Liam Broady vs Scott Clayton, Glasgow 2016, Round of 16

FUTURES · Round of 16 · Hard · Thu 4 Feb

Final

Liam Broady

WinnerRank #233

Broady won in 3 sets · 2h 24m

2–1

Set 16–7⁵

Set 26–4

Set 36–3

Scott Clayton

LostRank #1583

Venue

Scotstoun Community Indoor Tennis Centre

Glasgow, GBR· Hard

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

Altitude

11 m

Above sea level

Indoor venue, weather not factored

Sea level

Match stats

2h 24m

3Aces7

1Double faults5

66Service points won66

15Service games played16

14Service games won12

16Return games played15

2/367%Break points saved56%5/9

4/944%Break points converted33%1/3

Head to head

1Broady

0Clayton

1 meeting

GlasgowRound of 16 · 4 Feb 2016HardThis match
Liam Broady
Sets won: 2Set 1: 6⁵Set 2: 6Set 3: 6
Scott Clayton
Sets won: 1Set 1: 7⁷Set 2: 4Set 3: 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

Liam Broady vs Scott Clayton, Glasgow 2016, Round of 16

Final score

Venue and conditions

Match stats

Head to head

Match research