Tatsuma Ito vs Elias Ymer — Dallas CH Quarter-final

Dallas CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
JPN
Tatsuma Ito
38 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 30 January 2017
hard
Elias Ymer
SWE
Elias Ymer
#183ATP
1548ELO
1527Hard ELO
$191kYTD
$2.4MCAREER
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWWLWWW
Ito T.
6-4 6-4
Ymer E.
Ito T.
662
Ymer E.
440

Tatsuma Ito defeated Elias Ymer 6-4 6-4 in the Dallas CH quarter-final on hard. The result followed the form book — Tatsuma Ito came in leading the head-to-head 1–0, defending last year's semi-final. Tatsuma Ito extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

  • Match story: Tatsuma Ito edged a tight contest from start to finish — 6–4 6–4.

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2021-06-28WimbledonQ1grassTatsuma Ito6-3 6-4

Serve vs return

This season
Ito T.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Ymer E.

Ymer E.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Ito T.

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
Ito T.Ymer E.
1st serve in·Even
62%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
69%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
48%
Service points won·Even
62%
61%
Return points won·Even
38%
38%
Break points saved·Even
59%
58%
Aces / match·Slight edge
3.8
4.7
Double faults / match·Even
3.0
3.1

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Ito T.Ymer E.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
24
48
Break points saved·Clear edge
61
83
Break points won·Clear edge
9
23
Deciding sets·Dominant
43
78
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
48
35

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

Freshness

Recent load
Ito T.Ymer E.
Freshness·
—
100

Ymer E.: 20 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Harrison R.[1]
Fritz T.[2]
6-36-3
Semi-finals
Fritz T.[2]
Kudla D.[6]
6-42-67-62
Harrison R.[1]
Ito T.
6-36-0
Quarter-finals
Fritz T.[2]
Ram R.[7]
6-36-2
Ito T.
Ymer E.
6-46-4
Harrison R.[1]
Trungelliti M.
6-46-1
Kudla D.[6]
Tiafoe F.[4]
7-657-61
R16
Tiafoe F.[4]
Wu D.
6-27-65
Kudla D.[6]
Krajicek A.
7-646-3
Ymer E.
Bangoura S.
6-37-5
Ito T.
Kukushkin M.[3]
4-67-637-66
Trungelliti M.
Sarmiento R.
7-666-1
Harrison R.[1]
Mcdonald M.
6-27-610
Ram R.[7]
Opelka R.
7-647-61
Fritz T.[2]
Giron M.
7-54-66-3
R32
Fritz T.[2]
Zhang Z.
6-46-3
Giron M.
Baker B.
7-656-4
Opelka R.
Caruso S.
6-16-3
Ram R.[7]
Coppejans K.
6-32-66-2
Tiafoe F.[4]
Harrison C.
6-26-1
Wu D.
Sandgren T.
7-656-3
Krajicek A.
Milojevic N.
6-16-3
Kudla D.[6]
Mcgee J.
6-34-66-1
Ymer E.
Smyczek T.[8]
7-666-3
Sarmiento R.
Becker B.[5]
7-57-5
Trungelliti M.
Wood C.
6-27-64
Mcdonald M.
Li Z.
6-46-3
Harrison R.[1]
Quigley E.
6-36-4
Bangoura S.
Molchanov D.
5-76-37-5
Ito T.
Gomez Gb42 A.
6-46-4
Kukushkin M.[3]
Novikov D.
6-46-2