Strong Kirchheimer vs Evan Zhu — Indian Wells 2 CH Round of 32

Indian Wells 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Strong Kirchheimer
USA
Strong Kirchheimer
#660ATP
31 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLLWWLWLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 22 January 2024
hard
USA
Evan Zhu
#699ATP
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLWLLLWWW
Kirchheimer S.
6-4 6-4
Zhu E.
Kirchheimer S.
662
Zhu E.
440

Strong Kirchheimer defeated Evan Zhu 6-4 6-4 in the Indian Wells 2 CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

  • Match story: Strong Kirchheimer edged a tight contest from start to finish — 6–4 6–4.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Kirchheimer S.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Zhu E.

Zhu E.serving76% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Kirchheimer S.

Serve advantage — Kirchheimer S.

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
Kirchheimer S.Zhu E.
1st serve in·Even
63%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
65%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
48%
Service points won·Even
61%
58%
Return points won·Even
36%
36%
Break points saved·Slight edge
62%
53%
Aces / match·Slight edge
4.2
2.8
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.8
4.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (82 vs 44). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kirchheimer S.Zhu E.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
6
11
Break points saved·Dominant
63
31
Break points won·Even
0
4
Deciding sets·Dominant
9
60
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
31
12

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kirchheimer S.
6.3
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Zhu E.
5.5
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.4No prior meetings
H2H
4.6
4.8
Surface form
2.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
9.1
Minutes 14d
9.3
9.0
Prev. match
9.0
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
Kirchheimer S.Zhu E.
Freshness·Even
78
76

Kirchheimer S.: 1 day rest · 2 matches, 39 games (7d) · Zhu E.: 1 day rest · 2 matches, 43 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-slowfavours grinders
SlowFast
Final
Bicknell B.
Svajda Z.[1]
6-36-2
Semi-finals
Svajda Z.[1]
Fanselow S.
6-26-4
Bicknell B.
Ilagan A.
7-656-4
Quarter-finals
Bicknell B.
Holt B.[4]
6-32-2
Svajda Z.[1]
Artnak B.
6-23-66-0
Fanselow S.
Tien L.
7-645-76-4
Ilagan A.
Kwiatkowski T.[8]
1-67-656-3
R16
Holt B.[4]
Kuzuhara B.
6-36-1
Ilagan A.
Handel T.
6-46-4
Fanselow S.
Svajda T.
6-46-4
Kwiatkowski T.[8]
Jubb P.
7-54-66-3
Svajda Z.[1]
Kirchheimer S.
6-26-1
Artnak B.
Krueger M.[6]
6-26-3
Tien L.
Trungelliti M.[3]
6-26-0
Bicknell B.
Oliel Y.
7-56-3
R32
Artnak B.
Trotter J.
6-37-5
Bicknell B.
Mayo A.[7]
6-36-4
Kirchheimer S.
Zhu E.
6-46-4
Kuzuhara B.
Pecotic M.
7-650-66-2
Kwiatkowski T.[8]
Mckennon M.
6-46-3
Svajda Z.[1]
Debru G.
6-46-1
Krueger M.[6]
Kumar O.
7-626-3
Trungelliti M.[3]
Gerch L.
6-26-3
Tien L.
Oradini G.
6-26-3
Fanselow S.
Pospisil V.
6-27-5
Svajda T.
Sandgren T.[5]
0-67-647-63
Oliel Y.
Lock B.
3-67-636-0
Holt B.[4]
Seggerman R.
6-36-4
Jubb P.
Baris O.
7-616-2
Handel T.
Soto M.
6-46-4
Ilagan A.
Gaio F.[2]
6-27-5