Quentin Halys vs Bernard Tomic — Istanbul 2 CH Round of 32

Istanbul 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Quentin Halys
FRA
Quentin Halys
#90ATP
1707ELO
1677Hard ELO
$694kYTD
$5.4MCAREER
29 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLWWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 13 September 2021
hard
Bernard Tomic
AUS
Bernard Tomic
#206ATP
1475ELO
1441Hard ELO
$117kYTD
$6.8MCAREER
33 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLWLLL
Halys Q.
6-0 6-1
Tomic B.
Halys Q.
662
Tomic B.
010

Quentin Halys defeated Bernard Tomic 6-0 6-1 in the Istanbul 2 CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Quentin Halys came in ranked #90.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Halys Q.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Tomic B.

Tomic B.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Halys Q.

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

Halys Q.Tomic B.
35
Serve
—
26
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Halys Q.Tomic B.
1st serve in·Even
58%
60%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
79%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
50%
Service points won·Even
67%
63%
Return points won·Even
34%
36%
Break points saved·Even
65%
62%
Aces / match·Dominant
11.1
5.8
Double faults / match·Dominant
3.9
2.0

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Halys Q.Tomic B.
Clutch Rating·Even
57
53
Break points saved·Slight edge
97
92
Break points won·Even
4
4
Deciding sets·Even
75
74
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
91
79

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Halys Q.
6.7
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Tomic B.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
7.5+236 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
2.5Hard Elo 1441
7.2Overall Elo 1707
ELO gap
2.8Overall Elo 1475
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.4
Surface form
4.2
0.0Lost last 5
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
9.1
Minutes 14d
9.0
9.0
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
Halys Q.Tomic B.
Freshness·Slight edge
93
84

Halys Q.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d) · Tomic B.: 5 days rest · 2 matches, 45 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Duckworth J.[1]
Wu T.
6-46-2
Semi-finals
Wu T.
Gojo B.
6-43-66-4
Duckworth J.[1]
Halys Q.
6-796-36-4
Quarter-finals
Halys Q.
Uchiyama Y.[4]
7-56-2
Wu T.
Setkic A.
6-36-2
Gojo B.
Blancaneaux G.
7-666-4
Duckworth J.[1]
Grenier H.
6-36-3
R16
Blancaneaux G.
Tseng C.
6-37-5
Halys Q.
Marchenko I.[7]
3-66-26-2
Grenier H.
Donskoy E.[6]
6-46-4
Duckworth J.[1]
Muller A.
6-36-2
Uchiyama Y.[4]
Heyman C.
3-66-36-4
Setkic A.
Albot R.[2]
4-66-37-5
Wu T.
Polmans M.[5]
6-23-66-1
Gojo B.
Karlovskiy E.
6-16-747-65
R32
Albot R.[2]
Ebden M.
6-41-66-1
Setkic A.
Cornea V.
6-46-2
Wu T.
Ito T.
6-36-2
Polmans M.[5]
Kirci K.
6-36-2
Gojo B.
Galan D.[3]
6-43-66-2
Blancaneaux G.
Lokoli L.
4-67-656-1
Marchenko I.[7]
Fabbiano T.
7-56-2
Halys Q.
Tomic B.
6-06-1
Tseng C.
Marcora R.
6-12-66-4
Karlovskiy E.
Tiurnev E.
7-54-66-0
Heyman C.
Arnaboldi A.
3-66-26-4
Uchiyama Y.[4]
Moriya H.
6-33-66-3
Donskoy E.[6]
Kuznetsov A.
7-646-1
Grenier H.
Agabigun S.
6-43-66-4
Muller A.
Chappell N.
6-46-2
Duckworth J.[1]
Giustino L.
7-56-1