Emilio Nava vs Ethan Quinn — Palo Alto CH Round of 32

Palo Alto CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1621Hard ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 14 August 2023
hard
Ethan Quinn
USA
Ethan Quinn
#47ATP
1804ELO
1767Hard ELO
$724kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
22 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWWWLWL
Nava E.
6-1 6-2
Quinn E.
Nava E.
662
Quinn E.
120

Emilio Nava defeated Ethan Quinn 6-1 6-2 in the Palo Alto CH round of 32 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Ethan Quinn came in ranked #47.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nava E.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Quinn E.

Quinn E.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Nava E.

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

Nava E.Quinn E.
40
Serve
37
16
Return
21

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

Statistics

This season
Nava E.Quinn E.
1st serve in·Even
63%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
72%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
50%
Service points won·Even
64%
64%
Return points won·Even
37%
37%
Break points saved·Even
64%
62%
Aces / match·Slight edge
7.7
6.3
Double faults / match·Even
3.0
2.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (199 vs 186). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nava E.Quinn E.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
52
71
Break points saved·Even
94
95
Break points won·Even
17
19
Deciding sets·Slight edge
89
98
Tiebreaks·Dominant
23
97

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nava E.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Quinn E.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
3.1Hard Elo 1621
Surface ELO
6.9+146 Hard Elo edge
3.6Overall Elo 1704
ELO gap
6.4Overall Elo 1804
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.8
Surface form
3.0
0.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
7.7
Minutes 14d
8.7
7.0
3-set count
7.0
7.0
Prev. match
7.0
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
Nava E.Quinn E.
Freshness·Even
100
97

Nava E.: 15 days rest · Quinn E.: 13 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Lestienne C.[4]
Nava E.
7-646-2
Semi-finals
Nava E.
Boyer T.
2-67-646-1
Lestienne C.[4]
Watanuki Y.[2]
W/O
Quarter-finals
Watanuki Y.[2]
Duckworth J.[6]
6-16-3
Lestienne C.[4]
Gojo B.[5]
6-26-2
Nava E.
Kovacevic A.[7]
7-627-64
Boyer T.
Mmoh M.[3]
7-57-65
R16
Watanuki Y.[2]
Moreno De Alboran N.
7-56-3
Gojo B.[5]
Michelsen A.
4-66-47-63
Mmoh M.[3]
Svrcina D.
6-46-3
Kovacevic A.[7]
Andreev A.
7-56-3
Boyer T.
Shimabukuro S.
7-57-68
Nava E.
Gaio F.
6-46-4
Lestienne C.[4]
Cozbinov A.
6-26-2
Duckworth J.[6]
Walton A.
6-36-4
R32
Moreno De Alboran N.
Chappell N.
3-66-36-4
Duckworth J.[6]
Olivieri G.
6-26-3
Lestienne C.[4]
Sweeny D.
2-67-667-612
Shimabukuro S.
Tirante T.[8]
6-16-3
Nava E.
Quinn E.
6-16-2
Kovacevic A.[7]
Kudla D.
6-36-2
Michelsen A.
Hong S.
4-66-26-0
Cozbinov A.
Verdasco F.
6-16-3
Walton A.
Svajda Z.
6-26-2
Gojo B.[5]
Kukushkin M.
7-57-61
Svrcina D.
Jung J.
6-46-2
Watanuki Y.[2]
Johnson S.
7-55-76-4
Andreev A.
Banerjee S.
5-76-26-4
Mmoh M.[3]
Krueger M.
6-26-3
Gaio F.
Markes C.
3-66-36-4
Boyer T.
Klahn B.
6-37-62