Cem Ilkel vs Evgeny Donskoy — Bengaluru 1 CH Round of 16

Bengaluru 1 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
Cem Ilkel
TUR
Cem Ilkel
#1462ATP
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 7 February 2022
hard
RUS
Evgeny Donskoy
36 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLLWLWLLL
Ilkel C.
2-6 6-3 7-5
Donskoy E.
Ilkel C.
2672
Donskoy E.
6351

Cem Ilkel defeated Evgeny Donskoy 2-6 6-3 7-5 in the Bengaluru 1 CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Ilkel C.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Donskoy E.

Donskoy E.serving83% hold

wins 65% 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.Donskoy E.
1st serve in·Even
58%
58%
1st serve points won·Even
72%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
52%
Service points won·Even
62%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
37%
Break points saved·Slight edge
56%
63%
Aces / match·Slight edge
5.0
3.8
Double faults / match·Even
2.4
2.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (123 vs 120). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Ilkel C.Donskoy E.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
32
25
Break points saved·Dominant
49
89
Break points won·Even
3
5
Deciding sets·Dominant
70
10
Tiebreaks·Even
66
65

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ilkel C.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Donskoy E.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
0.0No prior meetings
H2H
10.0
2.9
Surface form
3.2
0.0Lost last 5
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
9.2
Minutes 14d
8.7
3-set count
7.0
9.0
Prev. match
7.0
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
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Tseng C.
Gojo B.
6-47-5
Semi-finals
Tseng C.
Couacaud E.[6]
7-56-4
Gojo B.
Muller A.
4-66-36-0
Quarter-finals
Couacaud E.[6]
Vesely J.[1]
6-40-0
Muller A.
Ilkel C.
6-47-67
Tseng C.
Decamps G.
6-46-4
Gojo B.
Coppejans K.
7-56-4
R16
Couacaud E.[6]
Purcell M.
6-43-66-2
Muller A.
Kuzmanov D.
7-646-4
Decamps G.
Moroni G.
6-25-77-63
Tseng C.
Grenier H.[4]
6-16-4
Vesely J.[1]
Gunneswaran P.
3-66-26-1
Coppejans K.
Celikbilek A.[5]
7-6126-3
Ilkel C.
Donskoy E.
2-66-37-5
Gojo B.
Vukic A.[3]
7-56-3
R32
Decamps G.
Gaio F.[8]
6-36-3
Gunneswaran P.
Bourgue M.
7-646-2
Kuzmanov D.
Dev S.
6-26-2
Donskoy E.
Jaziri M.
7-6106-4
Gojo B.
Noguchi R.
3-66-16-2
Celikbilek A.[5]
Kadhe A.
6-16-2
Moroni G.
Myneni S.
6-16-1
Tseng C.
Clarke J.
6-36-1
Grenier H.[4]
Kopriva V.
6-12-66-4
Vesely J.[1]
Bellier A.
6-36-726-2
Vukic A.[3]
Kubler J.
7-56-4
Purcell M.
Ramanathan R.
3-66-07-5
Muller A.
Travaglia S.[2]
6-17-62
Couacaud E.[6]
Reddy R.
6-16-3
Coppejans K.
Polmans M.
1-66-26-4
Ilkel C.
Diez S.
6-26-3