Tomas Machac vs Lukas Lacko — Forli 5 CH Round of 32

Forli 5 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Tomas Machac
CZE1
Tomas Machac
#53ATP
1866ELO
1829Hard ELO
$832kYTD
$6.8MCAREER
25 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 21 February 2022
hard
SVK
Lukas Lacko
38 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
Machac T.
6-2 6-2
Lacko L.
Machac T.
662
Lacko L.
220

Tomas Machac defeated Lukas Lacko 6-2 6-2 in the Forli 5 CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Machac T.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Lacko L.

Lacko L.serving75% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Machac T.

Serve advantage — Machac T.

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

Machac T.Lacko L.
30
Serve
—
25
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Machac T.Lacko L.
1st serve in·Even
62%
59%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
70%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
54%
44%
Service points won·Slight edge
64%
59%
Return points won·Slight edge
38%
33%
Break points saved·Slight edge
62%
52%
Aces / match·Even
5.0
5.3
Double faults / match·Even
2.5
2.6

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 20). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Machac T.Lacko L.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
90
26
Break points saved·Clear edge
98
86
Break points won·Dominant
80
8
Deciding sets·Dominant
94
33
Tiebreaks·Dominant
97
27

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Machac T.
6.3
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Lacko L.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
0.0No prior meetings
H2H
10.0
6.8
Surface form
3.2
Win streak
0.0Lost last 3
Fatigue & Travel
5.1
Minutes 14d
9.2
4.0
3-set count
9.0
Prev. match
9.0
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Draper J.
Ritschard A.
3-66-37-68
Semi-finals
Draper J.
Basic M.
6-26-736-4
Ritschard A.
Van Rijthoven T.
6-37-63
Quarter-finals
Basic M.
Horansky F.
6-36-1
Draper J.
Mmoh M.
5-76-46-2
Ritschard A.
Borges N.
6-47-67
Van Rijthoven T.
Machac T.[1]
6-37-65
R16
Mmoh M.
Bergs Z.[7]
6-46-2
Basic M.
Moraing M.[4]
6-37-64
Horansky F.
Schnur B.
4-67-656-4
Ritschard A.
Marchenko I.[6]
6-37-5
Borges N.
Caruso S.[3]
6-24-67-63
Van Rijthoven T.
Sels J.
6-47-64
Machac T.[1]
Napolitano S.
6-36-4
Draper J.
Ferrari G.
6-26-4
R32
Basic M.
Cobolli F.
6-37-62
Ferrari G.
Dzumhur D.[2]
7-57-64
Draper J.
De Jong J.
4-66-47-64
Mmoh M.
Sachko V.
7-626-4
Bergs Z.[7]
Arnaldi M.
6-47-5
Horansky F.
Giustino L.
6-776-46-3
Schnur B.
Grenier H.[5]
3-66-46-2
Ritschard A.
Elias G.
6-756-26-3
Borges N.
Pellegrino A.
6-47-65
Caruso S.[3]
Ficovich J.
6-46-3
Van Rijthoven T.
Agamenone F.[8]
6-46-4
Sels J.
Maestrelli F.
7-656-3
Napolitano S.
Ejupovic E.
6-756-37-61
Marchenko I.[6]
Uchiyama Y.
6-26-7116-4
Machac T.[1]
Lacko L.
6-26-2
Moraing M.[4]
Arnaboldi A.
6-46-4