Cem Ilkel vs Yu Hsiou Hsu — Antalya 3 CH Round of 32

Antalya 3 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Cem Ilkel
TUR1
Cem Ilkel
#1462ATP
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 29 November 2021
clay
Yu Hsiou Hsu
TPE
Yu Hsiou Hsu
#210ATP
1489ELO
1407Clay ELO
27 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLWLW
Ilkel C.
6-3 6-4
Hsu Y.
Ilkel C.
662
Hsu Y.
340

Cem Ilkel defeated Yu Hsiou Hsu 6-3 6-4 in the Antalya 3 CH round of 32 on clay.

Key context

  • Match story: Cem Ilkel closed it out in two sets, 6–3 6–4.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Ilkel C.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Hsu Y.

Hsu Y.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Ilkel C.

Even serve battle

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
Ilkel C.Hsu Y.
1st serve in·Slight edge
58%
65%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
67%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
50%
Service points won·Even
62%
61%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Even
58%
59%
Aces / match·Slight edge
4.7
3.4
Double faults / match·Even
2.5
2.3

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (191 vs 196). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Ilkel C.Hsu Y.
Clutch Rating·Even
32
36
Break points saved·Dominant
49
74
Break points won·Even
3
4
Deciding sets·Clear edge
70
50
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
66
77

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ilkel C.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Hsu Y.
6.0
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.7
Surface form
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
8.3
Minutes 14d
9.0
8.0
Prev. match
8.0
6.0
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Borges N.[6]
Peniston R.
6-46-3
Semi-finals
Peniston R.
Barranco Cosano J.
6-47-62
Borges N.[6]
Esteve Lobato E.
6-36-3
Quarter-finals
Esteve Lobato E.
Ramanathan R.[2]
6-26-0
Borges N.[6]
Hardt N.
6-26-4
Peniston R.
Ajdukovic D.[4]
6-25-77-62
Barranco Cosano J.
Jianu F.
6-14-66-4
R16
Esteve Lobato E.
Misolic F.
6-26-3
Borges N.[6]
Erel Y.
6-46-0
Peniston R.
Svrcina D.
2-66-46-2
Ajdukovic D.[4]
Cacao T.
6-26-1
Jianu F.
Blancaneaux G.[7]
6-756-46-0
Barranco Cosano J.
Ilkel C.[1]
7-636-3
Hardt N.
Domingues J.[3]
6-47-5
Ramanathan R.[2]
Crawford O.
7-56-4
R32
Svrcina D.
Oliveira G.[8]
6-40-0
Hardt N.
Dougaz A.
6-26-2
Ramanathan R.[2]
Wessels L.
6-26-3
Crawford O.
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
6-16-3
Esteve Lobato E.
Lee D.
6-26-3
Misolic F.
Tseng C.[5]
6-25-77-67
Peniston R.
Fatic N.
2-66-16-3
Cacao T.
Metreveli A.
6-36-2
Blancaneaux G.[7]
Zekic M.
7-626-3
Ilkel C.[1]
Hsu Y.
6-36-4
Borges N.[6]
Kirkin E.
6-46-3
Barranco Cosano J.
Roca Batalla O.
7-646-4
Domingues J.[3]
Bonadio R.
7-644-66-1
Jianu F.
Veldheer M.
6-16-4
Ajdukovic D.[4]
Chappell N.
6-45-77-5
Erel Y.
Tiurnev E.
7-655-73-3