Marius Copil vs James Ward — Nottingham 1 CH Qualifying Round 1

Nottingham 1 CH · CHALLENGER · Qualifying Round 1
ROU5
Marius Copil
35 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLLLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 7 June 2021
grass
GBR
James Ward
39 yrs · 190 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLLLWW
Copil M.
6-3 7-6
Ward J.
Copil M.
67112
Ward J.
3690

Marius Copil defeated James Ward 6-3 7-6 in the Nottingham 1 CH qualifying round 1 on grass. Marius Copil extended the head-to-head to 2–1.

Key context

  • Match story: Marius Copil closed it out in two sets, 6–3 7–6.

Head to head

1–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2015-02-23DubaiQ2hardJames Ward6-7(3) 6-4 6-4
2013-12-29BrisbaneQ2hardMarius Copil4-6 6-4 6-3

Serve vs return

This season
Copil M.serving94% hold

wins 74% of points on serve vs Ward J.

Ward J.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Copil M.

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
Copil M.Ward J.
1st serve in·Even
59%
63%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
75%
70%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
52%
43%
Service points won·Slight edge
66%
60%
Return points won·Even
35%
33%
Break points saved·Slight edge
62%
53%
Aces / match·Clear edge
8.3
6.4
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.0
4.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (154 vs 7). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Copil M.Ward J.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
47
29
Break points saved·Slight edge
91
86
Break points won·Even
3
6
Deciding sets·Dominant
63
36
Tiebreaks·Dominant
79
40

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Copil M.
4.9
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Ward J.
4.8
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 56 days (−0.7)
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
4.6
Surface form
5.2
0.0Lost last 3
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
8.4
Minutes 14d
7.0
3-set count
6.0
Prev. match
3.0
Surface transition
7.0
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Q2
Vukic A.[3]
Sijsling I.
6-47-65
Ebden M.[6]
Troicki V.[2]
6-34-66-2
Gojo B.[7]
Bemelmans R.[1]
6-36-3
Copil M.[5]
Ramanathan R.[4]
6-26-4
Q1
Sijsling I.
Viola M.[8]
6-736-16-0
Bemelmans R.[1]
Smith J.
7-646-3
Ramanathan R.[4]
Matusevich A.
2-67-617-65
Vukic A.[3]
Purcell M.
6-14-1
Ebden M.[6]
Fery A.
6-36-4
Gojo B.[7]
Lammons N.
7-626-796-4
Copil M.[5]
Ward J.
6-37-69
Troicki V.[2]
Gray A.
7-636-1