Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Tomas Machac — Glasgow CH Round of 64

Glasgow CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 64
Botic Van De Zandschulp
NED
Botic Van De Zandschulp
#55ATP
1743ELO
1711Hard ELO
$690kYTD
$6.6MCAREER
30 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLLLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 16 September 2019
hard
Tomas Machac
CZE
Tomas Machac
#53ATP
1866ELO
1829Hard ELO
$832kYTD
$6.8MCAREER
25 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWLWW
Van De Zandschulp B.
6-4 6-3
Machac T.
Van De Zandschulp B.
662
Machac T.
430

Botic Van De Zandschulp defeated Tomas Machac 6-4 6-3 in the Glasgow CH round of 64 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Tomas Machac came in ranked #53. Botic Van De Zandschulp extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2022-08-29US OpenR128hardBotic Van De Zandschulp3-6 7-6(3) 6-1 3-6 7-5
View full head-to-head →

Serve vs return

This season
Van De Zandschulp B.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Machac T.

Machac T.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Van De Zandschulp B.

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

Serve & return on hard

Van De Zandschulp B.Machac T.
41
Serve
30
43
Return
25

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the hard field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Van De Zandschulp B.Machac T.
1st serve in·Even
62%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
70%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
47%
54%
Service points won·Even
62%
64%
Return points won·Even
38%
38%
Break points saved·Even
60%
62%
Aces / match·Even
5.6
5.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.9
2.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 199). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Van De Zandschulp B.Machac T.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
77
90
Break points saved·Even
98
98
Break points won·Clear edge
68
80
Deciding sets·Clear edge
79
94
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
81
97

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

Freshness

Recent load
Van De Zandschulp B.Machac T.
Freshness·
91
—

Van De Zandschulp B.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Ruusuvuori E.[4]
Muller A.[16]
6-36-1
Semi-finals
Ruusuvuori E.[4]
Rodionov J.[17]
6-16-3
Muller A.[16]
Ramanathan R.[5]
7-51-66-4
Quarter-finals
Ruusuvuori E.[4]
Kamke T.[9]
6-26-1
Rodionov J.[17]
Marcora R.[6]
6-26-2
Ramanathan R.[5]
Masur D.[14]
7-57-64
Muller A.[16]
Kuhn N.[7]
3-67-56-4
R16
Masur D.[14]
Halys Q.[3]
7-657-64
Ramanathan R.[5]
Van De Zandschulp B.
6-46-1
Rodionov J.[17]
Bourgue M.[13]
6-46-746-3
Marcora R.[6]
Durasovic V.
7-656-2
Ruusuvuori E.[4]
Ilkel C.[15]
6-36-2
Kuhn N.[7]
Basic M.[10]
6-36-4
Muller A.[16]
Jaziri M.[1]
6-36-1
Kamke T.[9]
Escoffier A.
6-26-2
R32
Halys Q.[3]
Rinderknech A.
7-660-0
Bourgue M.[13]
Klein L.
7-53-67-62
Jaziri M.[1]
Ocleppo J.
7-606-3
Escoffier A.
Bemelmans R.[8]
6-46-4
Rodionov J.[17]
Blancaneaux G.
2-66-46-4
Durasovic V.
Smith J.[12]
6-16-4
Marcora R.[6]
Johnson L.
7-636-0
Ruusuvuori E.[4]
Mridha J.
7-54-66-3
Ilkel C.[15]
Vanni L.
6-7106-26-0
Kamke T.[9]
Haerteis J.
6-36-4
Ramanathan R.[5]
Celikbilek A.
6-46-2
Van De Zandschulp B.
Ortega Olmedo R.[11]
6-06-0
Masur D.[14]
Furness E.
6-46-3
Kuhn N.[7]
Glasspool L.
3-66-46-3
Basic M.[10]
Drzewiecki K.
6-46-3
Muller A.[16]
Neuchrist M.
4-66-46-1
R64
Escoffier A.
Whitehouse M.
7-56-2
Van De Zandschulp B.
Machac T.
6-46-3
Johnson L.
Verbeek S.
1-66-37-62
Vanni L.
Hassan B.
6-46-1
Durasovic V.
Robert Q.
6-46-2
Haerteis J.
Duncan S.
6-36-3
Celikbilek A.
Draper J.
6-756-46-2
Blancaneaux G.
Heliovaara H.
6-23-66-3
Klein L.
Martineau M.
7-626-2
Mridha J.
Wendelken H.
7-676-3
Furness E.
Bega A.
6-33-66-3
Rinderknech A.
Mchugh A.
7-6106-3
Glasspool L.
Balzerani R.
6-36-2
Drzewiecki K.
Grenier H.
6-35-76-2
Neuchrist M.
Hoyt E.
6-47-61