Borna Gojo vs Jason Jung — Nottingham CH Round of 32

Nottingham CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Borna Gojo
CRO
Borna Gojo
#168ATP
1683ELO
1468Grass ELO
$139kYTD
$1.6MCAREER
28 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLLWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 6 June 2022
grass
Jason Jung
TPE
Jason Jung
#896ATP
1420ELO
1417Grass ELO
37 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWLLLLLL
Gojo B.
6-2 7-6
Jung J.
Gojo B.
6772
Jung J.
2630

Borna Gojo defeated Jason Jung 6-2 7-6 in the Nottingham CH round of 32 on grass.

Key context

  • Match story: Borna Gojo closed it out in two sets, 6–2 7–6.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Gojo B.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Jung J.

Jung J.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Gojo B.

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
Gojo B.Jung J.
1st serve in·Even
64%
65%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
76%
67%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
50%
Service points won·Slight edge
67%
61%
Return points won·Even
36%
40%
Break points saved·Slight edge
67%
56%
Aces / match·Dominant
10.5
2.5
Double faults / match·Even
2.8
2.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 121). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Gojo B.Jung J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
53
21
Break points saved·Dominant
95
64
Break points won·Even
10
8
Deciding sets·Dominant
70
21
Tiebreaks·Even
73
69

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gojo B.
5.1
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Jung J.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.9
Surface form
5.5
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
8.2
0.0
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
9.0
3.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Gojo B.Jung J.
Freshness·Clear edge
100
78

Gojo B.: 20 days rest · Jung J.: 5 days rest · 3 matches, 61 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Evans D.[1]
Thompson J.[3]
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Thompson J.[3]
Popyrin A.[5]
6-46-2
Evans D.[1]
Sock J.[7]
7-56-3
Quarter-finals
Thompson J.[3]
Kukushkin M.
6-24-66-3
Sock J.[7]
Broady L.
7-631-66-4
Evans D.[1]
Huesler M.[8]
6-46-4
Popyrin A.[5]
Peniston R.
6-36-4
R16
Peniston R.
Gojo B.
6-47-64
Popyrin A.[5]
Escoffier A.
6-37-5
Kukushkin M.
Verdasco F.[6]
6-36-726-4
Thompson J.[3]
Clarke J.
6-46-4
Evans D.[1]
Fabbiano T.
7-56-0
Sock J.[7]
Blancaneaux G.
6-04-66-2
Broady L.
Virtanen O.
2-67-56-2
Huesler M.[8]
Cox D.
6-24-66-2
R32
Peniston R.
Vesely J.[2]
6-777-657-66
Popyrin A.[5]
Lacko L.
6-46-2
Gojo B.
Jung J.
6-27-63
Escoffier A.
Pouille L.
5-76-46-4
Clarke J.
Jubb P.
6-36-2
Kukushkin M.
Copil M.
6-46-4
Sock J.[7]
Squire H.
6-27-67
Blancaneaux G.
Ramanathan R.
7-637-5
Virtanen O.
Millman J.[4]
7-656-3
Cox D.
Gaio F.
2-66-46-3
Evans D.[1]
Couacaud E.
7-57-63
Thompson J.[3]
Bellier A.
6-36-4
Fabbiano T.
Ajdukovic D.
4-67-636-4
Broady L.
Lestienne C.
6-44-66-3
Huesler M.[8]
Escobedo E.
6-46-4
Verdasco F.[6]
Gray A.
7-637-66