Mohamed Safwat vs Gastao Elias — Amersfoort CH Round of 32

Amersfoort CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
EGY5
Mohamed Safwat
#1884ATP
35 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLLWLLLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 12 July 2021
clay
Gastao Elias
POR
Gastao Elias
#669ATP
1447ELO
1425Clay ELO
35 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLLWL
Safwat M.
6-1 6-3
Elias G.
Safwat M.
662
Elias G.
130

Mohamed Safwat defeated Gastao Elias 6-1 6-3 in the Amersfoort CH round of 32 on clay.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Safwat M.serving68% hold

wins 57% of points on serve vs Elias G.

Elias G.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Safwat M.

Serve advantage — Elias G.

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
Safwat M.Elias G.
1st serve in·Even
57%
55%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
49%
Service points won·Even
61%
60%
Return points won·Even
37%
40%
Break points saved·Even
57%
59%
Aces / match·Slight edge
4.2
3.1
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.8
2.4

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Safwat M.Elias G.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
8
37
Break points saved·Slight edge
64
57
Break points won·Clear edge
2
24
Deciding sets·Dominant
17
86
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
21
7

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Safwat M.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Elias G.
6.6
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
2.2
Surface form
7.0
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
6.8
Minutes 14d
8.1
7.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
9.0
Surface transition
6.0
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
Griekspoor T.[1]
Van De Zandschulp B.[2]
6-13-66-1
Semi-finals
Van De Zandschulp B.[2]
Andreozzi G.[7]
6-746-36-2
Griekspoor T.[1]
Hoang A.[4]
4-66-36-4
Quarter-finals
Van De Zandschulp B.[2]
De Jong J.
6-36-0
Andreozzi G.[7]
Sels J.
3-66-46-2
Hoang A.[4]
Rosol L.[8]
6-47-64
Griekspoor T.[1]
Coppejans K.[6]
3-66-36-2
R16
Van De Zandschulp B.[2]
Moraing M.
6-37-5
De Jong J.
Safwat M.[5]
2-66-16-4
Sels J.
Vatutin A.
6-26-2
Andreozzi G.[7]
Vukic A.
7-52-66-3
Coppejans K.[6]
Brouwer G.
6-36-4
Griekspoor T.[1]
Vrbensky M.
6-46-4
Rosol L.[8]
Nikles J.
6-26-1
Hoang A.[4]
Mena F.
7-647-65
R32
Hoang A.[4]
Maden Y.
6-47-65
Brouwer G.
Jong S.
7-670-0
Moraing M.
Haerteis J.
6-16-0
Brouwer G.
Jong A.
7-670-0
Van De Zandschulp B.[2]
Oliveira G.
6-26-4
De Jong J.
Guinard M.
7-654-67-65
Safwat M.[5]
Elias G.
6-16-3
Sels J.
Aragone J.
6-16-1
Vukic A.
Haase R.
6-47-61
Andreozzi G.[7]
Lehecka J.
7-52-66-4
Rosol L.[8]
Kopriva V.
7-646-2
Mena F.
Bellucci T.
6-36-4
Coppejans K.[6]
Wassermann D.
6-35-76-2
Vrbensky M.
Bergs Z.
6-47-62
Nikles J.
Nijboer R.
7-656-2
Griekspoor T.[1]
Geerts M.
6-27-62
Vatutin A.
Polmans M.[3]
6-746-46-4