Lukas Rosol vs Tatsuma Ito — Nottingham CH Round of 16

Nottingham CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
CZE16
Lukas Rosol
40 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLLLLLLLL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 10 June 2019
grass
JPN
Tatsuma Ito
38 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLLWLW
Rosol L.
6-4 6-7 6-3
Ito T.
Rosol L.
66062
Ito T.
47731

Lukas Rosol defeated Tatsuma Ito 6-4 6-7 6-3 in the Nottingham CH round of 16 on grass. The upset overturned the form book — Tatsuma Ito came in leading the head-to-head 1–0, defending last year's round of 16. Lukas Rosol claimed a first win over Tatsuma Ito in two meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 1–1.

Key context

  • Match story: Lukas Rosol closed it out in three sets, 6–4 6–7 6–3.

Head to head

0–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2016-06-13HalleQ1grassTatsuma Ito7-6(1) 6-3

Serve vs return

This season
Rosol L.serving84% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Ito T.

Ito T.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Rosol L.

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
Rosol L.Ito T.
1st serve in·Even
62%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
49%
Service points won·Even
62%
61%
Return points won·Even
36%
38%
Break points saved·Even
60%
58%
Aces / match·Slight edge
4.6
3.8
Double faults / match·Even
3.3
3.4

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 130). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Rosol L.Ito T.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
51
24
Break points saved·Dominant
89
61
Break points won·Slight edge
3
9
Deciding sets·Dominant
77
43
Tiebreaks·Dominant
73
48

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

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Evans D.[1]
Donskoy E.[13]
7-636-3
Semi-finals
Donskoy E.[13]
Hoang A.[14]
6-36-2
Evans D.[1]
Soeda G.
6-46-2
Quarter-finals
Soeda G.
Rosol L.[16]
6-46-4
Evans D.[1]
Koepfer D.
7-666-766-4
Hoang A.[14]
Bemelmans R.
6-36-4
Donskoy E.[13]
Novak D.[5]
6-7157-57-66
R16
Koepfer D.
Ofner S.[10]
6-22-0
Evans D.[1]
Ymer M.[15]
6-22-67-5
Rosol L.[16]
Ito T.
6-46-706-3
Hoang A.[14]
Peniston R.
7-636-2
Bemelmans R.
Maden Y.[6]
4-66-36-4
Donskoy E.[13]
Karlovic I.[3]
6-36-777-66
Novak D.[5]
Kwon S.[9]
7-646-3
Soeda G.
Duckworth J.
7-646-2
R32
Peniston R.
Tomic B.[2]
7-621-0
Donskoy E.[13]
Escobedo E.
7-56-4
Hoang A.[14]
Kamke T.
5-76-46-2
Karlovic I.[3]
Napolitano S.
7-644-66-3
Koepfer D.
Majchrzak K.[7]
6-36-4
Rosol L.[16]
Smith J.
6-16-746-3
Maden Y.[6]
Sugita Y.
6-16-3
Bemelmans R.
Ramanathan R.[11]
6-16-0
Kwon S.[9]
Basic M.
7-646-4
Novak D.[5]
Jubb P.
7-57-5
Duckworth J.
Polansky P.[8]
6-747-646-3
Soeda G.
Otte O.[12]
6-26-3
Ito T.
Granollers M.[4]
6-37-5
Ofner S.[10]
Myneni S.
6-47-5
Ymer M.[15]
Eubanks C.
6-43-66-2
Evans D.[1]
Draper J.
7-56-3
R64
Duckworth J.
Clarke J.
6-42-0
Koepfer D.
Troicki V.
6-40-0
Bemelmans R.
Harris A.
6-36-2
Smith J.
Couacaud E.
6-46-2
Ito T.
Kubler J.
6-46-4
Peniston R.
Klein B.
4-66-46-4
Kamke T.
Broady L.
6-47-5
Sugita Y.
Zhang Z.
6-33-66-3
Napolitano S.
Ward J.
7-57-61
Escobedo E.
Aragone J.
6-766-47-67
Basic M.
Hoyt E.
6-47-65
Jubb P.
Zopp J.
6-776-46-4
Soeda G.
Ilkel C.
6-26-0
Myneni S.
Moraing M.
7-626-3
Eubanks C.
Watanuki Y.
6-17-63
Draper J.
Chung Y.
5-76-06-2