Emilio Nava vs Matteo Viola — Pozoblanco CH Round of 16

Pozoblanco CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1621Hard ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 19 July 2021
hard
ITA
Matteo Viola
39 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLLLL
Nava E.
7-5 4-6 6-3
Viola M.
Nava E.
7462
Viola M.
5631

Emilio Nava defeated Matteo Viola 7-5 4-6 6-3 in the Pozoblanco CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

  • Match story: Emilio Nava closed it out in three sets, 7–5 4–6 6–3.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nava E.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Viola M.

Viola M.serving72% hold

wins 59% 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.Viola M.
39
Serve
—
21
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Nava E.Viola M.
1st serve in·Even
63%
65%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
72%
63%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
46%
Service points won·Slight edge
64%
57%
Return points won·Even
37%
40%
Break points saved·Slight edge
64%
53%
Aces / match·Dominant
7.7
1.3
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.0
3.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 63). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nava E.Viola M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
52
8
Break points saved·Dominant
94
20
Break points won·Slight edge
17
25
Deciding sets·Dominant
89
15
Tiebreaks·Dominant
23
71

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)
Viola M.
5.7
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.7
Surface form
5.2
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
8.0
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.Viola M.
Freshness·
96
—

Nava E.: 14 days rest · 1 match (14d). 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