Sumit Nagal vs Mohamed Safwat — Braunschweig CH Round of 32

Braunschweig CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Sumit Nagal
IND7
Sumit Nagal
#241ATP
1543ELO
1538Clay ELO
28 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WLWWWWWLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 5 July 2021
clay
EGY
Mohamed Safwat
#1884ATP
35 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLLWLLLW
Nagal S.
6-3 7-6
Safwat M.
Nagal S.
6772
Safwat M.
3630

Sumit Nagal defeated Mohamed Safwat 6-3 7-6 in the Braunschweig CH round of 32 on clay. Sumit Nagal claimed a first win over Mohamed Safwat in two meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 1–1.

Key context

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

Head to head

0–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2020-01-20Australian OpenQ1hardMohamed Safwat7-6(2) 6-2

Serve vs return

This season
Nagal S.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Safwat M.

Safwat M.serving63% hold

wins 55% of points on serve vs Nagal S.

Serve advantage — Nagal S.

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
Nagal S.Safwat M.
1st serve in·Clear edge
70%
57%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
64%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
48%
Service points won·Even
60%
61%
Return points won·Slight edge
42%
37%
Break points saved·Even
58%
57%
Aces / match·Clear edge
1.5
4.2
Double faults / match·Clear edge
1.8
2.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 87). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nagal S.Safwat M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
33
8
Break points saved·Slight edge
69
64
Break points won·Dominant
35
2
Deciding sets·Even
16
17
Tiebreaks·Dominant
84
21

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nagal S.
5.2
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 28 days (−0.3)
Safwat M.
4.6
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
4.6
Surface form
2.5
0.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
7.9
3-set count
7.0
4.0
Prev. match
7.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Nagal S.Safwat M.
Freshness·
96
—

Nagal S.: 8 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-slowfavours grinders
SlowFast
Final
Altmaier D.[8]
Laaksonen H.[5]
6-16-2
Semi-finals
Altmaier D.[8]
Moeller M.
7-56-0
Laaksonen H.[5]
Kopriva V.
6-46-0
Quarter-finals
Moeller M.
Hassan B.
6-46-2
Altmaier D.[8]
Ymer E.
6-36-3
Laaksonen H.[5]
Kovalik J.[4]
6-36-2
Kopriva V.
Bergs Z.
3-66-07-5
R16
Hassan B.
Ehrat S.
4-66-36-4
Moeller M.
Nagal S.[7]
6-31-66-2
Ymer E.
Hanfmann Y.[3]
2-66-36-2
Altmaier D.[8]
Vilella Martinez M.
6-36-2
Kovalik J.[4]
Jaziri M.
6-17-5
Bergs Z.
Machac T.[6]
7-655-76-4
Kopriva V.
Paire B.[1]
6-12-66-2
Laaksonen H.[5]
Kuhn N.
6-47-5
R32
Hassan B.
Kelly D.
6-47-67
Moeller M.
Gabashvili T.
7-56-3
Nagal S.[7]
Safwat M.
6-37-63
Hanfmann Y.[3]
Diez S.
7-52-66-3
Ymer E.
Kamke T.
6-37-5
Vilella Martinez M.
Molleker R.
3-66-46-3
Altmaier D.[8]
Kolar Z.
6-27-5
Laaksonen H.[5]
Rosenkranz M.
6-36-2
Kuhn N.
Zverev M.
6-27-64
Jaziri M.
Vukic A.
6-36-4
Machac T.[6]
Coppejans K.
6-26-3
Bergs Z.
Marterer M.
6-26-1
Kopriva V.
Michalski D.
6-26-2
Paire B.[1]
Andreozzi G.
6-42-67-5
Ehrat S.
Moraing M.
6-756-46-4
Kovalik J.[4]
Horansky F.
7-656-3