Oscar Otte vs Lukas Lacko — Ismaning CH Final

Ismaning CH · CHALLENGER · Final
GER5
Oscar Otte
#1056ATP
32 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWWLLLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 25 October 2021
hard
SVK
Lukas Lacko
38 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
Otte O.
6-4 6-4
Lacko L.
Otte O.
662
Lacko L.
440

Oscar Otte defeated Lukas Lacko 6-4 6-4 in the Ismaning CH final on hard. The result followed the form book — Oscar Otte came in leading the head-to-head 1–0. Oscar Otte extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

  • Match story: Oscar Otte edged a tight contest from start to finish — 6–4 6–4.

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2020-09-28Roland GarrosQ1clayOscar Otte4-6 6-1 6-2

Serve vs return

This season
Otte O.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Lacko L.

Lacko L.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Otte O.

Serve advantage — Otte O.

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
Otte O.Lacko L.
1st serve in·Even
57%
59%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
77%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
49%
Service points won·Even
65%
62%
Return points won·Even
37%
34%
Break points saved·Even
63%
59%
Aces / match·Dominant
9.0
5.7
Double faults / match·Clear edge
4.1
2.6

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (163 vs 60). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Otte O.Lacko L.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
41
26
Break points saved·Slight edge
93
86
Break points won·Clear edge
30
8
Deciding sets·Clear edge
20
33
Tiebreaks·Dominant
80
27

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Otte O.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Lacko L.
5.2
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
5.2
Surface form
5.7
0.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
6.6
Minutes 14d
7.0
3-set count
9.0
Prev. match
Context
5.0
Defending pts
6.0

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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Otte O.[5]
Lacko L.
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Otte O.[5]
Cressy M.[7]
7-52-67-65
Lacko L.
Halys Q.[8]
6-17-65
Quarter-finals
Otte O.[5]
Marterer M.
3-66-37-65
Cressy M.[7]
Zuk K.
6-776-47-64
Halys Q.[8]
Forejtek J.
3-66-26-2
Lacko L.
Bachinger M.
7-53-66-4
R16
Marterer M.
Rosenkranz M.
6-37-63
Otte O.[5]
Lenz J.
6-36-4
Zuk K.
Seppi A.[3]
4-66-47-64
Lacko L.
Machac T.[6]
6-726-47-62
Bachinger M.
Van Rijthoven T.
6-746-46-2
Forejtek J.
Maden Y.
7-633-66-1
Halys Q.[8]
Bemelmans R.
7-686-756-4
Cressy M.[7]
Virtanen O.
7-653-67-5
R32
Marterer M.
Vesely J.[2]
7-686-4
Rosenkranz M.
Huesler M.
6-726-27-60
Lenz J.
Ilkel C.
6-757-56-1
Seppi A.[3]
Kamke T.
7-56-3
Zuk K.
Sachko V.
6-26-4
Virtanen O.
Rehberg M.
7-56-2
Cressy M.[7]
Moriya H.
6-37-5
Machac T.[6]
Coppejans K.
6-46-2
Bachinger M.
Celikbilek A.
6-36-1
Van Rijthoven T.
Hanfmann Y.[4]
5-77-646-4
Bemelmans R.
Squire H.
6-36-4
Forejtek J.
Thompson J.[1]
5-76-26-2
Halys Q.[8]
Masur D.
6-45-76-3
Otte O.[5]
Haase R.
6-746-46-4
Lacko L.
Copil M.
7-687-64
Maden Y.
Moraing M.
W/O