Liam Draxl vs Bernard Tomic — Calgary CH Quarter-final

Calgary CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Liam Draxl
CAN7
Liam Draxl
#223ATP
1592ELO
1565Hard ELO
$201kYTD
$642kCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWLWWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 14 October 2024
hard
Bernard Tomic
AUS4
Bernard Tomic
#206ATP
1475ELO
1441Hard ELO
$117kYTD
$6.8MCAREER
33 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLWLLL
Draxl L.
6-4 4-6 6-1
Tomic B.
Draxl L.
6462
Tomic B.
4611

Liam Draxl defeated Bernard Tomic 6-4 4-6 6-1 in the Calgary CH quarter-final on hard.

Key context

  • Match story: Liam Draxl came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–4 4–6 6–1.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Draxl L.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Tomic B.

Tomic B.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Draxl L.

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
Draxl L.Tomic B.
1st serve in·Slight edge
66%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
50%
Service points won·Even
62%
63%
Return points won·Even
40%
37%
Break points saved·Even
60%
63%
Aces / match·Clear edge
4.0
5.6
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.2
1.9

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (153 vs 153). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Draxl L.Tomic B.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
66
53
Break points saved·Slight edge
83
92
Break points won·Dominant
36
4
Deciding sets·Clear edge
94
74
Tiebreaks·Even
75
79

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Draxl L.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 28 days (−0.3)
Tomic B.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.2+124 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.8Hard Elo 1441
6.0Overall Elo 1592
ELO gap
4.0Overall Elo 1475
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.4
Surface form
6.9
Win streak
7.04-match win streak
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
3.8
3-set count
0.0
7.0
Prev. match
9.0
6.0
Surface transition
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Draxl L.Tomic B.
Freshness·Clear edge
98
81

Draxl L.: 12 days rest · 1 match (14d) · Tomic B.: 4 days rest · 2 matches, 45 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Cassone M.
Nanda G.
4-66-36-4
Semi-finals
Nanda G.
Draxl L.[7]
6-26-4
Cassone M.
Dougaz A.[3]
7-56-4
Quarter-finals
Cassone M.
Galarneau A.[6]
6-777-627-64
Nanda G.
Kasnikowski M.[1]
7-656-757-5
Draxl L.[7]
Tomic B.[4]
6-44-66-1
Dougaz A.[3]
Mejia N.[5]
6-16-4
R16
Tomic B.[4]
Ilagan A.
6-36-2
Kasnikowski M.[1]
Martin A.
6-46-4
Nanda G.
Trotter J.[8]
3-66-46-2
Draxl L.[7]
Wessels L.
7-646-1
Mejia N.[5]
Escobedo E.
7-616-1
Dougaz A.[3]
Mayo A.
6-46-4
Galarneau A.[6]
Pospisil V.
7-56-2
Cassone M.
Kypson P.[2]
6-26-4
R32
Dougaz A.[3]
Wiskandt M.
6-36-756-2
Trotter J.[8]
Gojo B.
5-76-46-4
Tomic B.[4]
Maloney P.
6-47-63
Kasnikowski M.[1]
Ilkel C.
6-36-3
Martin A.
Martinez A.
7-644-66-3
Nanda G.
Handel T.
6-46-2
Ilagan A.
George B.
6-47-5
Wessels L.
Boulais J.
7-622-66-4
Draxl L.[7]
Oliveira G.
6-16-726-4
Mejia N.[5]
Kuzuhara B.
6-47-60
Escobedo E.
Pannu K.
6-17-5
Mayo A.
Harper C.
6-47-63
Galarneau A.[6]
Boitan G.
6-46-3
Pospisil V.
Perez A.
7-644-66-3
Cassone M.
Seggerman R.
3-67-647-613
Kypson P.[2]
Cid R.
7-56-1