Tim Van Rijthoven vs Evgeny Karlovskiy — Biel CH Round of 16

Biel CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
NED8
Tim Van Rijthoven
29 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 21 March 2022
hard
RUS
Evgeny Karlovskiy
#1219ATP
31 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWLLLWW
Van Rijthoven T.
6-2 7-5
Karlovskiy E.
Van Rijthoven T.
672
Karlovskiy E.
250

Tim Van Rijthoven defeated Evgeny Karlovskiy 6-2 7-5 in the Biel CH round of 16 on hard. The result followed the form book — Tim Van Rijthoven came in defending last year's semi-final.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Van Rijthoven T.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Karlovskiy E.

Karlovskiy E.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Van Rijthoven T.

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

Statistics

This season
Van Rijthoven T.Karlovskiy E.
1st serve in·Even
65%
67%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
77%
68%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
53%
46%
Service points won·Slight edge
69%
60%
Return points won·Slight edge
33%
38%
Break points saved·Slight edge
64%
58%
Aces / match·Dominant
11.0
4.0
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.2
2.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (71 vs 128). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Van Rijthoven T.Karlovskiy E.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
26
0
Break points saved·Dominant
90
55
Break points won·Even
1
5
Deciding sets·Clear edge
19
7
Tiebreaks·Dominant
61
12

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Van Rijthoven T.
6.9
Slight advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Karlovskiy E.
4.8
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
8.0
Surface form
4.1
Win streak
0.0Lost last 4
Fatigue & Travel
6.0
Surface transition
Context
8.5
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
Rodionov J.
Zuk K.
7-636-4
Semi-finals
Rodionov J.
Horansky F.
0-66-46-4
Zuk K.
Stricker D.[3]
6-36-4
Quarter-finals
Rodionov J.
Riedi L.
6-46-4
Horansky F.
Gengel M.
6-46-3
Stricker D.[3]
Van Rijthoven T.[8]
6-47-5
Zuk K.
Escoffier A.
7-626-2
R16
Horansky F.
Feldbausch K.
7-667-65
Escoffier A.
Copil M.
6-43-67-63
Stricker D.[3]
Kovacevic A.
6-47-63
Van Rijthoven T.[8]
Karlovskiy E.
6-27-5
Rodionov J.
Sels J.
6-46-4
Riedi L.
Virtanen O.
6-46-4
Gengel M.
Gojo B.
7-664-66-1
Zuk K.
Kotov P.[5]
6-46-4
R32
Virtanen O.
Moriya H.
7-686-4
Zuk K.
Soeda G.
6-36-2
Stricker D.[3]
Sugita Y.
7-656-1
Sels J.
Masur D.[6]
6-34-66-3
Rodionov J.
Setkic A.
6-36-4
Riedi L.
Brouwer G.
1-66-36-4
Feldbausch K.
Huesler M.[7]
7-56-0
Horansky F.
Kym J.
6-36-3
Gojo B.
Herbert P.[1]
6-706-36-3
Karlovskiy E.
Schnur B.
6-756-37-5
Van Rijthoven T.[8]
Kravchenko G.
7-647-5
Kotov P.[5]
Peniston R.
7-676-4
Escoffier A.
Novak D.[2]
6-46-2
Copil M.
Menendez Maceiras A.
6-26-3
Kovacevic A.
Li Z.
7-56-3
Gengel M.
Bemelmans R.
7-647-63