Daniel Brands vs Andrey Kuznetsov, Como Challenger 2015, Final

Challenger · Final · Clay · Sun 6 Sept

Final

Daniel Brands

LostRank #1055

Kuznetsov won in 2 sets · 1h 11m

0–2

Set 14–6

Set 23–6

Andrey Kuznetsov

WinnerRank #1435

Venue

Tennis Como

Como, ITA· Clay

Court speed

What is court speed?

How much the court helps the server, judged from aces and serve points won and adjusted for who played. 100 is the average ATP tournament court that season.

Very slow< 92Monte Carlo, Rome
Slow92–97Roland Garros, Indian Wells
Average97–103US Open, Dubai
Fast103–108Wimbledon, Shanghai
Very fast108+Basel

Challenger and ITF courts usually read lower: partly the venues, partly the balls and conditions at those levels.

How court speed works

Know how fast this court plays before the first serve

See it with Pro

Wind

14 km/h

Gentle

Humidity

56%

Moderate

Temperature

23°C

Warm

Altitude

206 m

Low

Historical daily weather

Match stats

1h 11m

4Aces5

0Double faults1

38Service points won36

10Service games played9

7Service games won9

9Return games played10

3/650%Break points saved0/0

0/0Break points converted50%3/6

Head to head

0Brands

1Kuznetsov

1 meeting

Como ChallengerFinal · 6 Sept 2015ClayThis match
Andrey Kuznetsov
Sets won: 2Set 1: 6Set 2: 6
Daniel Brands
Sets won: 0Set 1: 4Set 2: 3

Match research

Pro

Everything that shapes this match: each player’s run-in and travel, records side by side, and results against similar opponents and in similar conditions. Better information, better-informed decisions.

Run-inEvery match in the last 28 days, rest days and travel between venues.
Tale of the tapeRecords and serve numbers side by side, filtered by period and surface.
Record by opponent rankingHow each player does against the top 10, top 50 or any ranking range.
Similar conditionsResults in comparable heat, humidity, wind and altitude before scheduled matches.

Get the edge with Pro

Daniel Brands vs Andrey Kuznetsov, Como Challenger 2015, Final

Final score

Venue and conditions

Match stats

Head to head

Match research