Gleb Sakharov vs Mick Lescure, Sarreguemines 2018, Quarterfinal

ITF M15 · Quarterfinal · Hard · Fri 5 Oct

Final

Gleb Sakharov

WinnerRank #2105

Sakharov won in 2 sets · 1h 16m

2–0

Set 16–4

Set 26–2

Mick Lescure

LostRank #1413

Venue

TK Břízky Jablonec

Jablonec nad Nisou, CZE· 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

532 m

Above sea level

Indoor venue, weather not factored

Moderate

Match stats

1h 16m

1Aces4

1Double faults3

37Service points won30

9Service games played9

8Service games won5

9Return games played9

1/250%Break points saved43%3/7

4/757%Break points converted50%1/2

Head to head

1Sakharov

0Lescure

1 meeting

SarregueminesQuarterfinal · 5 Oct 2018HardThis match
Gleb Sakharov
Sets won: 2Set 1: 6Set 2: 6
Mick Lescure
Sets won: 0Set 1: 4Set 2: 2

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

Gleb Sakharov vs Mick Lescure, Sarreguemines 2018, Quarterfinal

Final score

Venue and conditions

Match stats

Head to head

Match research