Albert Ramos vs Filip Misolic — Tulln CH Round of 32

Tulln CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
ESP1
Albert Ramos
1558ELO
1526Clay ELO
38 yrs · 188 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLLLLLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 4 September 2023
clay
Filip Misolic
AUT
Filip Misolic
#293ATP
1587ELO
1664Clay ELO
$111kYTD
$1.2MCAREER
24 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLWWLLL
Ramos A.
6-4 7-6
Misolic F.
Ramos A.
6772
Misolic F.
4620

Albert Ramos defeated Filip Misolic 6-4 7-6 in the Tulln CH round of 32 on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Filip Misolic came in defending last year's round of 32.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Ramos A.serving68% hold

wins 57% of points on serve vs Misolic F.

Misolic F.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Ramos A.

Serve advantage — Misolic F.

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
Ramos A.Misolic F.
1st serve in·Slight edge
65%
59%
1st serve points won·Even
65%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
50%
Service points won·Even
60%
61%
Return points won·Even
38%
39%
Break points saved·Even
61%
61%
Aces / match·Slight edge
2.0
3.3
Double faults / match·Clear edge
1.8
2.6

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (158 vs 186). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Ramos A.Misolic F.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
59
79
Break points saved·Even
95
91
Break points won·Even
49
53
Deciding sets·Clear edge
80
94
Tiebreaks·Dominant
22
97

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ramos A.
4.8
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Misolic F.
5.7
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Form & Matchup
3.3Clay Elo 1526
Surface ELO
6.7+138 Clay Elo edge
4.6Overall Elo 1558
ELO gap
5.4Overall Elo 1587
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.8
Surface form
6.3
Win streak
0.0
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-slowfavours grinders
SlowFast
Final
Kopriva V.
Nagal S.
6-26-4
Semi-finals
Nagal S.
Cobolli F.[4]
6-36-4
Kopriva V.
Marterer M.[3]
6-36-3
Quarter-finals
Kopriva V.
Kuzmanov D.
6-16-1
Cobolli F.[4]
Squire H.
6-16-2
Marterer M.[3]
Rodriguez Taverna S.
4-66-47-61
Nagal S.
Ramos A.[1]
7-666-3
R16
Cobolli F.[4]
Laaksonen H.
5-0
Rodriguez Taverna S.
Gakhov I.[6]
6-746-47-64
Kuzmanov D.
Svrcina D.[7]
2-66-46-2
Nagal S.
Sachko V.[8]
7-623-66-3
Kopriva V.
Rodionov J.[2]
7-52-66-4
Marterer M.[3]
Stodder T.
7-696-1
Squire H.
Miedler L.
4-66-36-4
Ramos A.[1]
Melzer G.
6-36-2
R32
Rodriguez Taverna S.
Molleker R.
7-56-4
Sachko V.[8]
Neumayer L.
7-627-61
Stodder T.
Diez S.
1-66-26-1
Svrcina D.[7]
Moeller M.
1-66-46-1
Nagal S.
Masur D.
6-16-2
Squire H.
Kovalik J.[5]
6-736-26-4
Rodionov J.[2]
Ejupovic E.
7-642-66-4
Marterer M.[3]
Rosol L.
6-43-66-3
Laaksonen H.
Jahn J.
6-756-47-64
Kuzmanov D.
Novak D.
6-736-27-5
Kopriva V.
Kolar Z.
6-27-64
Gakhov I.[6]
Hassan B.
7-56-4
Miedler L.
Oberleitner N.
7-642-66-3
Cobolli F.[4]
Sels J.
6-37-5
Melzer G.
Kopp S.
6-36-4
Ramos A.[1]
Misolic F.
6-47-62