Johnny Wolf vs Eyal Shumilov — score & stats

Set by set

Player	Set 1	Set 2	Sets
J. Wolf	3	2	0
E. Shumilov	6	6	2

Momentum — game by game, ● = break

▲ J. Wolf ▼ E. Shumilov

Match facts

Tournament

UTR PTT Chapel Hill Men 01

J. Wolf

E. Shumilov

W J. Lee 2–0

J. Wolf · match stats · E. Shumilov

0Aces4

2Double faults5

76%First serve in63%

48%First-serve points won79%

85%Second serve in74%

46%Second-serve points won42%

50%Break points saved33%

67%Break points converted50%

35%Return points won53%

26Service points won34

18Receiver points won29

44Total points won63

5Games won12

3Service games won7

0Tiebreaks won0

5Longest point streak7

2Longest game streak5

Per set · aces & double faults

Set	Aces	Double faults
Set 1	0–2	0–1
Set 2	0–2	2–4

Figures read J. Wolf first.

Set 28 games · newest first

2-6 game 8 E. Shumilov serving

0-15 0-30 15-30 15-40 30-40

2-5 game 7 J. Wolf serving BREAK

0-15 15-15 15-30 15-40

2-4 game 6 E. Shumilov serving

0-15 15-15 15-30 15-40

2-3 game 5 J. Wolf serving BREAK

15-0 15-15 30-15 30-30 30-40 40-40 40-A 40-40 40-A

2-2 game 4 E. Shumilov serving

15-0 15-15 30-15 30-30 30-40 40-40 40-A 40-40 40-A

2-1 game 3 J. Wolf serving

15-0 15-15 15-30 30-30 40-30

1-1 game 2 E. Shumilov serving BREAK

0-15 0-30 15-30 30-30 40-30

0-1 game 1 J. Wolf serving BREAK

15-0 15-15 15-30 30-30 30-40 40-40 40-A 40-40 40-A

Set 19 games · newest first

3-6 game 9 E. Shumilov serving

0-15 0-30 15-30 15-40

3-5 game 8 J. Wolf serving

15-0 30-0 40-0

2-5 game 7 E. Shumilov serving

0-15 0-30 0-40

2-4 game 6 J. Wolf serving BREAK

15-0 15-15 30-15 30-30 30-40

2-3 game 5 E. Shumilov serving BREAK

15-0 30-0 30-15 40-15 40-30

1-3 game 4 J. Wolf serving BREAK

0-15 0-30 15-30 30-30 30-40 40-40 40-A

1-2 game 3 E. Shumilov serving

15-0 30-0 30-15 30-30 30-40

1-1 game 2 J. Wolf serving

0-15 15-15 15-30 30-30 40-30

0-1 game 1 E. Shumilov serving

0-15 0-30 0-40

Point chips read J. Wolf first · highlighted border marks the point winner.

Win probability

J. WolfE. Shumilov

45%

55%

Model confidence

Why the model thinks so

Better recent form