Celine Naef vs Caty Mcnally — s Hertogenbosch Round of 16

s Hertogenbosch · WTA · Round of 16
SUI
Celine Naef
#194WTA
1671ELO
1632Grass ELO
21 yrs · 167 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWWWWLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 12 June 2023
grass
Caty Mcnally
USA8
Caty Mcnally
#50WTA
1817ELO
1707Grass ELO
$711kYTD
$3.7MCAREER
24 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLWLWW
Naef C.
3-6 6-4 6-3
Mcnally C.
Naef C.
3662
Mcnally C.
6431

Celine Naef defeated Caty Mcnally 3-6 6-4 6-3 in the s Hertogenbosch round of 16 on grass. The upset overturned the form book — Caty Mcnally came in ranked #50, defending last year's quarter-final.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Naef C.serving75% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Mcnally C.

Mcnally C.serving81% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Naef C.

Serve advantage — Mcnally C.

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
Naef C.Mcnally C.
1st serve in·Slight edge
60%
70%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
66%
61%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
45%
Service points won·Even
58%
56%
Return points won·Slight edge
42%
47%
Break points saved·Even
56%
54%
Aces / match·Clear edge
3.7
1.2
Double faults / match·Even
3.0
3.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (119 vs 111). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Naef C.Mcnally C.
Clutch Rating·Even
72
73
Break points saved·Slight edge
81
73
Break points won·Clear edge
87
99
Deciding sets·Even
73
74
Tiebreaks·
—
78

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Naef C.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Mcnally C.
4.5
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Form & Matchup
3.5Grass Elo 1632
Surface ELO
6.5+75 Grass Elo edge
3.0Overall Elo 1671
ELO gap
7.0Overall Elo 1817
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
Surface form
5.3
Fatigue & Travel
Surface transition
3.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
7.0

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
Naef C.Mcnally C.
Freshness·Even
100
96

Naef C.: 20 days rest · Mcnally C.: 11 days rest · 2 matches (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast

Draw

Final
Alexandrova E.[1]
Kudermetova V.[1]
4-66-47-63
Semi-finals
Alexandrova E.[1]
Sasnovich A.[7]
6-17-61
Kudermetova V.[1]
Hruncakova V.
6-36-2
Quarter-finals
Sasnovich A.[7]
Samsonova L.[2]
7-643-1
Kudermetova V.[1]
Naef C.
6-36-2
Hruncakova V.
Krueger A.
6-46-4
Alexandrova E.[1]
Bektas E.
6-46-4
R16
Sasnovich A.[7]
Minnen G.
6-24-66-3
Naef C.
Mcnally C.[8]
3-66-46-3
Bektas E.
Vickery S.
6-46-4
Kudermetova V.[1]
Zhao C.
6-16-3
Krueger A.
Azarenka V.[3]
6-36-2
Samsonova L.[2]
Kudermetova P.
6-46-1
Alexandrova E.[1]
Birrell K.
6-47-63
Hruncakova V.
Andreescu B.
7-666-3
R32
Kudermetova V.[1]
Riske Amritraj A.
6-33-0
Minnen G.
Ponchet J.
7-54-66-2
Vickery S.
Hon P.
6-36-0
Naef C.
Williams V.
3-67-636-2
Zhao C.
Bonaventure Y.
7-637-64
Alexandrova E.[1]
Rodina E.
6-36-4
Azarenka V.[3]
Stevanovic N.
7-656-3
Krueger A.
Peterson R.
6-16-2
Samsonova L.[2]
Rueffer L.
7-56-757-63
Hruncakova V.
Bandecchi S.
6-46-2
Bektas E.
Galfi D.
7-57-61
Birrell K.
Pattinama Kerkhove L.
6-16-4
Andreescu B.
Sonmez Z.
6-46-4
Sasnovich A.[7]
Stefanini L.
6-06-3
Mcnally C.[8]
Volynets K.
6-26-1
Kudermetova P.
Yuan Y.[4]
6-46-3