Ulises Blanch vs Emilio Nava — Tiburon CH Round of 64

Tiburon CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 64
USA
Ulises Blanch
#1661ATP
28 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLWWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 23 September 2019
hard
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1621Hard ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
Blanch U.
6-2 6-3
Nava E.
Blanch U.
662
Nava E.
230

Ulises Blanch defeated Emilio Nava 6-2 6-3 in the Tiburon CH round of 64 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Emilio Nava came in ranked #91.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Blanch U.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Nava E.

Nava E.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Blanch U.

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

Serve & return on hard

Blanch U.Nava E.
—
Serve
40
—
Return
16

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

Statistics

This season
Blanch U.Nava E.
1st serve in·Slight edge
58%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
74%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
50%
Service points won·Even
64%
64%
Return points won·Even
35%
37%
Break points saved·Even
63%
64%
Aces / match·Slight edge
7.0
7.7
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.6
3.0

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Blanch U.Nava E.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
19
52
Break points saved·Slight edge
83
94
Break points won·Clear edge
2
17
Deciding sets·Dominant
19
89
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
37
23

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

Freshness

Recent load
Blanch U.Nava E.
Freshness·
—
100

Nava E.: 15 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Paul T.[1]
Kokkinakis T.[8]
7-56-736-4
Semi-finals
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Kwiatkowski T.[14]
2-66-26-1
Paul T.[1]
Gomez E.[4]
6-17-65
Quarter-finals
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Cressy M.[16]
6-46-2
Kwiatkowski T.[14]
Nakashima B.
7-51-67-66
Gomez E.[4]
Bangoura S.
6-31-66-2
Paul T.[1]
Escobar G.
6-41-67-62
R16
Cressy M.[16]
Quiroz R.
5-76-26-3
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Couacaud E.[9]
7-56-1
Kwiatkowski T.[14]
Giron M.[3]
4-67-636-4
Nakashima B.
Eubanks C.[10]
7-657-5
Bangoura S.
King D.[7]
1-66-46-0
Gomez E.[4]
Escobedo E.[15]
7-642-66-2
Escobar G.
Torpegaard M.[5]
6-47-69
Paul T.[1]
Gaston H.
7-686-1
R32
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Leshem E.
6-46-0
Escobedo E.[15]
Young D.
6-14-2
Escobar G.
Krueger M.[11]
7-676-3
Quiroz R.
Kudla D.[2]
6-36-2
Cressy M.[16]
Wolf J.
6-16-4
Giron M.[3]
Redlicki M.
6-47-5
Eubanks C.[10]
Arevalo M.
6-46-4
Nakashima B.
Mmoh M.[6]
5-76-36-4
King D.[7]
Blanch U.
2-67-627-5
Bangoura S.
Polansky P.[12]
6-16-4
Gomez E.[4]
Pervolarakis M.
5-76-06-4
Torpegaard M.[5]
Peniston R.
4-66-46-3
Gaston H.
Galan D.[13]
3-66-36-4
Paul T.[1]
Holt B.
5-76-36-2
Kwiatkowski T.[14]
Gomez Herrera C.
6-46-4
Couacaud E.[9]
Aragone J.
6-36-1
R64
Pervolarakis M.
Sinclair C.
6-37-60
Gomez Herrera C.
Fanselow S.
6-44-66-2
Aragone J.
Altamirano C.
6-27-63
Quiroz R.
Styler O.
3-66-46-4
Wolf J.
Sarkissian A.
6-737-636-4
Leshem E.
Crawford O.
6-736-46-4
Redlicki M.
Peliwo F.
6-35-76-3
Arevalo M.
Zhu E.
6-36-4
Blanch U.
Nava E.
6-26-3
Bangoura S.
Geerts M.
6-47-5
Young D.
Shane R.
6-16-1
Peniston R.
Ritschard A.
6-06-4
Escobar G.
Smith R.
6-23-66-2
Gaston H.
Song E.
3-66-46-4
Holt B.
Sarmiento R.
6-46-766-3
Nakashima B.
Redlicki M.
6-36-3