Tomas Machac vs Lukas Rosol — Prague CH Quarter-final

Prague CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Tomas Machac
CZE6
Tomas Machac
#53ATP
1866ELO
1783Clay ELO
$832kYTD
$6.8MCAREER
25 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 18 April 2022
clay
CZE
Lukas Rosol
40 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLLLLLLLL
Machac T.
7-6 6-0
Rosol L.
Machac T.
7762
Rosol L.
6300

Tomas Machac defeated Lukas Rosol 7-6 6-0 in the Prague CH quarter-final on clay.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Machac T.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Rosol L.

Rosol L.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Machac T.

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

Serve & return on clay

Machac T.Rosol L.
13
Serve
—
46
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Machac T.Rosol L.
1st serve in·Even
62%
61%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
54%
51%
Service points won·Even
64%
63%
Return points won·Even
38%
37%
Break points saved·Even
62%
60%
Aces / match·Slight edge
5.0
4.0
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.5
3.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 75). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Machac T.Rosol L.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
90
51
Break points saved·Slight edge
98
89
Break points won·Dominant
80
3
Deciding sets·Clear edge
94
77
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
97
73

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Machac T.
5.2
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 28 days (−0.3)
Rosol L.
5.7
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.6
Surface form
2.9
0.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
5.9
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
7.0
6.0
Surface transition
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
Ofner S.
Svrcina D.
6-06-4
Cachin P.[5]
Giustino L.
6-37-64
Krutykh O.[2]
Gerch L.
6-36-726-2
Semi-finals
Svrcina D.
Machac T.[6]
W/O
Ofner S.
Tseng C.[3]
7-51-66-1
Cachin P.[5]
Blancaneaux G.
2-66-26-3
Giustino L.
Kuzmanov D.
7-644-66-2
Gerch L.
Domingues J.
6-44-66-3
Krutykh O.[2]
Mensik J.
7-56-3
Quarter-finals
Ofner S.
Forejtek J.
6-27-65
Tseng C.[3]
Barranco Cosano J.
2-66-37-63
Machac T.[6]
Rosol L.
7-636-0
Svrcina D.
Giustino L.
6-04-1
Blancaneaux G.
Tabur C.
6-06-1
Cachin P.[5]
Fabbiano T.
6-36-3
Giustino L.
Gaio F.[8]
6-33-67-67
Kuzmanov D.
Marterer M.
6-16-0
Krutykh O.[2]
Moreno De Alboran N.[8]
6-43-67-68
Gerch L.
Gigante M.
7-56-2
Domingues J.
Navone M.
7-636-3
Mensik J.
Cuevas M.
7-56-2
R16
Forejtek J.
Altmaier D.[1]
6-16-4
Rosol L.
Moraing M.[2]
4-66-36-4
Machac T.[6]
Furness E.
3-67-656-4
Svrcina D.
Krutykh O.
6-36-4
Barranco Cosano J.
Novak D.[5]
7-692-66-3
Ofner S.
Rodionov J.[8]
6-17-66
Giustino L.
Nava E.
5-77-657-64
Tseng C.[3]
Miedler L.
6-26-2
Marterer M.
Krumich M.
6-36-1
Giustino L.
Donati M.
6-16-3
Blancaneaux G.
Rosol L.
1-66-27-63
Fabbiano T.
Peniston R.
6-14-66-0
Gaio F.[8]
Forejtek J.
7-652-67-5
Tabur C.
Kopriva V.[4]
6-26-4
Kuzmanov D.
Borges N.[2]
6-17-5
Cachin P.[5]
Furness E.
6-06-3
Moreno De Alboran N.[8]
Collignon R.
7-55-77-5
Cuevas M.
Gengel M.
6-06-1
Mensik J.
Rosol L.
6-26-4
Navone M.
Squire H.[5]
7-56-1
Gigante M.
Vrbensky M.
6-26-3
Krutykh O.[2]
Nouza P.
6-36-4
Domingues J.
Sachko V.[3]
7-57-5
Gerch L.
Andreev A.
6-46-4
R32
Furness E.
Muller A.
6-23-0
Tseng C.[3]
Moro Canas A.
6-46-4
Barranco Cosano J.
Domingues J.
6-21-66-2
Moraing M.[2]
Marterer M.
6-43-67-611
Nava E.
Pouille L.[4]
6-36-1
Novak D.[5]
Karlovskiy E.
7-646-766-4
Miedler L.
Lamasine T.
2-66-26-3
Rodionov J.[8]
Haase R.
6-16-4
Altmaier D.[1]
Krumich M.
5-77-56-4
Giustino L.
Peniston R.
6-26-3
Forejtek J.
Tiurnev E.
6-36-756-4
Ofner S.
Lestienne C.
6-26-2
Krutykh O.
Popko D.[9]
6-46-1
Svrcina D.
Ionel N.
6-36-4
Rosol L.
Horansky F.
7-656-1
Machac T.[6]
Vrbensky M.
6-33-1
Rosol L.
Sachko V.
6-30-0
Marterer M.
Paulson A.
7-627-66
Borges N.[2]
Bonadio R.
6-26-4
Forejtek J.
Gerch L.
7-54-66-3
Blancaneaux G.
Ficovich J.[7]
6-46-3
Tabur C.
Purcell M.
6-46-3
Peniston R.
Vukic A.[1]
6-16-3
Donati M.
Uchida K.
2-66-46-3
Fabbiano T.
Oliel Y.
2-66-36-2
Kopriva V.[4]
Basic M.
6-36-2
Kuzmanov D.
Marchenko I.
6-16-3
Cachin P.[5]
Svrcina D.
6-36-1
Gaio F.[8]
Michalski D.
6-36-1
Giustino L.
Copil M.
3-67-627-5
Krumich M.
De Jong J.[6]
7-667-66
Furness E.
Ofner S.
7-633-2
Krutykh O.[2]
Copil M.
6-14-67-65
Collignon R.
Gautier A.
6-46-1
Cuevas M.
Krumich M.
2-66-36-3
Squire H.[5]
Neumayer L.
6-16-4
Navone M.
Fils A.
6-46-1
Domingues J.
Vocel M.
6-36-1
Sachko V.[3]
Dellien Velasco M.
6-26-1
Gerch L.
Ilkel C.[7]
6-46-2
Vrbensky M.
De Schepper K.
7-57-65
Gigante M.
Burruchaga R.
7-652-66-2
Moreno De Alboran N.[8]
Moro Canas A.
6-33-67-5
Gengel M.
Roca Batalla O.[4]
6-46-746-3
Andreev A.
Rosenkranz M.
6-36-3
Nouza P.
Cornea V.
6-36-736-2
Mensik J.
Menendez Maceiras A.
6-34-0
Rosol L.
Kirkin E.[6]
4-66-47-61