Li Tu vs Naoki Nakagawa — Brisbane 2 CH Round of 32

Brisbane 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
AUS
Li Tu
#421ATP
1488ELO
1471Hard ELO
30 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 9 February 2026
hard
JPN
Naoki Nakagawa
#774ATP
1289ELO
1271Hard ELO
29 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWLWLLL
Tu L.
6-7 6-4 7-6
Nakagawa N.
Tu L.
666772
Nakagawa N.
784621

Li Tu defeated Naoki Nakagawa 6-7 6-4 7-6 in the Brisbane 2 CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Li Tu came in ranked #421, defending last year's quarter-final.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Tu L.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Nakagawa N.

Nakagawa N.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Tu L.

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
Tu L.Nakagawa N.
1st serve in·Even
60%
56%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
74%
81%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
51%
56%
Service points won·Slight edge
65%
70%
Return points won·Even
37%
40%
Break points saved·Even
57%
53%
Aces / match·Dominant
7.3
10.3
Double faults / match·Dominant
3.0
1.3

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (22 vs 7). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Tu L.Nakagawa N.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
27
3
Break points saved·Dominant
82
57
Break points won·Slight edge
8
1
Deciding sets·Slight edge
20
12
Tiebreaks·Dominant
64
17

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Tu L.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Nakagawa N.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
7.8+200 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
2.2Hard Elo 1271
8.0Overall Elo 1488
ELO gap
2.0Overall Elo 1289
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.5
Surface form
6.8
0.0
Win streak
7.03-match win streak
Fatigue & Travel
7.7
Minutes 14d
5.9
4.0
3-set count
0.0
7.0
Prev. match
9.0
Context
7.0
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
Final
Zhang Z.
Bolt A.[4]
6-26-4
Semi-finals
Zhang Z.
Sakamoto R.[3]
6-16-4
Bolt A.[4]
Moriya H.
6-33-66-3
Quarter-finals
Sakamoto R.[3]
Tu L.
7-636-4
Bolt A.[4]
Blanch D.[8]
7-56-3
Moriya H.
Sweeny D.[2]
7-57-63
Zhang Z.
Matsuoka H.
6-37-5
R16
Blanch D.[8]
Weber A.
6-16-3
Matsuoka H.
Polmans M.
4-67-626-3
Zhang Z.
Uchiyama Y.[9]
6-47-67
Sakamoto R.[3]
Sinclair C.
7-56-3
Tu L.
Ellis B.
6-46-4
Moriya H.
Sach T.
6-766-06-4
Sweeny D.[2]
Imamura M.
6-36-2
Bolt A.[4]
Jasika O.
6-24-1
R32
Polmans M.
Mackenzie J.
7-52-66-1
Matsuoka H.
Delaney J.
6-46-4
Uchiyama Y.[9]
Hewitt C.
7-57-5
Sakamoto R.[3]
Mochizuki Y.
6-06-1
Sinclair C.
Hulme M.
5-77-646-4
Tu L.
Nakagawa N.
6-766-47-62
Weber A.
Jorda Sanchis D.
6-32-67-5
Jasika O.
Shiraishi H.
4-66-27-65
Moriya H.
Bouzige M.
6-46-4
Imamura M.
Dellavedova M.
3-66-46-3
Sweeny D.[2]
Daniel T.
7-56-4
Zhang Z.
Marinkov P.
7-646-3
Bolt A.[4]
Isomura K.
7-56-3
Ellis B.
Sun F.[7]
7-623-67-5
Blanch D.[8]
Denolly C.
6-47-5
Sach T.
Zhou Y.[6]
6-42-66-2