Holger Rune vs Tim Van Rijthoven — Oeiras 4 CH Round of 32

Oeiras 4 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Holger Rune
DEN
Holger Rune
#81ATP
1757ELO
1729Clay ELO
$0YTD
$16MCAREER
23 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLWWWLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 24 May 2021
clay
NED
Tim Van Rijthoven
29 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLLLL
Rune H.
6-3 6-4
Van Rijthoven T.
Rune H.
662
Van Rijthoven T.
340

Holger Rune defeated Tim Van Rijthoven 6-3 6-4 in the Oeiras 4 CH round of 32 on clay. The result followed the form book — Holger Rune came in leading the head-to-head 1–0. Holger Rune extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

  • Match story: Holger Rune closed it out in two sets, 6–3 6–4.

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2022-09-26SofiaR32hardHolger Rune7-6(2) 7-6(6)

Serve vs return

This season
Rune H.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Van Rijthoven T.

Van Rijthoven T.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Rune H.

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
Rune H.Van Rijthoven T.
1st serve in·Even
62%
65%
1st serve points won·Even
73%
77%
2nd serve points won·Even
54%
54%
Service points won·Even
66%
69%
Return points won·Even
36%
34%
Break points saved·Even
65%
65%
Aces / match·Dominant
5.8
10.6
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.2
2.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 119). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Rune H.Van Rijthoven T.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
91
26
Break points saved·Slight edge
99
90
Break points won·Dominant
84
1
Deciding sets·Dominant
98
19
Tiebreaks·Dominant
99
61

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Rune H.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Van Rijthoven T.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
4.9
Surface form
5.2
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
5.5
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
8.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Elias G.
Rune H.
5-76-46-4
Semi-finals
Rune H.
Skatov T.
6-23-66-2
Elias G.
Borges N.
4-67-50-0
Quarter-finals
Skatov T.
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
7-645-76-1
Rune H.
Gimeno Valero C.[6]
6-26-4
Borges N.
Jianu F.
6-46-4
Elias G.
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-706-36-0
R16
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
Wu T.[2]
6-27-62
Skatov T.
Oliveira G.
6-36-1
Gimeno Valero C.[6]
Galovic V.
6-46-2
Borges N.
Yevseyev D.
6-726-46-2
Ugo Carabelli C.
Bonadio R.[8]
4-67-56-4
Elias G.
Araujo P.
7-56-0
Jianu F.
Tseng C.[4]
6-33-66-1
Rune H.
Lenz J.[3]
5-76-46-3
R32
Wu T.[2]
Cacao T.
6-16-1
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
Blancaneaux G.
6-36-2
Skatov T.
Sijsling I.
2-66-27-64
Oliveira G.
Cachin P.[7]
6-45-77-61
Lenz J.[3]
Denolly C.
6-46-0
Rune H.
Van Rijthoven T.
6-36-4
Gimeno Valero C.[6]
Sachko V.
6-26-1
Borges N.
Quiroz R.[5]
6-36-0
Yevseyev D.
Serdarusic N.
6-47-5
Jianu F.
Haerteis J.
6-36-0
Tseng C.[4]
Ortega Olmedo R.
6-46-2
Bonadio R.[8]
Forejtek J.
7-643-66-0
Ugo Carabelli C.
De Jong J.
6-46-2
Araujo P.
Bourgue M.[1]
6-26-2
Galovic V.
Ajdukovic D.
4-67-646-1
Elias G.
Faria L.
6-26-3