📸 ATP official website

It might have taken a while to get going for M. Berrettini, but the Italian wild card managed to get things under control as soon as he found his serve and groundstrokes combination back. Furthermore, M. Berrettini's backhand also worked perfectly in this match, especially in the last two sets while oftentimes balancing with the volleys when necessary, creating 13 break points thanks to his aggression despite H. Gaston having a 66% break point conversion rate while trying to apply his classic tricks.

On the other hand, M. Berrettini had an exceptional first serve winning percentage with 82%, 26% more than H. Gaston, aided by his 10 aces to get out of most troubles despite the first-set start to adjust himself for the play. Interestingly, even though H. Gaston double-faulted eight times, he still won 1% more second serve points than M. Berrettini with 51%, likely due to the latter's constant forehand rush earlier in the match.

Help I just remembered the match where my friend and I survived against Joseph by ourselves for around 13 minutes (the other two died within the first 5 minutes).

📸 Tennis TV

I joined the match really late, towards the end of the second set. Was checking on Tennis TV and then realized Rublanov was still playing. Either way, stats time!

(People on Twitter are used to me posting stats at the end or middle of every match that I watch, middle for Challengers, at least to allow myself to see the game through the numbers, even though my tennis stats understanding is very limited).

All right, now let's get back to business for the stats. Serves really helped Rublanov a lot, hence they were pretty aces-heavy throughout the match (8 aces omg, maybe that's where their first serves really worked!). Their ability to convert the break points (50% of all the games) was something worth noting also for this match!

📸 ATP Challenger Livestream (via website)

What a match. That was spectacular. I might have missed a lot (because I peeked at it while doing something else), but the scorelines made me interested in what did I miss in particular.

The tie-break, however, gave me an impression of that picture. Andy Murray servebot era with 12 aces? That could explain his serving rates (81% won on 1st and 72% won on the 2nd serves), however, Brouwer managed to almost level them on return with such shot choices and rallies (there were several winners from him I remember or good shot choices in general), hence his better break conversion rate %.

📸 ATP/WTA Joint App

Lina stepped up her point construction starting the second set, but she was unable to stay in the momentum she gained at the third set when Leonie started redirecting back, with some notable passes going after the former's forehand, which resulted in Lina being out-paced in some key moments. As a result, even if Lina's aggression brought her to have 15 break points, Leonie optimized her chances by converting 50% of her 8 break points.

Besides, Leonie had firmer service games, which carried her in the most important moments. Even though Lina scored 5 aces, Leonie landed 74% of her first serves and won 61% of her first serve points, 2% more than Lina, which helped her to get out of some troubles. Furthermore, Leonie also had a slight edge from her second serves by 1%, winning 56% of her second serve points compared to Lina's 55%, where the latter's rushed follow-ups often could not help.

📸 Warsaw feed

Lina appeared dominant for a set and three-fourth, before she struggled to close things out until her third attempt to serve for the match. Through her clean ballstriking, she went after C. Monnet's forehand side, whose balance became more questionable as the match progressed. As a result, Lina won 13 more points than C. Monnet, converting 63% of her 8 break points thanks to her aggressive play compared to the latter's 50% break point conversion rate (out of 6 chances to break).

Furthermore, Lina appeared more solid with her service games. Scoring 4 aces than C. Monnet's 1, Lina won 66% of her first serve points despite only landing 56% of her first serves, winning 13% more points than C. Monnet that got her out of trouble at times. However, the latter's second serves appeared more vulnerable since she only won 39% of her second serve points, 11% lesser than Lina, who double-faulted thrice, some while trying to close things out.

📸 ATP official website

Ramanathan's resourcefulness in his aggression, where his slices also played a part before he took the second set, overwhelmed Oliel to some extent that even forcing the former to stay back did not work, and that was even if Oliel tried to raise his game in the second set. This way, Ramanathan managed to convert 2 out of his 7 break points, intuitively generating the said break points through his shot winners (mostly down-the-line and volleys), leaving Oliel less to no room on Ramanathan's almost flawless service games.

Speaking of Ramanathan's service games, he scored a whopping 15 aces, 11 more than Oliel, and had an exceptional 88% first serve winning percentage, which often got him out of trouble in various occasions. He also kept his second serve percentage consistent as he won 85% of his second serve points, 42% more than Oliel, which marked the latter's second serve vulnerability as he double-faulted thrice throughout the match. This confirmed Ramanathan's solid service game, as he appeared more clutch on the crucial moments as well.