Egor Gerasimov vs Li Tu — Shenzhen CH Round of 32

Shenzhen CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
BLR
Egor Gerasimov
33 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLWLLL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 9 October 2023
hard
AUS
Li Tu
#464ATP
1488ELO
1471Hard ELO
30 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
Gerasimov E.
4-6 6-4 6-4
Tu L.
Gerasimov E.
4662
Tu L.
6441

Egor Gerasimov defeated Li Tu 4-6 6-4 6-4 in the Shenzhen CH round of 32 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Li Tu came in leading the head-to-head 1–0. Egor Gerasimov claimed a first win over Li Tu in two meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 1–1.

Key context

Head to head

0–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2024-09-18ChengduQ1hardLi Tu6-4 6-1

Serve vs return

This season
Gerasimov E.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Tu L.

Tu L.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Gerasimov 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

Statistics

This season
Gerasimov E.Tu L.
1st serve in·Even
64%
61%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
51%
Service points won·Even
63%
64%
Return points won·Even
36%
37%
Break points saved·Even
59%
60%
Aces / match·Even
6.6
6.2
Double faults / match·Even
2.6
2.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (114 vs 184). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Gerasimov E.Tu L.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
44
27
Break points saved·Slight edge
88
82
Break points won·Even
8
8
Deciding sets·Dominant
70
20
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
40
64

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gerasimov E.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Tu L.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
4.9
Surface form
4.8
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
5.5
Minutes 14d
7.2
3-set count
4.0
9.0
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Kovacevic A.[6]
Borges N.[3]
7-647-65
Duckworth J.[1]
Wong C.
6-06-1
Semi-finals
Kovacevic A.[6]
Cachin P.[2]
6-47-67
Borges N.[3]
Gerasimov E.
6-26-1
Wong C.
Kovacevic A.[2]
W/O
Duckworth J.[1]
Yunchaokete B.[4]
6-16-2
Quarter-finals
Cachin P.[2]
Jung J.
6-36-4
Kovacevic A.[6]
Yevseyev D.
6-26-4
Gerasimov E.
Zhukayev B.
6-746-26-3
Borges N.[3]
Hsu Y.[8]
7-606-0
Kovacevic A.[2]
Giustino L.
6-33-66-3
Wong C.
Huang T.
4-67-56-3
Yunchaokete B.[4]
Bai Y.
6-36-2
Duckworth J.[1]
Tu L.[5]
6-16-1
R16
Cachin P.[2]
Wu T.
7-656-737-66
Yevseyev D.
Cui J.
6-46-0
Zhukayev B.
Kokkinakis T.[1]
6-36-4
Kovacevic A.[6]
Kachmazov A.
6-16-4
Gerasimov E.
Atmane T.[7]
7-646-3
Borges N.[3]
Yunchaokete B.
6-36-4
Jung J.
Duckworth J.[5]
3-67-56-2
Hsu Y.[8]
Tseng C.
6-36-4
Huang T.
Gerasimov E.
6-36-2
Duckworth J.[1]
Li Z.
7-646-4
Kovacevic A.[2]
Zhukayev B.
6-46-716-0
Giustino L.
Sinclair C.
6-36-4
Tu L.[5]
Palan D.
6-33-66-2
Wong C.
Atmane T.[3]
3-66-37-5
Bai Y.
Diez S.[8]
3-66-16-4
Yunchaokete B.[4]
Kachmazov A.
6-36-4
R32
Yunchaokete B.
Mccabe J.
3-66-32-0
Kokkinakis T.[1]
Sinclair C.
6-23-66-3
Jung J.
Donskoy E.
6-42-66-4
Borges N.[3]
Diez S.
7-56-2
Cachin P.[2]
Bai Y.
6-46-3
Duckworth J.[5]
Uchida K.
6-07-62
Yevseyev D.
Fognini F.[4]
6-47-66
Kachmazov A.
Tang S.
6-36-4
Kovacevic A.[6]
Sekulic P.
6-16-4
Hsu Y.[8]
Te R.
6-26-1
Tseng C.
Saville L.
6-27-5
Atmane T.[7]
Giustino L.
7-646-3
Gerasimov E.
Tu L.
4-66-46-4
Zhukayev B.
Li Z.
6-46-4
Cui J.
Sun Q.
6-36-3
Wu T.
Palan D.
6-47-64
Kovacevic A.[2]
Chen C.
6-36-1
Kachmazov A.
Sun F.
6-37-67
Diez S.[8]
Ly N.
6-46-1
Wong C.
Xiao L.
6-37-64
Zhukayev B.
Wang X.
6-36-4
Giustino L.
Te R.
6-46-3
Atmane T.[3]
Haliak M.
6-16-4
Huang T.
Lock B.
7-56-4
Gerasimov E.
Yevseyev D.[7]
6-26-2
Bai Y.
Weber A.
6-46-727-63
Tu L.[5]
Statham J.
7-56-3
Palan D.
Mo Y.
6-36-3
Li Z.
Trongcharoenchaikul W.
6-37-60
Duckworth J.[1]
Takahashi Y.
6-36-2
Yunchaokete B.[4]
Saville L.
6-36-3
Sinclair C.
Donskoy E.[6]
2-66-36-4