Florent Bax vs Marek Gengel — Phan Thiet 2 CH Round of 16

Phan Thiet 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
FRA
Florent Bax
#262ATP
1399ELO
1387Hard ELO
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWWLWWW
0 — 0
Sets
Retired
Monday, 26 January 2026
hard
Marek Gengel
CZE
Marek Gengel
#370ATP
1411ELO
1377Hard ELO
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWWWWWL
Bax F.
6-2 1-0
Gengel M.
Bax F.
61–
Gengel M.
20–

Florent Bax advanced when Marek Gengel retired 6-2 1-0 in the Phan Thiet 2 CH round of 16.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Bax F.serving77% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Gengel M.

Gengel M.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Bax F.

Serve advantage — Gengel M.

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
Bax F.Gengel M.
1st serve in·Slight edge
55%
64%
1st serve points won·Even
78%
74%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
51%
Service points won·Even
66%
65%
Return points won·Slight edge
34%
44%
Break points saved·Slight edge
65%
58%
Aces / match·Clear edge
7.9
5.6
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.3
2.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (23 vs 19). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Bax F.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Gengel M.
6.6
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
5.1+10 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.9Hard Elo 1377
4.8Overall Elo 1399
ELO gap
5.2Overall Elo 1411
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.6
Surface form
8.0
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
7.1
Minutes 14d
0.4
3-set count
0.0
8.0
Prev. match
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
Bax F.Gengel M.
Freshness·
100
—

Bax F.: 19 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Simakin I.
Zhou Y.[6]
7-56-4
Semi-finals
Zhou Y.[6]
Michalski D.[7]
7-630-0
Simakin I.
Sakellaridis S.
3-66-46-3
Quarter-finals
Michalski D.[7]
Bax F.
6-26-4
Simakin I.
Barsukov N.
7-627-5
Zhou Y.[6]
Hsu Y.[4]
7-646-3
Sakellaridis S.
Martin Tiffon P.[8]
6-26-3
R16
Bax F.
Gengel M.
6-21-0
Barsukov N.
Sin S.
6-16-3
Simakin I.
Bar Biryukov P.
4-66-46-2
Sakellaridis S.
Bailly G.[3]
6-36-2
Martin Tiffon P.[8]
Jones M.
6-26-2
Zhou Y.[6]
Denolly C.
6-17-62
Hsu Y.[4]
Blanch D.
6-03-66-3
Michalski D.[7]
Jasika O.
6-41-66-1
R32
Sin S.
Jorda Sanchis D.
6-33-62-1
Bax F.
Sun F.
2-66-36-4
Barsukov N.
Gomez F.[1]
7-637-5
Bar Biryukov P.
Ribecai M.
6-46-2
Simakin I.
Cina F.[5]
6-33-66-3
Sakellaridis S.
Kwon S.
6-26-3
Martin Tiffon P.[8]
Vu H.
6-16-2
Zhou Y.[6]
Cui J.
6-37-64
Blanch D.
Ferguson C.
6-06-1
Hsu Y.[4]
Bertrand R.
7-57-65
Michalski D.[7]
Handel T.
7-56-1
Gengel M.
Crawford O.[2]
1-66-16-1
Jasika O.
Marmousez L.
3-4
Denolly C.
Chung H.
6-26-4
Jones M.
Sharipov M.
6-37-64
Bailly G.[3]
Matsuoka H.
6-16-3