Christopher Eubanks vs Lloyd Harris — Gwangju CH Round of 32

Gwangju CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
USA2
Christopher Eubanks
#788ATP
1523ELO
1493Hard ELO
30 yrs · 201 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWLWLLL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 1 May 2023
hard
Lloyd Harris
RSA
Lloyd Harris
#187ATP
1665ELO
1640Hard ELO
$130kYTD
$4.7MCAREER
29 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLWWLL
Eubanks C.
7-6 4-6 6-4
Harris L.
Eubanks C.
77462
Harris L.
63641

Christopher Eubanks defeated Lloyd Harris 7-6 4-6 6-4 in the Gwangju CH round of 32 on hard. Christopher Eubanks extended the head-to-head to 3–1.

Key context

Head to head

2–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2023-06-26MallorcaSFgrassChristopher Eubanks4-6 6-3 7-6(9)
2021-09-27San DiegoR32hardLloyd Harris3-6 6-1 6-4
2019-03-04Indian Wells MastersQ1hardChristopher Eubanks7-5 7-5

Serve vs return

This season
Eubanks C.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Harris L.

Harris L.serving94% hold

wins 74% of points on serve vs Eubanks C.

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

Statistics

This season
Eubanks C.Harris L.
1st serve in·Even
68%
64%
1st serve points won·Even
74%
77%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
50%
Service points won·Even
67%
67%
Return points won·Slight edge
32%
37%
Break points saved·Even
64%
64%
Aces / match·Slight edge
10.6
11.5
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.2
2.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (166 vs 154). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Eubanks C.Harris L.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
50
57
Break points saved·Even
96
95
Break points won·Clear edge
3
24
Deciding sets·Dominant
67
94
Tiebreaks·Dominant
74
24

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Eubanks C.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry Score
Harris L.
7.0
Strong advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
3.1Hard Elo 1493
Surface ELO
6.9+147 Hard Elo edge
3.0Overall Elo 1523
ELO gap
7.0Overall Elo 1665
0.0
H2H
10.0
7.8
Surface form
4.8
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
7.1
Minutes 14d
9.1
4.0
3-set count
8.0
Prev. match
8.0
Context
8.5
Defending pts
5.0
Opponent rise
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-slowfavours grinders
SlowFast
Final
Thompson J.[3]
Purcell M.[1]
6-36-2
Semi-finals
Purcell M.[1]
Polmans M.
6-06-2
Thompson J.[3]
Eubanks C.[2]
7-636-3
Quarter-finals
Eubanks C.[2]
Yunchaokete B.
6-36-2
Polmans M.
Jung J.
6-46-3
Thompson J.[3]
Hijikata R.[6]
6-46-4
Purcell M.[1]
Gomez E.[5]
6-27-63
R16
Eubanks C.[2]
Holt B.
6-26-1
Yunchaokete B.
Vukic A.[7]
6-47-64
Hijikata R.[6]
Tu L.
6-47-63
Jung J.
Chung Y.
3-66-36-4
Polmans M.
Duckworth J.[4]
6-37-65
Purcell M.[1]
Saville L.
6-26-2
Gomez E.[5]
Palan D.
6-36-2
Thompson J.[3]
Donskoy E.
6-26-4
R32
Chung Y.
Uchida K.
7-646-3
Duckworth J.[4]
Jasika O.
6-36-1
Yunchaokete B.
Sin S.
6-46-1
Gomez E.[5]
Celikbilek A.
6-36-2
Hijikata R.[6]
Diallo G.
6-26-4
Donskoy E.
Masur D.
6-36-1
Eubanks C.[2]
Harris L.
7-634-66-4
Holt B.
Ilkel C.
3-66-06-1
Vukic A.[7]
Shimabukuro S.
7-57-62
Thompson J.[3]
Park U.
6-16-736-0
Tu L.
Wu T.
6-36-2
Jung J.
Kudla D.[8]
6-36-716-3
Palan D.
Hsu Y.
6-26-3
Saville L.
Gojowczyk P.
6-36-4
Purcell M.[1]
Berankis R.
6-36-2
Polmans M.
Shimizu Y.
2-67-56-4