Sergiy Stakhovsky vs Matteo Viola — Porto CH Round of 16

Porto CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
UKR
Sergiy Stakhovsky
40 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWWWLLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 28 June 2021
hard
ITA
Matteo Viola
39 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLLLL
Stakhovsky S.
6-2 4-6 7-5
Viola M.
Stakhovsky S.
6472
Viola M.
2651

Sergiy Stakhovsky defeated Matteo Viola 6-2 4-6 7-5 in the Porto CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Stakhovsky S.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Viola M.

Viola M.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Stakhovsky S.

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
Stakhovsky S.Viola M.
1st serve in·Slight edge
59%
65%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
73%
63%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
45%
Service points won·Slight edge
63%
57%
Return points won·Even
36%
40%
Break points saved·Slight edge
61%
53%
Aces / match·Dominant
6.5
1.4
Double faults / match·Even
3.5
3.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (47 vs 63). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Stakhovsky S.Viola M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
40
8
Break points saved·Dominant
88
20
Break points won·Clear edge
3
25
Deciding sets·Dominant
57
15
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
59
70

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Stakhovsky S.
6.0
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Viola M.
5.9
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.4No prior meetings
H2H
4.6
4.3
Surface form
5.6
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
0.0Lost last 3
Fatigue & Travel
9.3
Minutes 14d
9.2
9.0
Prev. match
9.0
7.0
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