Emilio Gomez vs Nicola Kuhn — Porto CH Round of 32

Porto CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
ECU3
Emilio Gomez
34 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLWLLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 28 June 2021
hard
GER
Nicola Kuhn
#1540ATP
26 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLLWWW
Gomez E.
7-5 6-2
Kuhn N.
Gomez E.
762
Kuhn N.
520

Emilio Gomez defeated Nicola Kuhn 7-5 6-2 in the Porto CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Emilio Gomez came in leading the head-to-head 1–0. Emilio Gomez extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

  • Match story: Emilio Gomez closed it out in two sets, 7–5 6–2.

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2022-01-17Australian OpenQ1hardEmilio Gomez6-4 6-4

Serve vs return

This season
Gomez E.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Kuhn N.

Kuhn N.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Gomez E.

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

Statistics

This season
Gomez E.Kuhn N.
1st serve in·Even
60%
59%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
67%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
53%
Service points won·Even
61%
61%
Return points won·Even
39%
38%
Break points saved·Even
60%
59%
Aces / match·Even
3.4
3.5
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.1
2.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (195 vs 98). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Gomez E.Kuhn N.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
32
14
Break points saved·Clear edge
77
56
Break points won·Even
19
17
Deciding sets·Clear edge
23
10
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
79
57

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gomez E.
6.7
Slight advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Kuhn N.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
7.6
Surface form
3.6
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
6.0
3-set count
7.0
6.0
Prev. match
8.0
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
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Celikbilek A.
Halys Q.
6-26-1
Semi-finals
Halys Q.
Gomez E.[3]
6-46-4
Celikbilek A.
Stakhovsky S.
6-26-1
Quarter-finals
Halys Q.
Diez S.
6-36-0
Gomez E.[3]
Elias G.
6-37-64
Celikbilek A.
Ito T.
7-56-3
Stakhovsky S.
Oliveira G.
7-627-65
R16
Stakhovsky S.
Viola M.
6-24-67-5
Diez S.
Gunneswaran P.[2]
6-31-66-4
Halys Q.
Kokkinakis T.[7]
7-656-4
Gomez E.[3]
Blancaneaux G.
6-16-776-1
Elias G.
Istomin D.[8]
7-56-4
Oliveira G.
Polansky P.
7-636-4
Celikbilek A.
Seyboth Wild T.[1]
7-656-3
Ito T.
Ferreira Silva F.[5]
6-41-0
R32
Viola M.
Cid R.
6-14-1
Ito T.
Faria L.
6-06-2
Seyboth Wild T.[1]
Olivo R.
6-46-2
Gunneswaran P.[2]
Bourgue M.
6-23-66-1
Diez S.
Janvier M.
7-52-67-65
Kokkinakis T.[7]
Marcora R.
7-636-1
Gomez E.[3]
Kuhn N.
7-56-2
Blancaneaux G.
Domingues J.
6-756-26-4
Elias G.
Verbeek S.
6-776-46-1
Istomin D.[8]
Andreozzi G.
6-46-3
Stakhovsky S.
Soeda G.[6]
2-66-27-65
Oliveira G.
Borges N.
6-16-2
Polansky P.
Tabilo A.[4]
1-66-16-2
Celikbilek A.
Watanuki Y.
6-36-756-3
Ferreira Silva F.[5]
Giustino L.
6-44-66-3
Halys Q.
Blanch U.
6-33-66-1