Borna Gojo vs Jakub Mensik — Tunis CH Quarter-final

Tunis CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Borna Gojo
CRO1
Borna Gojo
#168ATP
1683ELO
1642Clay ELO
$139kYTD
$1.6MCAREER
28 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLLWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 15 May 2023
clay
Jakub Mensik
CZE
Jakub Mensik
#19ATP
1931ELO
1861Clay ELO
$2.0MYTD
$6.9MCAREER
20 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWWWWWL
Gojo B.
6-2 6-0
Mensik J.
Gojo B.
662
Mensik J.
200

Borna Gojo defeated Jakub Mensik 6-2 6-0 in the Tunis CH quarter-final on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Jakub Mensik came in ranked #19.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Gojo B.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Mensik J.

Mensik J.serving84% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Gojo B.

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
Gojo B.Mensik J.
1st serve in·Slight edge
64%
59%
1st serve points won·Even
77%
76%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
49%
Service points won·Even
67%
65%
Return points won·Even
36%
37%
Break points saved·Even
66%
63%
Aces / match·Even
10.7
10.2
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.6
3.6

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (146 vs 186). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Gojo B.Mensik J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
53
88
Break points saved·Even
95
98
Break points won·Dominant
10
77
Deciding sets·Clear edge
70
92
Tiebreaks·Dominant
73
99

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gojo B.
5.5
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Mensik J.
7.5
Dominant favouriteUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
2.9Clay Elo 1642
Surface ELO
7.1+219 Clay Elo edge
1.8Overall Elo 1683
ELO gap
8.2Overall Elo 1931
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.1
Surface form
8.4
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
9.05-match win streak
Fatigue & Travel
5.2
Minutes 14d
2.9
4.0
3-set count
0.0
9.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Gojo B.Mensik J.
Freshness·Slight edge
100
90

Gojo B.: 20 days rest · Mensik J.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Shimabukuro S.
Blancaneaux G.
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Shimabukuro S.
De Jong J.
6-36-1
Blancaneaux G.
Gojo B.[1]
6-26-3
Quarter-finals
Gojo B.[1]
Mensik J.
6-26-0
Blancaneaux G.
Marterer M.[4]
5-2
Shimabukuro S.
Dougaz A.
2-67-56-3
De Jong J.
Dzumhur D.[8]
7-54-66-3
R16
Blancaneaux G.
Coppejans K.
6-22-66-3
De Jong J.
Weis A.
6-46-3
Shimabukuro S.
Barrios Vera T.[3]
3-66-36-2
Dzumhur D.[8]
Novak D.
6-46-0
Dougaz A.
Tirante T.[5]
6-46-3
Mensik J.
Ionel N.
6-756-47-5
Gojo B.[1]
Noguchi R.
6-26-1
Marterer M.[4]
Rincon D.
6-36-4
R32
Barrios Vera T.[3]
Gigante M.
6-11-0
Weis A.
Broady L.[2]
6-05-76-3
De Jong J.
Cuevas P.
7-602-1
Mensik J.
Lokoli L.
6-46-2
Ionel N.
Bellucci M.[7]
7-656-2
Blancaneaux G.
Sousa J.[6]
6-35-76-4
Dougaz A.
Jaziri M.
6-36-1
Shimabukuro S.
Olivieri G.
6-726-36-4
Novak D.
Bailly G.
2-66-37-63
Tirante T.[5]
Mochizuki S.
6-46-4
Coppejans K.
Maestrelli F.
6-36-4
Gojo B.[1]
Mejia N.
6-47-64
Marterer M.[4]
Tabilo A.
6-36-2
Rincon D.
De Loore J.
4-67-56-3
Noguchi R.
Wenger D.
6-26-2
Dzumhur D.[8]
Ouakaa A.
1-66-06-2