Dennis Novak vs Cem Ilkel — Bergamo CH Round of 32

Bergamo CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
AUT
Dennis Novak
#818ATP
32 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 31 October 2022
hard
Cem Ilkel
TUR
Cem Ilkel
#1462ATP
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
Novak D.
6-2 6-4
Ilkel C.
Novak D.
662
Ilkel C.
240

Dennis Novak defeated Cem Ilkel 6-2 6-4 in the Bergamo CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Dennis Novak came in ranked #818, defending last year's quarter-final.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Novak D.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Ilkel C.

Ilkel C.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Novak D.

Serve advantage — Novak D.

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
Novak D.Ilkel C.
1st serve in·Slight edge
64%
58%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
50%
Service points won·Even
62%
62%
Return points won·Even
40%
37%
Break points saved·Even
59%
56%
Aces / match·Clear edge
3.5
5.0
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.1
2.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (184 vs 123). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Novak D.Ilkel C.
Clutch Rating·Even
36
32
Break points saved·Dominant
80
49
Break points won·Clear edge
15
3
Deciding sets·Dominant
33
70
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
77
66

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Novak D.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Ilkel C.
7.0
Strong advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
1.9
Surface form
8.4
0.0Lost last 3
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
7.9
Minutes 14d
2.5
7.0
3-set count
4.0
9.0
Prev. match
6.0
Context
7.0
Defending pts

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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Virtanen O.
Struff J.
6-27-5
Semi-finals
Virtanen O.
Borges N.[2]
6-47-5
Struff J.
Rodionov J.
2-66-46-2
Quarter-finals
Struff J.
Arnaldi M.
4-66-16-4
Borges N.[2]
Vavassori A.
6-46-4
Virtanen O.
Stricker D.
6-47-65
Rodionov J.
Hanfmann Y.
4-66-46-4
R16
Vavassori A.
Gojo B.
6-16-2
Virtanen O.
Zhang Z.[3]
6-47-67
Struff J.
Nardi L.
6-47-61
Arnaldi M.
Broady L.
6-41-66-3
Rodionov J.
Celikbilek A.
6-26-4
Hanfmann Y.
Shevchenko A.
7-664-66-0
Stricker D.
Kopriva V.
6-47-5
Borges N.[2]
Novak D.
6-34-2
R32
Broady L.
Bergs Z.
7-54-1
Struff J.
Cobolli F.
6-16-2
Novak D.
Ilkel C.
6-26-4
Gojo B.
Karlovskiy E.
7-56-0
Zhang Z.[3]
Zeppieri G.
3-66-36-4
Stricker D.
Van Rijthoven T.[5]
3-66-46-4
Nardi L.
Machac T.[6]
7-57-63
Arnaldi M.
Barrere G.[4]
6-36-1
Hanfmann Y.
Piros Z.
5-76-26-2
Rodionov J.
Verdasco F.[8]
6-26-3
Borges N.[2]
Kovalik J.
7-56-3
Shevchenko A.
Majchrzak K.[1]
6-47-5
Celikbilek A.
Kachmazov A.
6-42-67-5
Virtanen O.
Guinard M.
6-47-5
Kopriva V.
Kuzmanov D.
4-66-26-1
Vavassori A.
Jarry N.[7]
7-647-64