Sumit Nagal vs Filip Horansky — Banja Luka CH Semi-final

Banja Luka CH · CHALLENGER · Semi-final
Sumit Nagal
IND6
Sumit Nagal
#241ATP
1543ELO
1538Clay ELO
28 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WLWWWWWLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 9 September 2019
clay
SVK5
Filip Horansky
33 yrs · 175 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLLLW
Nagal S.
7-6 6-2
Horansky F.
Nagal S.
7762
Horansky F.
6120

Sumit Nagal defeated Filip Horansky 7-6 6-2 in the Banja Luka CH semi-final on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Filip Horansky came in defending last year's round of 32.

Key context

  • Match story: Sumit Nagal closed it out in two sets, 7–6 6–2.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nagal S.serving66% hold

wins 56% of points on serve vs Horansky F.

Horansky F.serving59% hold

wins 53% of points on serve vs Nagal S.

Baseline battle — serve is shaky, expect plenty of breaks

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
Nagal S.Horansky F.
1st serve in·Slight edge
70%
64%
1st serve points won·Even
64%
65%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
47%
Service points won·Even
60%
59%
Return points won·Even
42%
40%
Break points saved·Even
58%
56%
Aces / match·Slight edge
1.5
2.9
Double faults / match·Clear edge
1.8
3.1

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Nagal S.Horansky F.
Clutch Rating·Even
33
29
Break points saved·Dominant
69
34
Break points won·Even
35
33
Deciding sets·Dominant
16
54
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
84
64

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

Freshness

Recent load
Nagal S.Horansky F.
Freshness·
96
—

Nagal S.: 8 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Griekspoor T.[7]
Nagal S.[6]
6-26-3
Semi-finals
Griekspoor T.[7]
Krstin P.[10]
6-44-67-5
Nagal S.[6]
Horansky F.[5]
7-616-2
Quarter-finals
Horansky F.[5]
Tabilo A.[14]
6-25-76-1
Nagal S.[6]
Coria F.[4]
6-27-5
Krstin P.[10]
Popko D.[13]
6-46-4
Griekspoor T.[7]
Mena F.[16]
6-787-56-1
R16
Mena F.[16]
Moroni G.
6-46-3
Krstin P.[10]
Berlocq C.[8]
6-26-4
Tabilo A.[14]
Kolar Z.
6-05-76-1
Horansky F.[5]
Collarini A.[11]
3-66-36-3
Coria F.[4]
Kalenichenko D.
7-616-0
Nagal S.[6]
Pecotic M.
6-16-1
Popko D.[13]
Miladinovic M.
7-653-66-2
Griekspoor T.[7]
Clezar G.
6-46-3
R32
Collarini A.[11]
Denolly C.
5-0
Horansky F.[5]
Crepatte B.
6-16-2
Kalenichenko D.
Petrovic D.[15]
3-67-57-64
Berlocq C.[8]
Arnaboldi A.
7-617-65
Tabilo A.[14]
Sabanov M.
6-26-0
Kolar Z.
Baldi F.[2]
6-46-2
Pecotic M.
Oconnell C.[12]
6-35-77-63
Nagal S.[6]
Nedelko I.
6-37-63
Popko D.[13]
Olivieri G.
6-26-1
Miladinovic M.
Milojevic N.[3]
6-26-2
Griekspoor T.[7]
Reboul F.
7-54-66-3
Clezar G.
Dutra Silva R.[9]
6-36-1
Mena F.[16]
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-46-3
Moroni G.
Haase R.[1]
6-16-4
Coria F.[4]
Safranek V.
3-66-16-1
Krstin P.[10]
Balzerani R.
6-26-4
R64
Ugo Carabelli C.
Erler A.
6-43-66-3
Nedelko I.
Zukas M.
6-17-5
Crepatte B.
Zekic M.
4-61-1
Sabanov M.
Serdarusic N.
6-14-66-2
Denolly C.
Shimizu Y.
6-42-66-4
Safranek V.
Ficovich J.
6-31-66-3
Kalenichenko D.
Berrettini J.
6-36-1
Arnaboldi A.
Gerch L.
6-37-5
Balzerani R.
Geerts M.
7-656-1
Olivieri G.
Doumbia S.
1-67-56-4
Miladinovic M.
Etcheverry T.
6-25-77-65
Clezar G.
Sels J.
6-26-3
Moroni G.
Malesevic N.
6-36-0
Pecotic M.
Radanovic G.
6-06-3
Reboul F.
Pla Malfeito J.
7-626-3