Jack Sock vs John Isner — Newport Quarter-final

Newport · ATP · Quarter-final
USA7
Jack Sock
33 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLWLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 7 July 2014
grass
USA1
John Isner
41 yrs · 208 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWLLWWW
Sock J.
6-4 7-6
Isner J.
Sock J.
6772
Isner J.
4640

Jack Sock defeated John Isner 6-4 7-6 in the Newport quarter-final on grass. The upset overturned the form book — John Isner came in leading the head-to-head 6–2, defending last year's semi-final. Jack Sock narrowed the head-to-head to 6–3.

Key context

Head to head

2–6
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2021-07-26AtlantaR16hardJohn Isner7-6(6) 6-4
2016-10-31Paris MastersQFhardJohn Isner7-6(6) 4-6 6-4
2016-04-04HoustonSFclayJack Sock7-6(4) 6-3
2015-10-26BaselR16hardJack Sock7-6(5) 6-3
2014-07-21AtlantaSFhardJohn Isner7-5 6-4
2014-05-18NiceR16clayJohn Isner6-4 6-3
2013-04-08HoustonR16clayJohn Isner7-5 6-7(3) 7-6(3)
2012-07-16AtlantaQFhardJohn Isner7-6(7) 6-4

Serve vs return

This season
Sock J.serving97% hold

wins 78% of points on serve vs Isner J.

Isner J.serving98% hold

wins 80% of points on serve vs Sock J.

Serve-dominated — both hold easily, expect tiebreaks

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Statistics

This season
Sock J.Isner J.
1st serve in·Slight edge
61%
70%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
73%
80%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
56%
Service points won·Slight edge
65%
73%
Return points won·Slight edge
35%
29%
Break points saved·Slight edge
62%
70%
Aces / match·Dominant
6.4
21.7
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.9
2.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Sock J.Isner J.
Clutch Rating·Even
67
64
Break points saved·Even
96
99
Break points won·Dominant
28
0
Deciding sets·Slight edge
86
91
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
82
98

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Hewitt L.[3]
Karlovic I.[2]
6-36-747-63
Semi-finals
Hewitt L.[3]
Sock J.[7]
6-16-2
Karlovic I.[2]
Groth S.
6-46-4
Quarter-finals
Sock J.[7]
Isner J.[1]
6-47-64
Hewitt L.[3]
Johnson S.[6]
6-46-4
Groth S.
Mahut N.[4]
6-36-4
Karlovic I.[2]
Sela D.
7-637-5
R16
Sock J.[7]
Ram R.
7-56-2
Hewitt L.[3]
Pavic A.
6-26-2
Karlovic I.[2]
Stakhovsky S.
7-57-63
Johnson S.[6]
Ito T.
6-32-0
Groth S.
Jaziri M.
7-677-63
Sela D.
Mannarino A.[8]
6-36-1
Isner J.[1]
Krajicek A.
6-36-3
Mahut N.[4]
Saville L.
6-46-2
R32
Krajicek A.
Smyczek T.
7-676-1
Ram R.
Ebden M.
6-27-5
Sock J.[7]
Kuznetsov A.
6-46-3
Hewitt L.[3]
Harrison R.
1-67-56-4
Ito T.
Krueger M.
7-676-1
Johnson S.[6]
Thompson C.
6-16-2
Jaziri M.
Berankis R.
7-56-3
Saville L.
Polansky P.
6-46-2
Mahut N.[4]
Arguello F.
7-616-4
Mannarino A.[8]
Wang J.
6-26-4
Sela D.
Przysiezny M.
6-17-62
Stakhovsky S.
Dustov F.
6-36-2
Karlovic I.[2]
Ginepri R.
7-626-2
Groth S.
Young D.[5]
7-676-2
Isner J.[1]
Odesnik W.
6-37-66
Pavic A.
Copil M.
7-606-4