Salvatore Caruso vs Marek Gengel — Manama CH Round of 16

Manama CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
ITA
Salvatore Caruso
33 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWLWLWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 13 February 2023
hard
Marek Gengel
CZE
Marek Gengel
#373ATP
1411ELO
1377Hard ELO
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWWLWWW
Caruso S.
6-1 6-2
Gengel M.
Caruso S.
662
Gengel M.
120

Salvatore Caruso defeated Marek Gengel 6-1 6-2 in the Manama CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Caruso S.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Gengel M.

Gengel M.serving70% hold

wins 58% of points on serve vs Caruso S.

Serve advantage — Caruso S.

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
Caruso S.Gengel M.
1st serve in·Even
60%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
64%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
46%
Service points won·Even
59%
60%
Return points won·Even
41%
37%
Break points saved·Even
53%
57%
Aces / match·Dominant
1.8
5.0
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.3
3.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (66 vs 88). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Caruso S.Gengel M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
41
11
Break points saved·Dominant
65
35
Break points won·Clear edge
30
10
Deciding sets·Dominant
80
54
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
18
4

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Caruso S.
4.9
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Recent retirement (−1.5)
Gengel M.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.8
Surface form
5.7
0.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
7.1
Minutes 14d
9.0
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
8.0
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
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Shelbayh A.
6-16-4
Semi-finals
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Struff J.
6-46-736-1
Shelbayh A.
Caruso S.
7-56-2
Quarter-finals
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Popyrin A.[2]
6-37-65
Struff J.
Machac T.[6]
6-46-3
Caruso S.
Giustino L.
7-56-2
Shelbayh A.
Kubler J.[1]
6-25-77-62
R16
Giustino L.
Passaro F.[4]
7-56-3
Struff J.
Oconnell C.[3]
6-17-61
Popyrin A.[2]
Durasovic V.
1-66-16-4
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Muller A.
6-44-66-4
Machac T.[6]
Sinclair C.
6-06-2
Caruso S.
Gengel M.
6-16-2
Shelbayh A.
Kopriva V.
6-43-66-3
Kubler J.[1]
Michalski D.
6-36-3
R32
Gengel M.
Jianu F.
7-636-727-63
Oconnell C.[3]
Neuchrist M.
6-46-4
Muller A.
Roca Batalla O.
6-36-1
Machac T.[6]
Giannessi A.
6-22-66-2
Kopriva V.
Kotov P.[7]
6-26-1
Kokkinakis T.[8]
Erel Y.
7-56-1
Durasovic V.
Braynin A.
6-766-17-5
Popyrin A.[2]
Virtanen O.
7-56-2
Struff J.
Chepelev A.
6-26-2
Sinclair C.
Arnaboldi A.
7-632-66-3
Giustino L.
Safwat M.
6-46-4
Passaro F.[4]
Uchida K.
6-16-4
Shelbayh A.
Atlangeriev B.
6-26-3
Caruso S.
Arnaldi M.[5]
3-66-36-2
Kubler J.[1]
Travaglia S.
5-76-17-611