Lukas Rosol vs Maxime Cressy — Nottingham 1 CH Round of 32

Nottingham 1 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
CZE
Lukas Rosol
40 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLLLLLLLL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 7 June 2021
grass
USA
Maxime Cressy
#1472ATP
29 yrs · 201 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLLLL
Rosol L.
6-4 6-7 6-3
Cressy M.
Rosol L.
66562
Cressy M.
47731

Lukas Rosol defeated Maxime Cressy 6-4 6-7 6-3 in the Nottingham 1 CH round of 32 on grass.

Key context

  • Match story: Lukas Rosol closed it out in three sets, 6–4 6–7 6–3.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Rosol L.serving91% hold

wins 71% of points on serve vs Cressy M.

Cressy M.serving93% hold

wins 73% of points on serve vs Rosol L.

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
Rosol L.Cressy M.
1st serve in·Even
61%
61%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
70%
79%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
51%
Service points won·Slight edge
62%
68%
Return points won·Even
37%
33%
Break points saved·Slight edge
60%
65%
Aces / match·Dominant
4.6
13.2
Double faults / match·Dominant
3.3
8.6

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (113 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Rosol L.Cressy M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
51
24
Break points saved·Slight edge
89
96
Break points won·Even
3
2
Deciding sets·Dominant
78
32
Tiebreaks·Dominant
72
8

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Rosol L.
5.0
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Cressy M.
4.9
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
7.1
Surface form
0.0Lost last 3
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
9.1
Minutes 14d
8.8
7.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
8.0
3.0
Surface transition
3.0
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
Final
Tiafoe F.[2]
Kudla D.[6]
6-16-3
Semi-finals
Tiafoe F.[2]
Copil M.
6-36-2
Kudla D.[6]
Majchrzak K.[8]
6-41-67-66
Quarter-finals
Tiafoe F.[2]
Donskoy E.
7-642-66-3
Majchrzak K.[8]
Seppi A.[3]
4-66-26-3
Kudla D.[6]
Evans D.[1]
6-41-66-4
Copil M.
Anderson K.[4]
7-647-69
R16
Tiafoe F.[2]
Marchenko I.
7-57-65
Copil M.
Ofner S.
6-46-4
Majchrzak K.[8]
Vukic A.
5-77-6106-4
Seppi A.[3]
Hoang A.
6-46-746-2
Kudla D.[6]
Broady L.
3-66-37-62
Anderson K.[4]
Rosol L.
6-36-4
Donskoy E.
Nakashima B.
7-637-62
Evans D.[1]
Ebden M.
7-667-64
R32
Majchrzak K.[8]
Gunneswaran P.
6-00-0
Donskoy E.
Mcdonald M.[5]
6-37-5
Anderson K.[4]
Clarke J.
6-37-60
Rosol L.
Cressy M.
6-46-756-3
Ofner S.
Gojo B.
6-36-7107-66
Copil M.
Dzumhur D.[7]
6-44-66-1
Kudla D.[6]
Machac T.
6-34-66-4
Ebden M.
Peniston R.
6-46-4
Evans D.[1]
Kokkinakis T.
4-67-617-65
Broady L.
Bolt A.
7-53-66-3
Tiafoe F.[2]
Huesler M.
6-36-4
Marchenko I.
Gaio F.
6-26-3
Nakashima B.
Vilella Martinez M.
6-36-2
Hoang A.
Fabbiano T.
7-657-63
Vukic A.
Polmans M.
7-6104-66-3
Seppi A.[3]
Zhang Z.
7-646-2