Igor Sijsling vs Nerman Fatic, Prijedor 2019, Quarterfinal

ITF M25 · Quarterfinal · Clay · Fri 10 May

Final

Igor Sijsling

LostRank #854

Fatic won in 2 sets · 54m

0–2

Set 10–6

Set 23–6

Nerman Fatic

WinnerRank #588

Venue

Teniski klub Dr Mladen Stojanović

Prijedor, BIH· 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

9 km/h

Light

Humidity

77%

Humid

Temperature

21°C

Mild

Altitude

137 m

Low

Historical daily weather

Match stats

54m

2Aces8

3Double faults1

21Service points won29

8Service games played7

3Service games won7

7Return games played8

0/50%Break points saved100%3/3

0/30%Break points converted100%5/5

Head to head

0Sijsling

1Fatic

1 meeting

PrijedorQuarterfinal · 10 May 2019ClayThis match
Nerman Fatic
Sets won: 2Set 1: 6Set 2: 6
Igor Sijsling
Sets won: 0Set 1: 0Set 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

Igor Sijsling vs Nerman Fatic, Prijedor 2019, Quarterfinal

Final score

Venue and conditions

Match stats

Head to head

Match research