Quentin Halys vs Michael Geerts — Ismaning CH Round of 32

Ismaning CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Quentin Halys
FRA1
Quentin Halys
#90ATP
1707ELO
1677Hard ELO
$694kYTD
$5.4MCAREER
29 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLWWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 10 October 2022
hard
Michael Geerts
BEL
Michael Geerts
#328ATP
1400ELO
1383Hard ELO
31 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLWLW
Halys Q.
7-6 6-4
Geerts M.
Halys Q.
71062
Geerts M.
6840

Quentin Halys defeated Michael Geerts 7-6 6-4 in the Ismaning CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Quentin Halys came in ranked #90, defending last year's semi-final.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Halys Q.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Geerts M.

Geerts M.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Halys Q.

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

Halys Q.Geerts M.
39
Serve
—
26
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Halys Q.Geerts M.
1st serve in·Even
58%
58%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
79%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
52%
Service points won·Even
67%
63%
Return points won·Even
34%
36%
Break points saved·Even
65%
62%
Aces / match·Dominant
11.0
4.3
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.9
2.5

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Halys Q.Geerts M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
57
9
Break points saved·Clear edge
97
82
Break points won·Even
4
3
Deciding sets·Dominant
75
8
Tiebreaks·Dominant
91
2

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Halys Q.
6.0
Even matchUmpiry Score
  • Recent retirement (−1.5)
Geerts M.
4.6
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
8.5+294 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
1.5Hard Elo 1383
8.5Overall Elo 1707
ELO gap
1.5Overall Elo 1400
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.5
Surface form
3.1
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
5.7
Minutes 14d
6.6
0.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
9.0
Surface transition
6.0
Context
8.5
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
Halys Q.Geerts M.
Freshness·Even
93
89

Halys Q.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d) · Geerts M.: 1 day rest · 1 match, 16 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Halys Q.[1]
Rehberg M.
7-666-3
Semi-finals
Halys Q.[1]
Zuk K.
7-657-64
Rehberg M.
Pospisil V.[3]
6-47-62
Quarter-finals
Pospisil V.[3]
Sachko V.
6-31-0
Rehberg M.
Ejupovic E.
7-687-64
Halys Q.[1]
Gray A.
6-46-737-64
Zuk K.
Yevseyev D.
6-43-66-3
R16
Gray A.
Fatic N.[7]
7-636-1
Pospisil V.[3]
Forejtek J.
7-656-4
Sachko V.
Masur D.[5]
6-16-736-3
Rehberg M.
Haase R.
6-37-67
Zuk K.
Decamps G.
6-16-4
Ejupovic E.
Klein L.
3-66-37-5
Yevseyev D.
Yunchaokete B.
6-17-65
Halys Q.[1]
Ramanathan R.
7-623-67-5
R32
Forejtek J.
Topo M.
6-23-66-3
Ramanathan R.
Harris B.
7-646-757-65
Rehberg M.
Machac T.[2]
6-36-4
Haase R.
Kolar Z.
6-47-66
Ejupovic E.
Bellier A.[6]
5-77-636-3
Sachko V.
Moraing M.
6-26-4
Masur D.[5]
Karlovskiy E.
6-46-3
Zuk K.
Escoffier A.[8]
6-43-66-4
Decamps G.
Bachinger M.
6-01-66-4
Yunchaokete B.
Hassan B.
7-626-2
Fatic N.[7]
Lenz J.
7-56-3
Gray A.
Horansky F.
6-36-4
Halys Q.[1]
Geerts M.
7-686-4
Klein L.
Virtanen O.
6-16-4
Pospisil V.[3]
Florig P.
6-36-2
Yevseyev D.
Novak D.[4]
7-657-64