Yu Hsiou Hsu vs Max Purcell — Sydney CH Semi-final

Sydney CH · CHALLENGER · Semi-final
Yu Hsiou Hsu
TPE
Yu Hsiou Hsu
#210ATP
1489ELO
1468Hard ELO
27 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 31 October 2022
hard
AUS8
Max Purcell
28 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLLWW
Hsu Y.
6-1 6-4
Purcell M.
Hsu Y.
662
Purcell M.
140

Yu Hsiou Hsu defeated Max Purcell 6-1 6-4 in the Sydney CH semi-final on hard. The result followed the form book — Yu Hsiou Hsu came in leading the head-to-head 1–0. Yu Hsiou Hsu extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2023-10-02Shanghai MastersR128hardYu Hsiou Hsu7-6(5) 4-6 6-4

Serve vs return

This season
Hsu Y.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Purcell M.

Purcell M.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Hsu Y.

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

Statistics

This season
Hsu Y.Purcell M.
1st serve in·Slight edge
65%
60%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
67%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
51%
Service points won·Even
61%
64%
Return points won·Even
39%
37%
Break points saved·Even
59%
62%
Aces / match·Dominant
3.5
7.5
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.3
1.9

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (185 vs 187). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Hsu Y.Purcell M.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
36
59
Break points saved·Clear edge
74
92
Break points won·Slight edge
4
10
Deciding sets·Dominant
50
84
Tiebreaks·Even
77
81

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Hsu Y.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Purcell M.
7.1
Strong advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
0.0
H2H
10.0
3.7
Surface form
7.4
Win streak
7.03-match win streak
Fatigue & Travel
7.0
Minutes 14d
2.1
7.0
3-set count
4.0
8.0
Prev. match
9.0
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Hsu Y.
Polmans M.
6-47-65
Semi-finals
Polmans M.
Gengel M.
6-36-4
Hsu Y.
Purcell M.[8]
6-16-4
Quarter-finals
Polmans M.
Whitehouse M.
6-36-1
Gengel M.
Walton A.
6-26-0
Purcell M.[8]
Schoolkate T.
7-646-4
Hsu Y.
Mccabe J.
6-46-0
R16
Schoolkate T.
Saville L.
7-647-64
Hsu Y.
Inui Y.
6-26-1
Whitehouse M.
Mukund S.
3-66-26-0
Walton A.
Vukic A.[3]
7-686-1
Polmans M.
Shimizu Y.
4-66-06-4
Gengel M.
Noguchi R.[7]
7-646-3
Mccabe J.
Bolt A.
6-47-63
Purcell M.[8]
Seelig K.
6-36-2
R32
Inui Y.
Tu L.[4]
6-46-4
Seelig K.
Takahashi Y.
7-56-4
Mukund S.
Duckworth J.[2]
4-66-37-65
Whitehouse M.
Kelly D.
3-66-26-4
Shimizu Y.
Hijikata R.[5]
6-34-67-5
Vukic A.[3]
Sinclair C.
7-636-2
Noguchi R.[7]
Sekulic P.
6-26-4
Bolt A.
Sweeny D.[6]
6-46-1
Schoolkate T.
Jasika O.
6-21-66-3
Hsu Y.
Harper M.
6-16-4
Saville L.
Rai A.
7-646-4
Gengel M.
Beale J.
6-46-0
Mccabe J.
Jin J.
7-617-5
Polmans M.
Statham J.
6-26-2
Walton A.
Ellis B.
4-66-37-65
Purcell M.[8]
Gunneswaran P.
4-67-637-63