Emilio Nava vs Ryan Peniston — Nottingham 2 CH Round of 16

Nottingham 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
Emilio Nava
USA
Emilio Nava
#91ATP
1704ELO
1560Grass ELO
$533kYTD
$2.1MCAREER
24 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWWWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 16 June 2025
grass
Ryan Peniston
GBR
Ryan Peniston
#417ATP
1441ELO
1440Grass ELO
30 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLLWW
Nava E.
7-6 6-4
Peniston R.
Nava E.
7762
Peniston R.
6540

Emilio Nava defeated Ryan Peniston 7-6 6-4 in the Nottingham 2 CH round of 16 on grass. The result followed the form book — Emilio Nava came in ranked #91.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Nava E.serving79% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Peniston R.

Peniston R.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Nava E.

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
Nava E.Peniston R.
1st serve in·Even
63%
64%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
73%
66%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
50%
Service points won·Even
65%
61%
Return points won·Slight edge
38%
44%
Break points saved·Slight edge
64%
58%
Aces / match·Dominant
7.5
2.3
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.0
3.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (120 vs 50). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Nava E.Peniston R.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
52
20
Break points saved·Dominant
94
60
Break points won·Slight edge
17
25
Deciding sets·Dominant
89
36
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
23
15

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Nava E.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Peniston R.
5.1
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.7+120 Grass Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.3Grass Elo 1440
8.2Overall Elo 1704
ELO gap
1.8Overall Elo 1441
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
2.7
Surface form
0.8
0.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
6.4
Minutes 14d
8.2
9.0
Prev. match
9.0
7.0
Surface transition
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
Nava E.Peniston R.
Freshness·
96
—

Nava E.: 14 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Cilic M.[2]
Mochizuki S.
6-26-3
Semi-finals
Mochizuki S.
Smith C.
6-26-2
Cilic M.[2]
Landaluce M.
6-766-47-67
Quarter-finals
Mochizuki S.
Faria J.
6-26-0
Cilic M.[2]
Barrios Vera T.[6]
6-16-3
Landaluce M.
Atmane T.
6-736-26-3
Smith C.
Nava E.
6-756-46-4
R16
Cilic M.[2]
Harris L.
2-66-43-1
Barrios Vera T.[6]
Schoolkate T.
6-27-68
Landaluce M.
Mannarino A.
4-67-57-5
Atmane T.
Fery A.
5-76-36-4
Faria J.
Choinski J.
7-56-3
Smith C.
Mccabe J.
5-76-36-3
Mochizuki S.
Boyer T.[8]
6-26-3
Nava E.
Peniston R.
7-656-4
R32
Atmane T.
Gigante M.
4-66-46-4
Mochizuki S.
Herbert P.
6-47-67
Peniston R.
Galan D.[5]
5-76-46-2
Mccabe J.
Loffhagen G.
6-37-64
Smith C.
Trungelliti M.
6-24-66-3
Barrios Vera T.[6]
Trotter J.
6-36-4
Harris L.
Royer V.
7-666-2
Cilic M.[2]
Grenier H.
6-36-2
Nava E.
Pinnington Jones J.
6-36-7106-3
Landaluce M.
Budkov Kjaer N.
6-22-66-2
Schoolkate T.
Blockx A.
6-36-2
Boyer T.[8]
Krueger M.
6-17-5
Choinski J.
Spizzirri E.
5-76-46-4
Faria J.
Holt B.[3]
6-36-4
Fery A.
Fognini F.
6-37-65
Mannarino A.
Cazaux A.[7]
6-46-3