
Mary Stoiana (WTA #481, wild card) vs Alana Smith (WTA #503, qualifier)
2024 Edmond Final - Match Data
Set by Set Stats
Winners and Errors (returns and rally shots)
Direction of winning shots and unforced errors (only groundstrokes)
1st Serves
2nd Serves
Return & rallying performance
Rally Length
Points won breakdown
This final section gives a last, broader look at the match by presenting how each player won points. Points are listed according to their frequency (highest to lowest) and are named in relation to the last touch on the ball. For simplicity, groundstrokes hit from the 5th shot onwards are grouped together.
Breakdown by side (FHs or BHs)
Breakdown by error type (UFEs or FEs)
To find out more about the stats published here, please visit the following post.
Even though they follow the same criteria used on all major tennis events, they are not official WTA or ITF stats. They are collected through our own rigorous video analysis.
Thanks for reading!
— Tennis Inside Numbers