Emilio Nava vs Yannick Maden — Pozoblanco CH Round of 32

Pozoblanco CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1621Hard ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 19 July 2021
hard
GER7
Yannick Maden
36 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWLLLLW
Nava E.
6-1 7-6
Maden Y.
Nava E.
6772
Maden Y.
1650

Emilio Nava defeated Yannick Maden 6-1 7-6 in the Pozoblanco CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

  • Match story: Emilio Nava came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–1 7–6.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nava E.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Maden Y.

Maden Y.serving73% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Nava E.

Serve advantage — Nava E.

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

Nava E.Maden Y.
40
Serve
—
16
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Nava E.Maden Y.
1st serve in·Even
63%
61%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
72%
62%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
49%
Service points won·Slight edge
64%
57%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Slight edge
64%
56%
Aces / match·Dominant
7.7
1.9
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.0
2.4

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 34). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nava E.Maden Y.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
52
30
Break points saved·Clear edge
94
70
Break points won·Clear edge
17
39
Deciding sets·Dominant
89
20
Tiebreaks·Dominant
23
54

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nava E.
4.3
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 119 days (−1.5)
Maden Y.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.7
Surface form
4.2
Win streak
0.0Lost last 5
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
8.2
Prev. match
8.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Nava E.Maden Y.
Freshness·
100
—

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