Cem Ilkel vs Johan Nikles — Lugano CH Round of 32

Lugano CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Cem Ilkel
TUR
Cem Ilkel
#1462ATP
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLLLLWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 4 March 2024
hard
Johan Nikles
SUI
Johan Nikles
#411ATP
1319ELO
1273Hard ELO
29 yrs · 173 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWWLWLW
Ilkel C.
6-0 6-3
Nikles J.
Ilkel C.
662
Nikles J.
030

Cem Ilkel defeated Johan Nikles 6-0 6-3 in the Lugano CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Ilkel C.serving66% hold

wins 57% of points on serve vs Nikles J.

Nikles J.serving71% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Ilkel C.

Baseline battle — serve is shaky, expect plenty of breaks

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
Ilkel C.Nikles J.
1st serve in·Slight edge
57%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
70%
59%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
49%
Service points won·Slight edge
61%
55%
Return points won·Slight edge
36%
44%
Break points saved·Even
57%
59%
Aces / match·Dominant
4.7
1.3
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.2
2.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (35 vs 31). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Ilkel C.Nikles J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
32
7
Break points saved·Dominant
49
22
Break points won·Dominant
3
30
Deciding sets·Dominant
70
29
Tiebreaks·
66
—

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ilkel C.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Nikles J.
3.8
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 504 days (−1.5)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.0
Surface form
4.6
0.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 3
Fatigue & Travel
9.2
Minutes 14d
9.0
Prev. match
Context
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Virtanen O.[2]
Masur D.
6-746-47-63
Semi-finals
Virtanen O.[2]
Molleker R.
6-16-3
Masur D.
Bergs Z.[1]
6-26-4
Quarter-finals
Masur D.
Albot R.[3]
7-607-64
Bergs Z.[1]
Kukushkin M.[5]
6-36-4
Molleker R.
Brouwer G.
6-47-64
Virtanen O.[2]
Herbert P.[6]
6-36-2
R16
Molleker R.
Choinski J.[8]
7-656-4
Bergs Z.[1]
Squire H.
7-656-2
Albot R.[3]
Ritschard A.
1-66-46-4
Herbert P.[6]
Escoffier A.
7-634-66-2
Kukushkin M.[5]
Harris B.
2-66-36-1
Masur D.
Gea A.
6-36-3
Brouwer G.
Blockx A.
6-36-1
Virtanen O.[2]
Ilkel C.
6-26-1
R32
Ilkel C.
Nikles J.
6-06-3
Herbert P.[6]
Shimizu Y.
6-34-66-1
Ritschard A.
Berankis R.
4-66-16-4
Molleker R.
Shimabukuro S.
6-46-4
Gea A.
Harris L.
6-46-3
Masur D.
Mpetshi Perricard G.[7]
6-46-4
Kukushkin M.[5]
Hsu Y.
6-26-2
Blockx A.
Riedi L.[4]
3-67-667-5
Bergs Z.[1]
Travaglia S.
6-26-3
Squire H.
Brunold M.
7-626-4
Harris B.
Bellucci M.
6-776-46-4
Albot R.[3]
Huesler M.
6-46-3
Choinski J.[8]
Wong C.
3-66-36-4
Brouwer G.
Blanchet U.
7-56-4
Escoffier A.
Yunchaokete B.
6-46-0
Virtanen O.[2]
Bertola R.
7-56-3