Michael Geerts vs Emilio Nava — Pozoblanco CH Quarter-final

Pozoblanco CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Michael Geerts
BEL
Michael Geerts
#328ATP
1400ELO
1383Hard ELO
31 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 19 July 2021
hard
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1621Hard ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
Geerts M.
7-6 7-6
Nava E.
Geerts M.
77772
Nava E.
62630

Michael Geerts defeated Emilio Nava 7-6 7-6 in the Pozoblanco CH quarter-final on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Emilio Nava came in ranked #91.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Geerts M.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Nava E.

Nava E.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Geerts M.

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

Serve & return on hard

Geerts M.Nava E.
—
Serve
40
—
Return
16

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the hard field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Geerts M.Nava E.
1st serve in·Slight edge
58%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
50%
Service points won·Even
63%
64%
Return points won·Even
36%
37%
Break points saved·Even
62%
64%
Aces / match·Dominant
4.3
7.7
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.5
3.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 199). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Geerts M.Nava E.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
9
52
Break points saved·Clear edge
82
94
Break points won·Clear edge
3
17
Deciding sets·Dominant
8
89
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
2
23

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Geerts M.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Nava E.
5.1
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 119 days (−1.5)
Form & Matchup
2.1Hard Elo 1383
Surface ELO
7.9+238 Hard Elo edge
1.4Overall Elo 1400
ELO gap
8.6Overall Elo 1704
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.5
Surface form
4.7
Fatigue & Travel
6.8
Minutes 14d
8.0
Prev. match
6.0
Surface transition
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
Geerts M.Nava E.
Freshness·Slight edge
89
100

Geerts M.: 1 day rest · 1 match, 16 games (7d) · Nava E.: 15 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Celikbilek A.[3]
Ilkel C.[4]
6-16-726-3
Semi-finals
Ilkel C.[4]
Geerts M.
6-26-736-4
Celikbilek A.[3]
Barrere G.[2]
4-66-31-1
Quarter-finals
Barrere G.[2]
Zeballos F.
6-46-3
Celikbilek A.[3]
Menendez Maceiras A.
6-36-0
Ilkel C.[4]
Van Rijthoven T.
7-57-65
Geerts M.
Nava E.
7-627-63
R16
Barrere G.[2]
Andreev A.
6-36-0
Zeballos F.
Jianu F.
7-666-4
Celikbilek A.[3]
Gabashvili T.
5-76-36-4
Menendez Maceiras A.
Janvier M.[5]
7-646-3
Van Rijthoven T.
Sijsling I.
6-46-4
Ilkel C.[4]
Moriya H.
6-36-2
Nava E.
Viola M.
7-54-66-3
Geerts M.
Bonzi B.[1]
7-636-2
R32
Barrere G.[2]
Roumane R.
7-656-3
Andreev A.
Ruiz Romero B.
6-06-0
Jianu F.
Alvarez Varona N.
6-26-4
Zeballos F.
Gojo B.[6]
6-47-64
Celikbilek A.[3]
Mansouri S.
6-736-17-64
Gabashvili T.
Martineau M.
6-41-66-4
Menendez Maceiras A.
Barroso Campos A.
6-26-4
Janvier M.[5]
Bourgue M.
6-736-27-612
Ilkel C.[4]
Haerteis J.
6-27-63
Nava E.
Maden Y.[7]
6-17-65
Viola M.
Bellucci T.
6-16-3
Geerts M.
Uchida K.
6-16-2
Bonzi B.[1]
Dougaz A.
4-66-46-3
Van Rijthoven T.
Ortega Olmedo R.
6-36-737-5
Moriya H.
Gomez Herrera C.
3-66-36-0
Sijsling I.
Kuhn N.[8]
7-50-0