Coco Gauff vs Jessica Pegula — Eastbourne Quarter-final

Eastbourne · WTA · Quarter-final
Coco Gauff
USA5
Coco Gauff
#7WTA
2071ELO
1823Grass ELO
$2.9MYTD
$33MCAREER
22 yrs · 175 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 26 June 2023
grass
Jessica Pegula
USA3
Jessica Pegula
#4WTA
2097ELO
1903Grass ELO
$2.8MYTD
$25MCAREER
32 yrs · 170 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWLWWWL
Gauff C.
6-3 6-3
Pegula J.
Gauff C.
662
Pegula J.
330

Coco Gauff defeated Jessica Pegula 6-3 6-3 in the Eastbourne quarter-final on grass. The upset overturned the form book — Jessica Pegula came in ranked #4, leading the head-to-head 5–3. Coco Gauff narrowed the head-to-head to 5–4.

Key context

Head to head

3–5
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2026-07-07WimbledonQFgrassCoco Gauff6-4 3-6 3-6
2025-11-01Riyadh FinalsRRhardJessica Pegula6-3 6-7(4) 6-2
2025-10-06WuhanFhardCoco Gauff6-4 7-5
2024-11-04Riyadh FinalsRRhardCoco Gauff6-3 6-2
2024-06-17BerlinSFgrassJessica Pegula7-5 7-6(2)
2023-10-30Cancun FinalsSFhardJessica Pegula6-2 6-1
2023-08-07MontrealQFhardJessica Pegula6-2 5-7 7-5
2022-02-14DubaiR32hardJessica Pegula6-4 6-4
View full head-to-head →

Serve vs return

This season
Gauff C.serving81% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Pegula J.

Pegula J.serving79% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Gauff C.

Even serve battle

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
Gauff C.Pegula J.
1st serve in·Even
60%
61%
1st serve points won·Even
69%
68%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
44%
50%
Service points won·Even
59%
61%
Return points won·Even
48%
45%
Break points saved·Even
56%
58%
Aces / match·Even
3.4
3.0
Double faults / match·Dominant
5.8
2.3

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Gauff C.Pegula J.
Clutch Rating·Even
99
96
Break points saved·Even
96
96
Break points won·Even
100
99
Deciding sets·Even
100
100
Tiebreaks·Even
99
96

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gauff C.
6.9
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Pegula J.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
  • Injury return: 28 days (−0.3)
  • Surface jump clay↔grass (−0.8)
Form & Matchup
4.6Grass Elo 1823
Surface ELO
5.4+81 Grass Elo edge
4.8Overall Elo 2071
ELO gap
5.2Overall Elo 2097
5.0
H2H
5.0
6.0
Surface form
6.2
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
8.5
Minutes 14d
9.0
Prev. match
Surface transition
3.0
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
Gauff C.Pegula J.
Freshness·Clear edge
60
76

Gauff C.: 3 days rest · 3 matches, 85 games (7d) · Pegula J.: 5 days rest · 2 matches, 54 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Weather
20°CPartly cloudy
Wind 26 km/hHumidity 53%

Draw

Final
Keys M.[2]
Kasatkina D.[9]
6-27-613
Semi-finals
Keys M.[2]
Gauff C.[5]
6-36-3
Kasatkina D.[9]
Giorgi C.
6-27-5
Quarter-finals
Giorgi C.
Ostapenko J.[3]
7-68
Kasatkina D.[9]
Garcia C.[2]
6-22-1
Gauff C.[5]
Pegula J.[3]
6-36-3
Keys M.[2]
Martic P.
6-46-1
R16
Keys M.[2]
Wang X.
6-27-63
Martic P.
Haddad Maia B.[8]
6-43-2
Ostapenko J.[3]
Dart H.
6-36-4
Giorgi C.
Jabeur O.[4]
6-36-2
Kasatkina D.[9]
Pliskova K.
3-66-36-3
Garcia C.[2]
Bogdan A.
6-36-4
Gauff C.[5]
Burrage J.
6-16-1
Pegula J.[3]
Osorio C.[6]
6-21-66-3
R32
Keys M.[2]
Martincova T.
7-646-4
Dart H.
Zhang S.
7-56-756-1
Pliskova K.
Mertens E.
6-736-33-0
Jabeur O.[4]
Paolini J.[1]
6-36-2
Ostapenko J.[3]
Strycova B.
6-46-3
Gauff C.[5]
Pera B.
6-36-2
Bogdan A.
Cirstea S.
6-32-66-3
Osorio C.[6]
Rogers S.
6-46-4
Wang X.
Marino R.
6-46-2
Haddad Maia B.[8]
Bouzkova M.
3-66-37-63
Pegula J.[3]
Zheng Q.
6-36-4
Giorgi C.
Watson H.
6-36-4
Kasatkina D.[9]
Kalinina A.
6-36-1
Burrage J.
Davis L.
4-66-46-3
Martic P.
Boulter K.
6-47-5
Garcia C.[2]
Brengle M.
6-17-5