Jason Jung vs Uladzimir Ignatik — Anning CH Round of 32

Anning CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Jason Jung
TPE4
Jason Jung
#1095ATP
1420ELO
1359Clay ELO
37 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWLLLLLL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 15 April 2019
clay
BLR
Uladzimir Ignatik
#1413ATP
35 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWLLWWW
Jung J.
6-3 5-7 7-5
Ignatik U.
Jung J.
6572
Ignatik U.
3751

Jason Jung defeated Uladzimir Ignatik 6-3 5-7 7-5 in the Anning CH round of 32 on clay. Jason Jung claimed a first win over Uladzimir Ignatik in two meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 1–1.

Key context

  • Match story: Jason Jung closed it out in three sets, 6–3 5–7 7–5.

Head to head

0–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2015-08-31US OpenQ1hardUladzimir Ignatik6-1 7-5

Serve vs return

This season
Jung J.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Ignatik U.

Ignatik U.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Jung J.

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
Jung J.Ignatik U.
1st serve in·Even
64%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
67%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
49%
Service points won·Even
61%
64%
Return points won·Even
39%
37%
Break points saved·Even
57%
61%
Aces / match·Dominant
2.8
6.2
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.7
1.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 87). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Jung J.Ignatik U.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
21
0
Break points saved·Slight edge
64
53
Break points won·Even
8
6
Deciding sets·Clear edge
21
2
Tiebreaks·Dominant
69
6

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

Freshness

Recent load
Jung J.Ignatik U.
Freshness·
61
—

Jung J.: 1 day rest · 4 matches, 93 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Clarke J.[14]
Gunneswaran P.[2]
6-46-3
Semi-finals
Gunneswaran P.[2]
Majchrzak K.[3]
7-656-736-4
Clarke J.[14]
Oliveira G.
6-36-2
Quarter-finals
Majchrzak K.[3]
Ramanathan R.[5]
6-17-64
Gunneswaran P.[2]
Milojevic N.[10]
7-56-3
Oliveira G.
Bolt A.[6]
6-756-46-3
Clarke J.[14]
Duckworth J.[9]
7-53-66-1
R16
Bolt A.[6]
Lopez Perez E.[11]
6-36-4
Gunneswaran P.[2]
Pavlasek A.[15]
7-56-3
Milojevic N.[10]
Martin A.
6-16-706-1
Oliveira G.
Jung J.[4]
6-37-61
Clarke J.[14]
Thompson J.[1]
7-52-66-2
Majchrzak K.[3]
Janvier M.[13]
6-36-4
Ramanathan R.[5]
Zhang Z.
6-33-66-3
Duckworth J.[9]
Kubler J.[8]
7-57-65
R32
Pavlasek A.[15]
Chung Y.
7-623-1
Majchrzak K.[3]
Banes M.
6-46-1
Kubler J.[8]
Ochi M.
6-26-1
Clarke J.[14]
Viola M.
6-46-3
Gunneswaran P.[2]
Myneni S.
6-26-4
Milojevic N.[10]
Li Z.
6-46-3
Janvier M.[13]
Yang T.
6-757-57-62
Zhang Z.
Nedovyesov A.[12]
7-612-66-2
Ramanathan R.[5]
Bai Y.
6-46-4
Bolt A.[6]
Uchiyama Y.
2-67-626-4
Lopez Perez E.[11]
Saville L.
6-36-4
Oliveira G.
Zhang Z.[16]
7-686-3
Jung J.[4]
Ignatik U.
6-35-77-5
Duckworth J.[9]
Grills J.
6-36-4
Thompson J.[1]
Purcell M.
6-36-4
Martin A.
Novak D.[7]
6-16-1
R64
Purcell M.
Wu D.
6-44-66-2
Oliveira G.
Xia Z.
6-26-0
Banes M.
Patael B.
4-66-37-65
Chung Y.
Liu H.
6-16-3
Myneni S.
Safranek V.
6-26-4
Yang T.
Uchida K.
6-736-36-1
Uchiyama Y.
Lamasine T.
6-45-77-5
Saville L.
Harris A.
3-66-46-4
Ignatik U.
Barrientos N.
6-26-2
Ochi M.
Li Y.
6-27-66
Grills J.
He Y.
6-16-4
Viola M.
Gao X.
6-36-1
Li Z.
Wu T.
6-27-65
Martin A.
Sun F.
6-36-1
Zhang Z.
Santillan A.
5-77-656-0
Bai Y.
Mukund S.
6-16-4