Sanjar Fayziev vs Ergi Kirkin — Prague CH Qualifying Round 1

Prague CH · CHALLENGER · Qualifying Round 1
UZB
Sanjar Fayziev
31 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLLLLLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 18 April 2022
clay
TUR6
Ergi Kirkin
#570ATP
27 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWLWWL
Fayziev S.
6-4 6-3
Kirkin E.
Fayziev S.
662
Kirkin E.
430

Sanjar Fayziev defeated Ergi Kirkin 6-4 6-3 in the Prague CH qualifying round 1 on clay.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Fayziev S.serving58% hold

wins 53% of points on serve vs Kirkin E.

Kirkin E.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Fayziev S.

Baseline battle — serve is shaky, expect plenty of breaks

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
Fayziev S.Kirkin E.
1st serve in·Even
58%
56%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
63%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
43%
47%
Service points won·Even
55%
59%
Return points won·Even
36%
39%
Break points saved·Slight edge
53%
58%
Aces / match·Even
4.1
3.6
Double faults / match·Slight edge
1.7
2.4

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (14 vs 147). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Fayziev S.
5.5
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Kirkin E.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.5
Surface form
3.6
0.0Lost last 3
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
9.1
Minutes 14d
7.7
8.0
Prev. match
9.0
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
Q2
Tiurnev E.[10]
Kamke T.[3]
6-34-66-4
Nava E.[8]
Fayziev S.
6-36-1
Krutykh O.[5]
Paulson A.
6-45-76-4
Moro Canas A.
Bachinger M.[4]
6-46-3
Miedler L.[2]
Fanselow S.
6-46-3
Ionel N.[7]
Lamasine T.[1]
6-46-2
Rosol L.[2]
Yevseyev D.[11]
5-76-26-4
Michalski D.[6]
Kamke T.[7]
W/O
Gerch L.[12]
Uchida K.[5]
6-36-1
Tabur C.
Lamasine T.[8]
2-66-46-4
Oliel Y.[10]
Moeller M.
W/O
Donati M.
Purcell M.[1]
6-46-4
Domingues J.[1]
Lamasine T.[12]
6-26-1
Cuevas M.[6]
Forti F.[8]
6-43-66-3
Menendez Maceiras A.[5]
Jecan M.
6-26-4
Cornea V.
Paul J.[11]
6-26-1
Krumich M.[9]
Paulson A.[3]
7-57-5
Vrbensky M.[2]
Gill F.[10]
6-06-4
Q1
Nava E.[8]
Nicod J.
7-53-66-4
Kamke T.[3]
Gengel M.
6-16-4
Lamasine T.[1]
Heller P.
6-27-5
Ionel N.[7]
Petr V.
6-06-4
Moro Canas A.
Moeller M.[9]
6-16-4
Fayziev S.
Kirkin E.[6]
6-46-3
Fanselow S.
Erler A.[12]
6-17-5
Miedler L.[2]
Molleker R.
7-57-63
Nava E.
Nicod J.
7-53-66-4
Paulson A.
Rosenkranz M.[11]
6-04-66-4
Krutykh O.[5]
Donald M.
6-36-4
Bachinger M.[4]
Siniakov D.
6-46-3
Tiurnev E.[10]
Poljak D.
6-36-3
Donati M.
Bachinger M.[9]
3-67-56-1
Kamke T.[7]
Gengel M.
6-41-67-5
Michalski D.[6]
Fayziev S.
5-76-26-1
Lamasine T.[8]
Mensik J.
6-00-0
Gerch L.[12]
Virtanen O.
5-76-36-1
Uchida K.[5]
Donald M.
6-26-0
Tabur C.
Soeda G.[4]
6-26-4
Oliel Y.[10]
De Schepper K.
6-35-77-5
Moeller M.
Sels J.[3]
1-66-46-1
Yevseyev D.[11]
Velik L.
6-36-1
Rosol L.[2]
Vrbensky M.
7-56-3
Purcell M.[1]
Damm M.
6-26-4
Forti F.[8]
Nicod J.
6-46-3
Jecan M.
Palosi S.[7]
6-36-4
Vrbensky M.[2]
Havlicek M.
6-15-76-2
Krumich M.[9]
Li H.
6-36-2
Lamasine T.[12]
Karol M.
6-26-3
Paulson A.[3]
Cuenin S.
6-16-3
Cuevas M.[6]
Jenicek J.
7-54-66-1
Forti F.
Nicod J.
6-46-3
Menendez Maceiras A.[5]
Donald M.
6-46-0
Paul J.[11]
Siniakov D.
6-47-5
Cornea V.
Mpetshi Perricard G.[4]
6-734-0
Gill F.[10]
Nejedly P.
7-56-3