Steve Johnson vs Arthur Cazaux — Lexington CH Final

Lexington CH · CHALLENGER · Final
USA2
Steve Johnson
36 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWWWWLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 31 July 2023
hard
Arthur Cazaux
FRA1
Arthur Cazaux
#98ATP
1793ELO
1738Hard ELO
$46kYTD
$2.3MCAREER
23 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLWWLW
Johnson S.
7-6 6-4
Cazaux A.
Johnson S.
7762
Cazaux A.
6540

Steve Johnson defeated Arthur Cazaux 7-6 6-4 in the Lexington CH final on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Johnson S.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Cazaux A.

Cazaux A.serving92% hold

wins 72% of points on serve vs Johnson S.

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

Serve & return on hard

Johnson S.Cazaux A.
—
Serve
40
—
Return
19

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the hard field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Johnson S.Cazaux A.
1st serve in·Even
59%
59%
1st serve points won·Even
74%
76%
2nd serve points won·Even
53%
52%
Service points won·Even
65%
66%
Return points won·Slight edge
33%
38%
Break points saved·Slight edge
60%
66%
Aces / match·Even
7.4
7.7
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.2
2.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (44 vs 198). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Johnson S.Cazaux A.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
52
65
Break points saved·Even
97
97
Break points won·Clear edge
10
27
Deciding sets·Clear edge
64
87
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
76
70

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Johnson S.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Cazaux A.
6.3
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.7
Surface form
5.7
Fatigue & Travel
8.5
Minutes 14d
6.3
3-set count
7.0
9.0
Prev. match
7.0
Surface transition
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Johnson S.[2]
Cazaux A.[1]
7-656-4
Semi-finals
Cazaux A.[1]
Kingsley C.
6-27-66
Johnson S.[2]
Sandgren T.[5]
7-616-3
Quarter-finals
Cazaux A.[1]
Mayo A.
6-16-4
Sandgren T.[5]
Hong S.[4]
6-46-2
Kingsley C.
Wu T.[3]
6-36-2
Johnson S.[2]
Blanch U.
6-36-4
R16
Wu T.[3]
Vallejo A.
6-47-64
Mayo A.
Schoolkate T.[8]
3-66-46-3
Cazaux A.[1]
Jasika O.
6-26-3
Hong S.[4]
Tomic B.
6-16-2
Sandgren T.[5]
Kirchheimer S.
6-26-4
Blanch U.
Walton A.[7]
6-36-3
Kingsley C.
Sweeny D.[6]
6-47-5
Johnson S.[2]
Spizzirri E.
6-37-5
R32
Kirchheimer S.
Damm M.
6-747-657-64
Sweeny D.[6]
Boyer T.
6-36-4
Spizzirri E.
Harrison C.
7-646-4
Blanch U.
Mchugh A.
7-626-4
Walton A.[7]
Janvier M.
4-66-36-3
Sandgren T.[5]
Lapadat J.
7-56-3
Vallejo A.
Bolt A.
6-44-66-1
Wu T.[3]
Langmo C.
6-46-4
Mayo A.
Ponwith N.
6-46-1
Hong S.[4]
Ly N.
6-17-5
Tomic B.
Dostanic S.
6-42-66-1
Jasika O.
Peniston R.
7-56-2
Cazaux A.[1]
Boulais J.
7-54-66-4
Schoolkate T.[8]
Sekulic P.
3-67-636-1
Kingsley C.
Mochizuki Y.
6-44-66-3
Johnson S.[2]
Harris B.
7-656-4