WTA1000 Indian Wells: Mirra Andreeva vs Iga Swiatek semifinal analysis
Textbook demonstration that some tennis points hold more value than others
None of the BNP Paribas Open semifinalists could be considered a surprise as all of them reached that stage of the event while riding some sort of double digit win streak:
Aryna Sabalenka (WTA #1) had won her last 16 matches on US hardcourts, dating back to her 2024 Cincinnati and US Open titles;
Australian Open champion Madison Keys (WTA #5) was unbeaten in 16 matches;
Recent WTA 1000 Dubai winner Mirra Andreeva (WTA #9) was on a 10-match win streak;
Defending champion Iga Swiatek (WTA #2) had not dropped a set the last 10 times she stepped on a court at the Indian Wells Tennis Garden, breezing through the 2025 draw for the loss of just 12 games in 4 matches.
The quartet was playing top-class tennis and the Indian Wells semifinals offered the extra bonus of having the Top-2 players in the world facing opponents they had already lost to during the 2025 season.
En route to a maiden WTA 1000 title in Dubai, Mirra Andreeva (WTA #9) surprised second seed Iga Swiatek (WTA #2) in the quarters. The 17-year old repeated the upset in the Indian Wells semis, this time with a textbook demonstration of how tennis points are not created equally.
Swiatek won 8 more points in the match (91 to 83) but Andreeva won it because she took the lion’s share of the important points.
Namely, the teenager played a flawless tie-break in the first set and was near-perfect in the multiple times she served at 0/30, 15/30, 30/30 or Deuce — the so-called pressure points when the server is 1 point away from facing break point.
In total, Andreeva won a staggering 19 of 24 (79%) pressure points faced. Forced to play a pressure point in 13 of 14 serve games (!), she raised her level later in games countless times to grab 8 holds from those 13 troubled and/or tightly-disputed games.
[All details of Andreeva’s successive escapes are shared below the paywall, exclusive to paid Tennis Inside Numbers subscribers, so please do subscribe!]
While Swiatek enjoyed several more easy games on serve, she was a lot less efficient at rescuing holds once they became close. In addition, the former #1 was great at taking the lead or making Andreeva's serve games tight but then failed to progress from pressure point to break point with alarming repetitiveness. Swiatek’s inability to win pressure points (5 of 24, 21%) gets worse when we consider how well she actually did after accruing break points: converted 5 of 6 chances (83%).
Pressure Points and Games
Pressure points faced: Andreeva 24 / Swiatek 13
Pressure points won: Andreeva 19 (79%) / Swiatek 8 (62%)
Serve games with pressure points: Andreeva 13 / Swiatek 6
Serve games with pressure points won: Andreeva 8 (62%) / Swiatek 2 (33%)
Serve games lost: Andreeva 5 / Swiatek 4
Break point conversion
Andreeva: 4 of 7 (57%)
Swiatek: 5 of 6 (83%)