WTA125 Vic: Rebeka Masarova vs Dalma Galfi final analysis
Superior in virtually every metric, Galfi won her 10th straight match and clinched back-to-back WTA 125 titles
Dalma Galfi (WTA #121) is enjoying the most prolifc period of her career.
The 26-year old Hungarian followed up a runner-up finish at WTA 125 La Bisbal D’Empordá five weeks ago with a 10-match unbeaten streak across Oeiras and Vic that also resulted in consecutive WTA 125 titles and her two most significant tournament wins to date.
Without dropping a set all week, Galfi completed the second title run with a one-sided 6-3, 6-0 win over Rebeka Masarova (WTA #153) in the Catalonia Open final.
The WTA 125 Vic championship match was dominated by Galfi from start to finish.
Exhibiting her drop shot skills already in the opening game (video below) while Masarova stumbled off the blocks with early-rally errors, Galfi grabbed an initial break and never let up.
📺 source: WTA Unlocked
For the duration of the match, Galfi’s heavier groundstrokes gave Masarova plenty of trouble. Once the Hungarian got set in the middle of the baseline, she pushed Masarova back, took the ball away from her opponent’s strike-zone and made her move from side to side.
Even when Masarova came up with a countering shot, Galfi played great defense and managed to regain control over the rally.
In her first singles final in exactly a year, Masarova was actually never in it. Unable to find any rhythm, she accumulated mistakes off the ground and did poorly when attacking the net.
Out of 18 forward moves, the Swiss only managed to win 7. Her 39% win-rate on net approaches was actually even worse than her already low 43% baseline win-rate.
With her errors providing most of the difference in the match — 11 more unforced errors (28 to 17) and 6 more forced errors (21 to 15) — Masarova dropped to 0-3 in championship matches at WTA 125 level and remains without a title since October 2022 at ITF W60 Hamburg.
Amidst Masarova’s surplus of errors, four observations was still possible.
1. Galfi struck twice more winners (10 to 5) from the forehand side with a relatively similar amount of errors (17 to 19).
Forehand Performances
Masarova: 5 winners / 19 errors = -14
Galfi: 10 winners / 17 errors = -7
2. The opposite was observed for backhands as both players didn’t generate much offensively from that wing. Instead, the 9-point gap between backhand performances was due to Masarova hitting 10 more errors (24 to 14).
Backhand Performances
Masarova: 3 winners / 24 errors = -21
Galfi: 2 winners / 14 errors = -12
3. The largest portion of the winning margin originated from short rallies.
Galfi picked up 75% of the final 20-point difference by collecting a 40-25 advantage in points decided within the first 4 shots.
A deeper look revealed that most of it was created by Masarova’s difficulties in controlling double faults (6 to 1) and “+1” errors (15 to 9).
4. In addition to winning 62% of all short rallies played (40 of 65), Galfi also did great in long exchanges. In fact, the Hungarian’s win-rate in points lasting 9+ shots was even greater, at 64% from 9 of 14 points won.
Among them was this 12-shot rally ended by a spectacular drop shot winner.
Beautiful way to conclude this analysis!
Rebeka Masarova (WTA #153) vs Dalma Galfi (WTA #121)
2025 Vic final - Match Data
Set by Set Stats
Strokes Breakdown
Direction of winning shots and unforced errors (only groundstrokes)
Serve and Return
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.
While we follow the same criteria used on all major tennis events, our stats are collected through our own video analysis and are not official WTA or ITF stats.
Thanks for reading!
— Tennis Inside Numbers