Alibek Kachmazov vs Nerman Fatic — Shanghai CH Round of 32

Shanghai CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
RUS
Alibek Kachmazov
#782ATP
1490ELO
1467Hard ELO
23 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 2 September 2024
hard
BIH
Nerman Fatic
#396ATP
1496ELO
1417Hard ELO
31 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWWLWLW
Kachmazov A.
6-3 7-6
Fatic N.
Kachmazov A.
6792
Fatic N.
3670

Alibek Kachmazov defeated Nerman Fatic 6-3 7-6 in the Shanghai CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Kachmazov A.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Fatic N.

Fatic N.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Kachmazov A.

Even serve battle

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
Kachmazov A.Fatic N.
1st serve in·Slight edge
56%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
50%
Service points won·Even
62%
62%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Even
62%
58%
Aces / match·Clear edge
6.0
4.3
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.3
2.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (99 vs 92). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kachmazov A.Fatic N.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
49
24
Break points saved·Clear edge
82
63
Break points won·Clear edge
16
36
Deciding sets·Dominant
61
24
Tiebreaks·Dominant
87
35

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kachmazov A.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry Score
Fatic N.
5.0
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 28 days (−0.3)
Form & Matchup
5.6+49 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.4Hard Elo 1417
4.9Overall Elo 1490
ELO gap
5.1Overall Elo 1496
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.9
Surface form
5.7
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
8.0
Prev. match
7.0
Surface transition
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Shimabukuro S.
Hsu Y.[9]
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Hsu Y.[9]
Gombos N.
6-36-4
Shimabukuro S.
Wong C.[4]
6-37-62
Quarter-finals
Hsu Y.[9]
Van Wyk K.
7-642-66-2
Gombos N.
Kachmazov A.
6-727-636-4
Wong C.[4]
Zhukayev B.
7-666-3
Shimabukuro S.
Svrcina D.
6-47-5
R16
Hsu Y.[9]
Watanuki Y.
2-66-44-0
Van Wyk K.
Gomez F.
6-46-4
Gombos N.
Polmans M.
6-46-2
Kachmazov A.
Cressy M.[8]
4-67-636-3
Zhukayev B.
Barrios Vera T.[7]
7-646-727-5
Wong C.[4]
Peniston R.
6-26-3
Svrcina D.
Hong S.[5]
7-56-3
Shimabukuro S.
Atmane T.[2]
6-46-3
R32
Van Wyk K.
Garin C.[1]
6-36-1
Hsu Y.[9]
Wu Y.
6-753-3
Barrios Vera T.[7]
Sun F.
6-47-5
Shimabukuro S.
Bai Y.
7-56-3
Gomez F.
Noguchi R.
7-57-64
Zhukayev B.
Rai A.
2-66-37-63
Watanuki Y.
Te R.
6-47-5
Polmans M.
Yunchaokete B.[3]
6-33-66-3
Gombos N.
Jubb P.
6-46-2
Kachmazov A.
Fatic N.
6-37-67
Cressy M.[8]
Mott B.
6-16-1
Peniston R.
Zhou Y.
6-46-2
Wong C.[4]
Gerasimov E.
7-646-1
Hong S.[5]
Wu T.
6-726-46-4
Svrcina D.
Mejia N.
6-16-1
Atmane T.[2]
Lajal M.
7-641-66-1