Altug Celikbilek vs Christopher Oconnell — Porto CH Final

Porto CH · CHALLENGER · Final
TUR
Altug Celikbilek
29 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWLLWWWL
0 — 0
Sets
Retired
Monday, 4 July 2022
hard
AUS3
Christopher Oconnell
1673ELO
1657Hard ELO
32 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
Celikbilek A.
7-6 3-1
Oconnell C.
Celikbilek A.
773–
Oconnell C.
651–

Altug Celikbilek advanced when Christopher Oconnell retired 7-6 3-1 in the Porto CH final.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Celikbilek A.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Oconnell C.

Oconnell C.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Celikbilek A.

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

Serve & return on hard

Celikbilek A.Oconnell C.
—
Serve
20
—
Return
32

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

Statistics

This season
Celikbilek A.Oconnell C.
1st serve in·Even
59%
61%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
51%
Service points won·Even
61%
64%
Return points won·Even
38%
35%
Break points saved·Even
60%
63%
Aces / match·Slight edge
6.0
7.1
Double faults / match·Dominant
3.5
1.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (124 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Celikbilek A.Oconnell C.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
40
49
Break points saved·Dominant
73
98
Break points won·Clear edge
38
22
Deciding sets·Clear edge
57
38
Tiebreaks·Dominant
26
93

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Celikbilek A.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Oconnell C.
4.7
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Recent retirement (−1.5)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.7
Surface form
6.1
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
7.6
Minutes 14d
0.0
3-set count
7.0
6.0
Prev. match
7.0
Surface transition
Context
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
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Celikbilek A.
Oconnell C.[3]
7-653-1
Semi-finals
Oconnell C.[3]
Nishioka Y.[2]
6-36-3
Celikbilek A.
Duckworth J.[1]
7-656-4
Quarter-finals
Oconnell C.[3]
Uchida K.
6-46-2
Celikbilek A.
Gerasimov E.[6]
7-56-4
Duckworth J.[1]
Mchugh A.
7-636-0
Nishioka Y.[2]
Grenier H.[5]
2-66-24-0
R16
Nishioka Y.[2]
Nava E.
7-626-3
Grenier H.[5]
Rodrigues D.
6-46-2
Uchida K.
De Schepper K.
7-56-3
Gerasimov E.[6]
Donskoy E.
6-36-776-2
Celikbilek A.
Escoffier A.
6-26-3
Mchugh A.
Ferreira Silva F.
7-656-1
Duckworth J.[1]
Bellier A.
6-26-1
Oconnell C.[3]
Barrere G.
6-36-1
R32
Ferreira Silva F.
Lestienne C.[7]
7-52-1
Nishioka Y.[2]
Kuznetsov A.
7-657-5
Nava E.
Bellucci T.
6-46-3
Gerasimov E.[6]
Decamps G.
6-736-46-1
Donskoy E.
Uchiyama Y.
7-56-4
Celikbilek A.
Olivo R.
6-36-3
Escoffier A.
Borges N.[4]
7-656-4
Mchugh A.
Basic M.
3-66-46-3
Duckworth J.[1]
Araujo P.
6-36-4
Grenier H.[5]
Sousa P.
6-37-5
De Schepper K.
Blanch U.
6-46-4
Bellier A.
Jung J.
6-32-66-4
Oconnell C.[3]
Jasika O.
6-26-4
Barrere G.
Domingues J.
5-77-626-1
Rodrigues D.
Moriya H.
6-46-2
Uchida K.
Marchenko I.
7-637-63