Cem Ilkel vs Maxime Janvier — Granby CH Round of 32

Granby CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Cem Ilkel
TUR
Cem Ilkel
#1462ATP
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 22 July 2019
hard
Maxime Janvier
FRA5
Maxime Janvier
#566ATP
1297ELO
1282Hard ELO
29 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLWLW
Ilkel C.
7-5 6-3
Janvier M.
Ilkel C.
762
Janvier M.
530

Cem Ilkel defeated Maxime Janvier 7-5 6-3 in the Granby CH round of 32 on hard. Cem Ilkel extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

  • Match story: Cem Ilkel closed it out in two sets, 7–5 6–3.

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2021-10-04Indian Wells MastersQ1hardCem Ilkel6-2 6-7(4) 7-6(4)

Serve vs return

This season
Ilkel C.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Janvier M.

Janvier M.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Ilkel C.

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
Ilkel C.Janvier M.
1st serve in·Even
58%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
47%
Service points won·Even
62%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
36%
Break points saved·Even
57%
59%
Aces / match·Slight edge
4.7
5.9
Double faults / match·Dominant
2.5
5.5

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Ilkel C.Janvier M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
32
5
Break points saved·Clear edge
49
71
Break points won·Even
3
1
Deciding sets·Dominant
70
7
Tiebreaks·Dominant
66
10

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

Freshness

Recent load
Ilkel C.Janvier M.
Freshness·
—
83

Janvier M.: 2 days rest · 1 match, 18 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Escobedo E.
Uchiyama Y.[3]
7-656-4
Semi-finals
Uchiyama Y.[3]
Polansky P.[2]
7-676-4
Escobedo E.
Gojo B.
6-737-636-2
Quarter-finals
Polansky P.[2]
Diez S.[9]
6-37-64
Uchiyama Y.[3]
Li Z.[10]
6-736-46-1
Escobedo E.
Couacaud E.[6]
7-57-5
Gojo B.
Moriya H.[13]
7-626-4
R16
Diez S.[9]
Harris A.[7]
6-46-2
Li Z.[10]
Ilkel C.
4-67-637-5
Escobedo E.
Pospisil V.[4]
4-66-26-3
Gojo B.
Neuchrist M.
6-33-0
Polansky P.[2]
Galarneau A.
7-56-2
Moriya H.[13]
Gombos N.[1]
6-37-65
Couacaud E.[6]
Sakharov G.
6-16-4
Uchiyama Y.[3]
Petrovic D.[16]
6-46-4
R32
Uchiyama Y.[3]
Sanchez M.
6-44-1
Couacaud E.[6]
Zhu E.
6-43-66-3
Li Z.[10]
Garanganga T.
7-637-66
Gombos N.[1]
Mansouri S.
6-47-5
Galarneau A.
Banes M.[15]
6-36-2
Diez S.[9]
Holt B.
6-26-4
Petrovic D.[16]
Sarkissian A.
7-656-4
Ilkel C.
Janvier M.[5]
7-56-3
Sakharov G.
Watanuki Y.[11]
6-47-5
Escobedo E.
Uchida K.[14]
7-56-3
Pospisil V.[4]
Peck J.
6-36-3
Gojo B.
Goransson A.
6-46-3
Neuchrist M.
Santillan A.[12]
6-06-756-4
Polansky P.[2]
Arconada J.
6-14-66-2
Moriya H.[13]
Sigouin B.
6-36-756-3
Harris A.[7]
Mertens Y.
6-16-1
R64
Peck J.
Simon T.
6-46-4
Ilkel C.
Grills J.
6-16-0
Sarkissian A.
Muamba N.
7-56-2
Arconada J.
Klein B.
7-687-5
Galarneau A.
Reese H.
6-27-62
Holt B.
Draxl L.
6-46-4
Sanchez M.
Krainik P.
3-67-666-0
Zhu E.
Nys H.
6-45-76-3
Sakharov G.
Lebedev A.
6-31-66-0
Escobedo E.
Verbeek S.
6-33-66-2
Gojo B.
Boulais J.
6-26-2
Neuchrist M.
Novikov D.
6-47-64
Sigouin B.
Baadi T.
6-706-46-2
Mansouri S.
Hoyt E.
6-43-67-65
Garanganga T.
Okamura I.
6-46-4
Mertens Y.
Ghasemi K.
6-26-0