Sumit Nagal vs Ivan Gakhov — Heilbronn CH Quarter-final

Heilbronn CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Sumit Nagal
IND3
Sumit Nagal
#241ATP
1543ELO
1538Clay ELO
28 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 3 June 2024
clay
Ivan Gakhov
RUS
Ivan Gakhov
#388ATP
1430ELO
1384Clay ELO
29 yrs · 191 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLLLW
Nagal S.
6-1 7-6
Gakhov I.
Nagal S.
6772
Gakhov I.
1640

Sumit Nagal defeated Ivan Gakhov 6-1 7-6 in the Heilbronn CH quarter-final on clay.

Key context

  • Match story: Sumit Nagal came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–1 7–6.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nagal S.serving70% hold

wins 58% of points on serve vs Gakhov I.

Gakhov I.serving66% hold

wins 56% of points on serve vs Nagal S.

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
Nagal S.Gakhov I.
1st serve in·Slight edge
70%
60%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
64%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
48%
Service points won·Even
60%
61%
Return points won·Even
41%
38%
Break points saved·Even
59%
62%
Aces / match·Clear edge
1.5
4.4
Double faults / match·Dominant
2.0
3.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (145 vs 127). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nagal S.Gakhov I.
Clutch Rating·Even
33
34
Break points saved·Clear edge
69
82
Break points won·Dominant
35
9
Deciding sets·Dominant
16
59
Tiebreaks·Dominant
84
22

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nagal S.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry Score
Gakhov I.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.2+153 Clay Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.8Clay Elo 1384
5.7Overall Elo 1543
ELO gap
4.3Overall Elo 1430
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.7
Surface form
3.8
0.0Lost last 4
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
9.0
Minutes 14d
7.4
7.0
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
6.0
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
Nagal S.Gakhov I.
Freshness·
96
—

Nagal S.: 8 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Nagal S.[3]
Ritschard A.
6-16-756-3
Semi-finals
Nagal S.[3]
Van Assche L.[5]
6-27-65
Ritschard A.
Choinski J.
6-36-776-4
Quarter-finals
Van Assche L.[5]
Kasnikowski M.
6-33-66-0
Nagal S.[3]
Gakhov I.
6-17-64
Ritschard A.
Squire H.
6-26-3
Choinski J.
Moro Canas A.
6-36-3
R16
Choinski J.
Heller P.
6-36-3
Gakhov I.
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
6-36-1
Kasnikowski M.
Altmaier D.[1]
6-27-5
Van Assche L.[5]
Blancaneaux G.
3-66-36-2
Nagal S.[3]
Barranco Cosano J.
6-46-1
Ritschard A.
Barrios Vera T.
6-36-3
Squire H.
Marterer M.[4]
6-06-2
Moro Canas A.
Rodionov J.[8]
3-67-647-61
R32
Kasnikowski M.
Fanselow S.
4-66-46-1
Van Assche L.[5]
Janvier M.
6-726-37-62
Barrios Vera T.
Hassan B.
6-46-0
Blancaneaux G.
Poertner L.
6-17-67
Ritschard A.
Ramos A.[7]
6-47-62
Altmaier D.[1]
Topo M.
6-37-64
Nagal S.[3]
Basilashvili N.
6-21-66-3
Barranco Cosano J.
Holmgren A.
6-46-2
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
Dutra Da Silva D.
7-666-2
Gakhov I.
Galan D.[6]
6-46-3
Squire H.
Vallejo A.
6-36-2
Marterer M.[4]
Masur D.
6-36-0
Rodionov J.[8]
Martineau M.
6-36-736-2
Moro Canas A.
Gill F.
6-47-5
Heller P.
Molleker R.
5-76-47-5
Choinski J.
Hanfmann Y.[2]
6-46-2