Sumit Nagal vs Leo Borg — Poznan CH Round of 32

Poznan CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Sumit Nagal
IND
Sumit Nagal
#241ATP
1543ELO
1538Clay ELO
28 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 19 June 2023
clay
SWE
Leo Borg
#534ATP
23 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWLLLWW
Nagal S.
6-2 6-3
Borg L.
Nagal S.
662
Borg L.
230

Sumit Nagal defeated Leo Borg 6-2 6-3 in the Poznan CH round of 32 on clay.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nagal S.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Borg L.

Borg L.serving57% hold

wins 53% of points on serve vs Nagal S.

Serve advantage — Nagal 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
Nagal S.Borg L.
1st serve in·Slight edge
70%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
64%
64%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
51%
46%
Service points won·Even
60%
58%
Return points won·Slight edge
42%
35%
Break points saved·Even
58%
55%
Aces / match·Clear edge
1.4
3.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
1.8
3.3

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 35). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nagal S.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Borg L.
3.5
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 119 days (−1.5)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
7.0
Surface form
2.6
0.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
9.0
Minutes 14d
8.0
Prev. match
6.0
Surface transition
6.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
6.0

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
Nagal S.Borg L.
Freshness·
96
—

Nagal S.: 8 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Navone M.
Barrios Vera T.[5]
7-56-3
Semi-finals
Navone M.
Stodder T.
6-26-0
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Kolar Z.
6-41-66-3
Quarter-finals
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Blanch U.
6-35-77-5
Stodder T.
Michalski D.
6-16-4
Kolar Z.
Diaz Acosta F.[4]
6-36-1
Navone M.
Guinard M.
7-56-736-2
R16
Kolar Z.
Taberner C.
6-46-1
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Mpetshi Perricard G.
7-626-3
Blanch U.
Blanch D.
1-66-36-4
Guinard M.
Kym J.
6-36-4
Stodder T.
Martin Tiffon P.
6-43-66-0
Michalski D.
Molleker R.
6-46-2
Navone M.
Kasnikowski M.
6-47-64
Diaz Acosta F.[4]
Nagal S.
6-12-66-4
R32
Mpetshi Perricard G.
Mensik J.
7-683-67-611
Blanch U.
Sachko V.
7-650-0
Guinard M.
Blancaneaux G.[6]
6-24-3
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Houkes M.
6-17-62
Stodder T.
Jorda Sanchis D.
7-626-3
Martin Tiffon P.
Svrcina D.[8]
7-57-64
Navone M.
Coria F.[2]
3-66-36-1
Molleker R.
Machac T.[3]
7-57-61
Kolar Z.
Dzumhur D.[7]
6-26-2
Diaz Acosta F.[4]
Giustino L.
3-66-26-4
Blanch D.
Shevchenko A.[1]
6-36-2
Taberner C.
Zuk K.
6-47-63
Nagal S.
Borg L.
6-26-3
Kym J.
Oberleitner N.
6-16-2
Michalski D.
Valkusz M.
5-76-46-1
Kasnikowski M.
Laaksonen H.
6-12-67-64