Alex Bolt vs Li Tu — Nottingham CH Qualifying Round 2

Nottingham CH · CHALLENGER · Qualifying Round 2
Alex Bolt
AUS7
Alex Bolt
#166ATP
1588ELO
1569Grass ELO
$125kYTD
$2.2MCAREER
33 yrs · 183 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLLWLWLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 10 June 2024
grass
AUS2
Li Tu
#464ATP
1488ELO
1516Grass ELO
30 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
Bolt A.
6-1 6-2
Tu L.
Bolt A.
662
Tu L.
120

Alex Bolt defeated Li Tu 6-1 6-2 in the Nottingham CH qualifying round 2 on grass.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Bolt A.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Tu L.

Tu L.serving91% hold

wins 71% of points on serve vs Bolt A.

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
Bolt A.Tu L.
1st serve in·Even
63%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
53%
51%
Service points won·Even
65%
65%
Return points won·Even
36%
37%
Break points saved·Even
65%
61%
Aces / match·Even
7.0
6.7
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.1
2.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (143 vs 124). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Bolt A.Tu L.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
44
27
Break points saved·Slight edge
93
82
Break points won·Even
7
8
Deciding sets·Dominant
46
20
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
83
64

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Bolt A.
6.8
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Tu L.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
5.7+53 Grass Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.3Grass Elo 1516
6.0Overall Elo 1588
ELO gap
4.0Overall Elo 1488
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.9
Surface form
5.6
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
7.4
Minutes 14d
9.2
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
9.0
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Q2
Peliwo F.[11]
Jones B.
6-37-69
Bertola R.[7]
Nouza P.
6-26-1
Gray A.
Zuk K.[8]
4-67-656-4
Stewart H.
Walters M.
6-26-4
Broom C.[4]
Matusevich A.
6-46-736-3
Moeller M.[1]
Cox D.[10]
6-26-0
Shimabukuro S.[5]
Mchugh A.
6-46-3
Broom C.[9]
Ellis B.
6-46-4
Searle H.
Saville L.[11]
6-47-60
Bolt A.[7]
Tu L.[2]
6-16-2
Fearnley J.
Lajal M.[3]
6-26-4
Pinnington Jones J.
Gill F.[10]
6-26-2
Q1
Moeller M.[1]
Poljak D.
6-47-63
Broom C.[4]
Wendelken H.
6-46-4
Walters M.
Oradini G.[6]
7-56-747-5
Gray A.
Mchugh A.[5]
6-36-2
Cox D.[10]
Barton H.
6-26-3
Jones B.
Diez S.[2]
6-46-4
Peliwo F.[11]
Canter A.
7-626-4
Nouza P.
Gerasimov E.[3]
4-66-36-4
Bertola R.[7]
Houghton G.
6-32-67-5
Matusevich A.
Gomez G.
6-26-1
Stewart H.
Hussey G.[12]
7-56-3
Ellis B.
Sweeny D.[6]
7-636-4
Searle H.
Rodionov J.[1]
6-26-2
Mchugh A.
Mccabe J.[12]
6-726-26-2
Tu L.[2]
Stewart H.
6-17-66
Lajal M.[3]
Brady P.
6-33-66-0
Pinnington Jones J.
Peniston R.[4]
3-67-636-3
Shimabukuro S.[5]
Parker S.
6-16-2
Bolt A.[7]
Mott B.
6-16-4
Fearnley J.
Chidekh C.[8]
2-66-37-64
Broom C.[9]
Wendelken H.
6-46-2
Gill F.[10]
Edmund K.
7-56-4
Saville L.[11]
Hussey G.
7-686-2