Stefan Kozlov vs Tennys Sandgren — Columbus CH Final

Columbus CH · CHALLENGER · Final
Stefan Kozlov
USA4
Stefan Kozlov
#296ATP
1429ELO
1408Hard ELO
28 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWLLWWLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 21 November 2016
hard
USA6
Tennys Sandgren
34 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWWWW
Kozlov S.
6-1 2-6 6-2
Sandgren T.
Kozlov S.
6262
Sandgren T.
1621

Stefan Kozlov defeated Tennys Sandgren 6-1 2-6 6-2 in the Columbus CH final on hard. The result followed the form book — Stefan Kozlov came in defending last year's round of 32.

Key context

  • Match story: Stefan Kozlov closed it out in three sets, 6–1 2–6 6–2.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Kozlov S.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Sandgren T.

Sandgren T.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Kozlov S.

Even serve battle

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
Kozlov S.Sandgren T.
1st serve in·Even
64%
60%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
66%
74%
2nd serve points won·Even
47%
49%
Service points won·Slight edge
59%
64%
Return points won·Slight edge
42%
35%
Break points saved·Even
58%
60%
Aces / match·Dominant
2.4
8.6
Double faults / match·Clear edge
4.0
2.8

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Kozlov S.Sandgren T.
Clutch Rating·Even
36
36
Break points saved·Dominant
49
92
Break points won·Clear edge
20
2
Deciding sets·Dominant
85
28
Tiebreaks·Dominant
30
86

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

Freshness

Recent load
Kozlov S.Sandgren T.
Freshness·
69
—

Kozlov S.: 4 days rest · 3 matches, 72 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Torpegaard M.
Becker B.[1]
6-41-66-2
Kozlov S.[4]
Sandgren T.[6]
6-12-66-2
Semi-finals
Torpegaard M.
Sandgren T.
7-57-65
Becker B.[1]
Smith J.
6-41-67-5
Sandgren T.[6]
Laaksonen H.[3]
6-25-76-4
Kozlov S.[4]
Barry S.[8]
7-57-66
Quarter-finals
Sandgren T.
Quiroz R.
6-07-63
Torpegaard M.
Austin G.
6-27-5
Smith J.
Bangoura S.
6-33-66-3
Becker B.[1]
Libietis M.
4-66-17-64
Sandgren T.[6]
Norrie C.
6-26-736-3
Laaksonen H.[3]
Kobelt P.
6-47-5
Kozlov S.[4]
King K.
6-27-5
Barry S.[8]
Fritz T.[1]
6-47-62
R16
Quiroz R.
King E.
6-46-4
Sandgren T.
Rola B.[7]
7-636-3
Torpegaard M.
Polansky P.[4]
6-46-726-4
Austin G.
Dancevic F.
7-646-3
Smith J.
Hurkacz H.
6-26-3
Libietis M.
Norrie C.
6-47-65
Becker B.[1]
Groth S.
6-36-2
Bangoura S.
Paul T.
6-36-3
Norrie C.
Bambridge L.
7-636-4
Sandgren T.[6]
Quigley E.
6-26-4
Laaksonen H.[3]
Mcnally J.
6-46-3
Kobelt P.
Krueger M.[5]
7-656-4
King K.
Harrison C.
6-36-3
Kozlov S.[4]
Koepfer D.
6-36-4
Barry S.[8]
Nevolo D.
6-46-2
Fritz T.[1]
Libietis M.
6-36-3
R32
Norrie C.
Escobedo E.[5]
7-641-0
King E.
Novikov D.[2]
6-46-757-62
Quiroz R.
Klein B.
6-46-2
Sandgren T.
Bester P.
6-46-4
Rola B.[7]
Scholtz N.
6-36-2
Polansky P.[4]
Gomez E.
7-56-4
Torpegaard M.
Meister N.
6-46-3
Austin G.
Joyce M.
6-46-2
Dancevic F.
Clezar G.[8]
6-26-4
Smith J.
Arevalo M.[6]
6-16-1
Hurkacz H.
Glasspool L.
6-47-5
Paul T.
Mcnally J.
6-36-3
Bangoura S.
Krajicek A.[3]
6-26-3
Libietis M.
Wolf J.
6-37-64
Groth S.
Hiltzik J.
6-37-66
Becker B.[1]
Quigley E.
7-56-4
Bambridge L.
Crepaldi E.
6-36-2
Norrie C.
Sarmiento R.
6-47-611
Quigley E.
Hiltzik A.
6-736-36-2
Sandgren T.[6]
Carter A.
6-26-2
Laaksonen H.[3]
Aragone J.
6-36-3
Mcnally J.
Pollanen H.
6-16-3
Kobelt P.
Vorster T.
6-47-5
Krueger M.[5]
Callahan H.
6-46-3
Harrison C.
Krajicek A.[7]
6-27-5
King K.
Joyce M.
7-656-2
Koepfer D.
Giron M.
7-636-4
Kozlov S.[4]
Statham J.
6-27-66
Barry S.[8]
Kirchheimer S.
7-56-4
Nevolo D.
Hiltzik J.
6-766-36-4
Libietis M.
Di Feo H.
5-76-27-63
Fritz T.[1]
Torpegaard M.
7-636-1