Yuki Bhambri vs Jose Rubin Statham — Ho Chi Minh City CH Round of 32

Ho Chi Minh City CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
IND4
Yuki Bhambri
34 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 23 October 2017
hard
NZL
Jose Rubin Statham
39 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLLLL
Bhambri Y.
6-1 6-4
Statham J.
Bhambri Y.
662
Statham J.
140

Yuki Bhambri defeated Jose Rubin Statham 6-1 6-4 in the Ho Chi Minh City CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Yuki Bhambri came in leading the head-to-head 3–0. Yuki Bhambri extended the head-to-head to 4–0.

Key context

Head to head

3–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2017-02-03Davis Cup G1 R1: NZL vs INDRRhardYuki Bhambri7-5 3-6 6-4
2015-07-17Davis Cup G1 R2: NZL vs INDRRhardYuki Bhambri6-2 6-1 6-3
2012-09-14Davis Cup G1 PO: IND vs NZLRRhardYuki Bhambri2-6 7-5 7-6(5)

Serve vs return

This season
Bhambri Y.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Statham J.

Statham J.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Bhambri Y.

Serve advantage — Bhambri Y.

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
Bhambri Y.Statham J.
1st serve in·Even
66%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
51%
Service points won·Even
62%
63%
Return points won·Slight edge
41%
36%
Break points saved·Even
60%
59%
Aces / match·Dominant
2.2
5.4
Double faults / match·Even
2.9
2.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (121 vs 181). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Bhambri Y.Statham J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
51
0
Break points saved·Dominant
73
33
Break points won·Dominant
49
2
Deciding sets·Dominant
63
6
Tiebreaks·Dominant
53
22

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

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Youzhny M.[2]
Millman J.[8]
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Millman J.[8]
Soeda G.[5]
7-653-67-5
Youzhny M.[2]
Santillan A.[6]
6-756-46-3
Quarter-finals
Youzhny M.[2]
Jung J.
6-36-2
Santillan A.[6]
Polansky P.[3]
6-33-66-4
Millman J.[8]
Bhambri Y.[4]
3-66-37-62
Soeda G.[5]
Fritz T.[1]
6-37-5
R16
Soeda G.[5]
Safwat M.
6-746-27-65
Youzhny M.[2]
Matosevic M.
6-16-1
Millman J.[8]
Escoffier A.
6-16-4
Bhambri Y.[4]
Chen T.
6-36-1
Fritz T.[1]
Gunneswaran P.
6-36-3
Jung J.
Grenier H.
7-656-3
Santillan A.[6]
Watanuki Y.
6-36-0
Polansky P.[3]
Robert S.
7-56-786-4
R32
Youzhny M.[2]
Nagal S.
6-16-756-4
Matosevic M.
Trinh L.
4-66-06-2
Polansky P.[3]
Bega A.
6-44-67-5
Robert S.
Pham M.
7-56-3
Watanuki Y.
Khabibulin T.
6-46-2
Santillan A.[6]
Myneni S.
6-46-2
Millman J.[8]
Purcell M.
6-16-3
Bhambri Y.[4]
Statham J.
6-16-4
Soeda G.[5]
Ly N.
6-46-1
Safwat M.
Paul J.
7-52-66-3
Gunneswaran P.
Polmans M.
6-46-2
Fritz T.[1]
Sundar Prashanth N.
6-26-4
Chen T.
Ursu V.
6-12-66-2
Grenier H.
Popko D.[7]
7-666-2
Jung J.
Mladenov V.
6-36-3
Escoffier A.
Baltensperger R.
3-66-17-5