Emilio Nava vs Ulises Blanch — Shymkent 1 CH Semi-final

Shymkent 1 CH · CHALLENGER · Semi-final
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1686Clay ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 9 May 2022
clay
USA
Ulises Blanch
#1661ATP
28 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLWWWW
Nava E.
6-3 6-2
Blanch U.
Nava E.
662
Blanch U.
320

Emilio Nava defeated Ulises Blanch 6-3 6-2 in the Shymkent 1 CH semi-final on clay. The result followed the form book — Emilio Nava came in ranked #91.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nava E.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Blanch U.

Blanch U.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Nava E.

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

Nava E.Blanch U.
22
Serve
—
1
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Nava E.Blanch U.
1st serve in·Slight edge
63%
58%
1st serve points won·Even
73%
74%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
49%
Service points won·Even
64%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
36%
Break points saved·Even
64%
63%
Aces / match·Slight edge
7.7
6.3
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.0
3.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 113). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nava E.Blanch U.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
52
19
Break points saved·Slight edge
94
83
Break points won·Clear edge
17
2
Deciding sets·Dominant
89
19
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
23
37

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nava E.
6.7
Slight advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Blanch U.
5.5
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 28 days (−0.3)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.9
Surface form
5.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
7.5
Minutes 14d
7.0
3-set count
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Nava E.Blanch U.
Freshness·
100
—

Nava E.: 15 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Nava E.
Fanselow S.
6-47-63
Semi-finals
Fanselow S.
Kirkin E.
7-646-4
Nava E.
Blanch U.
6-36-2
Quarter-finals
Kirkin E.
Karlovskiy E.[7]
6-34-66-3
Nava E.
Durasovic V.
6-16-2
Fanselow S.
Madaras D.
6-47-65
Blanch U.
Lazarov A.
4-2
R16
Lazarov A.
Shevchenko A.[3]
3-66-47-63
Madaras D.
Ionel N.
6-46-3
Blanch U.
Alvarez Varona N.[5]
7-56-727-63
Durasovic V.
Torpegaard M.
6-47-62
Karlovskiy E.[7]
Yevseyev D.
3-66-36-2
Kirkin E.
Marchenko I.[4]
5-76-16-3
Nava E.
Zhu E.
6-46-4
Fanselow S.
Bellier A.
3-66-16-2
R32
Marchenko I.[4]
Decamps G.
6-36-1
Ionel N.
Lomakin G.
6-06-2
Bellier A.
Tiurnev E.
6-36-767-66
Fanselow S.
Jianu F.[8]
6-37-5
Alvarez Varona N.[5]
Metreveli A.
6-36-1
Lazarov A.
Bondarevskiy Y.
4-67-657-5
Torpegaard M.
Uchida K.[6]
6-34-66-3
Zhu E.
Istomin D.
6-13-66-1
Blanch U.
Oliel Y.
7-57-65
Yevseyev D.
Mukund S.
7-56-2
Nava E.
Sandgren T.[1]
6-36-4
Kirkin E.
Haase R.
5-76-47-62
Madaras D.
Celikbilek A.[2]
6-34-66-4
Shevchenko A.[3]
Vanshelboim E.
6-16-1
Karlovskiy E.[7]
Donati M.
6-33-66-3
Durasovic V.
Zhukayev B.
6-46-2