11/02/2026 · 25–23 / 25–18 / 25–19
Checked 135 scoring rallies against the saved set scores.
Recorded attack destinations and serve targets. View from the attacking or serving side; the opponent’s court is shown with the net at the bottom.
Attack tempo filters positions 2, 4 and 1 only. Middle, pipe, other tempos and uncoded attacks remain under All attacks. Serve maps are unchanged.
After reception: the first attack following serve reception. Transition: attack after a block touch, defence or freeball. Attacks without enough recorded context remain under All attacks.
Solid teal: kill · dashed red: error · dotted purple: blocked · grey: continued play. Circles mark starts; arrowheads mark recorded endpoints. Hover over or focus a line for player, set and video time.
Lines join the recorded start and end; they do not reconstruct the ball’s flight or block deflections. Out-of-court endpoints are retained here. Attacks without both coordinates are excluded. Use the filters above to reduce overlapping lines.
Cells show counts and percentages of mapped actions. Choose “Show recorded points” to overlay the endpoints. Locations outside the opponent’s court and missing start/end coordinates are excluded and counted above. Endpoints describe the scout’s recorded locations, not necessarily where the ball landed. No coordinates are invented from cone codes.
Start and end coordinates are decoded using the OpenVolley coordinate convention. Actions starting on the opposite half are rotated 180 degrees to give a consistent view. The 3 × 3 grid divides the 9 × 9 metre court into 3 metre cells. Filters affect these maps only.
| Team | Kills / attacks | Efficiency | Aces | Serve errors | Blocks | Positive reception | Side-out |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAVINO DEL BENE SCANDICCI | 41/84 | 39.3% | 9 | 5 | 7 | 57.1% | 42/61 (68.9%) |
| MEGABOX OND. SAVIO VALLEFOGLIA | 43/96 | 26.0% | 4 | 5 | 0 | 37.7% | 41/74 (55.4%) |
| Player | Attacks | Kills | Errors | Blocked | Efficiency | Aces | Blocks | Points | Receptions | Positive | Rec. errors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marta Bechis | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Brenda Castillo | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 53.8% | 0 |
| Lindsey Ora Ruddins | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 33.3% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Sarah Franklin | 28 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 39.3% | 1 | 0 | 15 | 18 | 66.7% | 0 |
| Manuela Ribechi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | 0 |
| Caterina Bosetti | 12 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 41.7% | 1 | 1 | 8 | 23 | 56.5% | 4 |
| Maja Ognjenovic | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Linda Nwakalor | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 57.1% | 1 | 4 | 9 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Ekaterina Antropova | 20 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 40.0% | 5 | 2 | 17 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Camilla Weitzel | 13 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 23.1% | 1 | 0 | 6 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Position | Won / received | Side-out |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 9/20 | 45.0% |
| 2 | 6/7 | 85.7% |
| 3 | 5/7 | 71.4% |
| 4 | 5/7 | 71.4% |
| 5 | 8/10 | 80.0% |
| 6 | 9/10 | 90.0% |
Review candidate: setter position 1 had 45.0% side-out (9/20). This is a single-match sample, not proof of a tactical weakness.
Here, poor reception means codes − (limited attack) and ! (no first tempo). Reception errors (=) and overpasses/no-attack receptions (/) are counted separately. Only the first receiving possession is included; later transition attacks are excluded.
19 receptions in this group: 12 coded − and 7 coded !. These produced 18 first attacks; 1 had no recorded first-possession attack. Separate reception outcomes: 4 errors and 1 overpasses/no-attack receptions.
| Attacker | Attempts | Share | Kills | Errors | Blocked | Kill rate | Efficiency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sarah Franklin | 6 | 33.3% | 4 | 1 | 0 | 66.7% | 50.0% |
| Ekaterina Antropova | 5 | 27.8% | 3 | 0 | 0 | 60.0% | 60.0% |
| Caterina Bosetti | 3 | 16.7% | 2 | 0 | 0 | 66.7% | 66.7% |
| Camilla Weitzel | 3 | 16.7% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 33.3% | 33.3% |
| Linda Nwakalor | 1 | 5.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Share uses first attacks as its denominator. This describes who attacked, not necessarily a deliberate choice by the designated setter. Small samples require video review. See Poor reception rallies.csv for every included reception.
| Player | Attacks | Kills | Errors | Blocked | Efficiency | Aces | Blocks | Points | Receptions | Positive | Rec. errors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Erblira Bici | 31 | 14 | 5 | 3 | 19.4% | 3 | 0 | 17 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Alice Feduzzi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 37.5% | 0 |
| Federica Carletti | 15 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 53.3% | 0 | 0 | 8 | 18 | 38.9% | 3 |
| Gaia Giovannini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Chiara De Bortoli | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 36.4% | 1 |
| Sonia Candi | 11 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 27.3% | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Valentina Bartolucci | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 66.7% | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Nyadholi Thokbuom | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 50.0% | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Adelina Ungureanu | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | -16.7% | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 33.3% | 0 |
| Loveth Oghosasere Omoruyi | 26 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 19.2% | 0 | 0 | 10 | 29 | 37.9% | 5 |
| Raquel Lazàro Castellanos | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 0 |
| Position | Won / received | Side-out |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6/12 | 50.0% |
| 2 | 6/13 | 46.2% |
| 3 | 7/15 | 46.7% |
| 4 | 8/13 | 61.5% |
| 5 | 8/13 | 61.5% |
| 6 | 6/8 | 75.0% |
Review candidate: setter position 2 had 46.2% side-out (6/13). This is a single-match sample, not proof of a tactical weakness.
Here, poor reception means codes − (limited attack) and ! (no first tempo). Reception errors (=) and overpasses/no-attack receptions (/) are counted separately. Only the first receiving possession is included; later transition attacks are excluded.
28 receptions in this group: 14 coded − and 14 coded !. These produced 25 first attacks; 3 had no recorded first-possession attack. Separate reception outcomes: 9 errors and 6 overpasses/no-attack receptions.
| Attacker | Attempts | Share | Kills | Errors | Blocked | Kill rate | Efficiency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loveth Oghosasere Omoruyi | 9 | 36.0% | 4 | 1 | 0 | 44.4% | 33.3% |
| Erblira Bici | 7 | 28.0% | 4 | 1 | 1 | 57.1% | 28.6% |
| Federica Carletti | 6 | 24.0% | 2 | 0 | 0 | 33.3% | 33.3% |
| Adelina Ungureanu | 3 | 12.0% | 2 | 0 | 1 | 66.7% | 33.3% |
Share uses first attacks as its denominator. This describes who attacked, not necessarily a deliberate choice by the designated setter. Small samples require video review. See Poor reception rallies.csv for every included reception.
Aces match opposing reception errors; blocked attacks match opposing winning blocks.
Efficiency = (kills − errors − blocked attacks) / attacks. Positive reception = codes + and # / all receptions. Side-out includes opponent service errors. Standard Data Volley evaluations are assumed; custom scouting conventions need review. Statistics are derived from the file, not independently verified against video.
The accompanying rally CSV includes recorded video seconds and attack outcomes for review. Video is not included. This offline report uses fixed calculations and rule-based review hints. Upload it or the DVW to ChatGPT for a coaching discussion.
Source: &2026-02-11 a1r11 vallefoglia-scandicci.dvw
Choose a server to see where they served from and where each serve went.
Circle = recorded serving position · Arrow = recorded destination.
Teal = ace · Red dashed = error · Grey = other serves.
Straight lines show direction, not the ball’s flight. Missing start or end locations are excluded; out-of-court destinations are retained.
Cells show counts and percentages of mapped serves. Missing locations and destinations outside the opponent’s court are excluded from the heatmap and counted above. These are recorded destinations, not necessarily where the ball landed.
Choose a team and a player. Each court shows attacks from one starting position.
Fast and high ball filters apply to positions 2, 4 and 1. Choose All attacks for middle, pipe, other tempos and uncoded attacks.
After reception: the first attack following serve reception. Transition: attack after a block touch, defence or freeball. Attacks without enough recorded context remain under All attacks.
● Start → recorded destination · Teal: point · Red dashed: error or blocked · Grey: play continued
Transparent arrows: Green = main direction · Blue = second direction
For the selected player, set and position, attacks are grouped into nine destination areas on the opponent’s court. The two most frequent areas determine the arrows, using the average start and endpoint in each group. Errors, blocked attacks and endpoints outside the opponent’s court are excluded from this ranking. Ties are labelled; fewer than two areas means fewer than two arrows.
The attacker is below the net in every diagram. “Position” means the recorded attack starting zone, not the setter’s rotation. Lines show recorded direction, not the ball’s exact flight. Missing locations are excluded; this view is based on one match.