Zachary Svajda and Emilio Nava will fight against each other in the quarter of the Knoxville Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Friday at 5:30 pm on COURT 2. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Zachary Svajda who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Zachary Svajda is the pick to win this match.
Zachary Svajda -> 1.5
Emilio Nava -> 2.5
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
To be able to watch live streaming bet365, a funded account is required or you need to have placed a bet in the last 24 hours. 18+ BeGambleAware.
Here where top tennis events are broadcasted or streamed online (ATP, WTA).
At the challenger level, there will be free live streaming on Challenger TV.
Â
Prediction and head to head Zachary Svajda vs. Emilio Nava
There is no head to head record between Zachary Svajda and Emilio Nava since this will be the first time that they will fight against each other in the main tour.
Zachary Svajda
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 26-23 | 18-12 | 2-4 | 0-2 | 6-5 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 46-24 | 28-8 | 2-6 | 10-6 | 6-4 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 26-23 | 25-14 | 0-3 | 1-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 24-13 | 24-12 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 6-6 | 5-3 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 141, Svajda reached the quarter after beating Aidan Mayo 6-3 6-4 and Sebastian Fanselow 6-2 7-5.
In the 2nd round, Zachary had a good straight sets win against Fanselow (6-2 7-5). During the match, Svajda scored 71 points vs Fanselow’s 54. The American was quite aggressive to blast 26 winners.
Talking about the service games, Svajda recorded 5 aces and he committed only 4 double faults. Overall, Zachary Svajda was pretty efficient on serve to win 81% (26/32) of his 1st serve and 54% (13/24) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve once. Svajda broke Fanselow 4 times after converting 44% of his break points (4/9).
Overall Performance in this tournament
The American hasn’t lost yet a set in this event to win 57% of the points he played.
Svajda has a winning win-loss record in the last 6 years having won 59% of his matches (123-86). 10-5 on indoor hard courts in 2023. In connection with his performance on the same surface of this event, Svajda has a compiled12-15 record in the last 6 years on indoor hard courts.
His best result of the current season was winning the title the Cary 2 Challenger where he beat Rinky Hijikata in the final 7-6(3) 4-6 6-1 and the Tiburon Challenger where he defeated Adam Walton in the final 6-2 6-2 and the Fairfield Challenger where he beat Nishesh Basavareddy in the final 6-4 6-1.
The American has an aggregate 46-23 win-loss record in 2023, 10-5 on indoor hard courts (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Knoxville Challenger
Emilio Nava
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 21-22 | 11-9 | 4-6 | 4-2 | 2-5 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 40-31 | 24-14 | 12-8 | 4-9 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 41-27 | 15-15 | 14-6 | 12-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 40-16 | 9-6 | 27-7 | 4-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 17-12 | 10-7 | 7-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 153, Nava got to the quarter after beating Nino Serdarusic 6-4 6-4 and Murphy Cassone 6-4 6-4.
In the 2nd round, Emilio had a good straight sets win against Cassone (6-4 6-4). During the match Nava scored 65 points vs Cassone’s 58. Emilio was pretty aggressive to blast 19 winners.
About the serving games, Nava scored 2 aces and he committed only 3 double faults. Emilio Nava lost the serve 3 times. Furthermore, Nava put 57% of his first serves in, winning 66% (19/29) of the points behind his 1st serve and 50% (11/22) on the 2nd serve. Emilio broke Cassone 5 times after converting 63% of his break points (5/8).
Overall Performance in this tournament
Nava hasn’t dropped yet a set in the tournament to win 53% of the points he played.
His best result of the season was conquering the title the Modena Challenger where he defeated Titouan Droguet in the final 6-7(5) 7-6(6) 6-4.
Emilio has a composed 39-29 win-loss record in 2023, 3-7 on indoor hard courts (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Knoxville Challenger
Previously, his best result was reaching the quarter in 2021. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament (main draw)
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Svajda | Nava |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 2 | 2 |
| Tot Set | 4 | 4 |
| Tot Games | 39 | 40 |
| Pts | 137-102 | 134-118 |
| Total Points | 239 | 252 |
| Winners | 46 | 55 |
| %Winners | 34% | 41% |
Both Svajda and Nava played 2 matches. Both players have not conceded a single set in this event so far. Talking about their workload, Svajda and Nava have played the same amount of sets 4. However, Svajda played 1 game less than Nava. The American scored 46 winners (34% of the total points). On the other side, The American recorded 55 winners (41%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Svajda | Nava |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 7 | 7 |
| Avg per match | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| 1st in | 59/115 | 73/115 |
| %1st in | 51% | 63% |
| 1st pts | 46/59 | 55/73 |
| %1st pts | 78% | 75% |
| 2nd pts | 32/56 | 21/42 |
| %2nd pts | 57% | 50% |
Svajda struck 7 aces (3.5 per match). Nava made 7 aces (3.5 per match). Svajda won 78% points on his first serve. He was rock solid on his second serve to win 57% of the points. On the other side, Nava won 75% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 50% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Svajda | Nava |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 8 | 7 |
| Converted | 8/17 | 7/14 |
| % Converted | 47% | 50% |
| Conceded | 7 | 5 |
| Saved | 4 | 2 |
| % Saved | 57% | 40% |
| Times Broken | 3 | 3 |
The American broke his opponents 8 times with a 47% conversion rate. Svajda surrendered his serve 3 times and he saved 57% of the break points that he conceded. Emilio broke his opponents 7 times with a 50% conversion rate. The American conceded his serve 3 times and he saved 40% of the break points that he conceded.
| Svajda | ||||
| R1 Mayo |
R2 Fanselow |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-3 6-4 | 6-2 7-5 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | 4 | |
| Tot Games | 19 | 20 | 39 | |
| pts | 66-48 | 71-54 | 137-102 | |
| Total points | 114 | 125 | 239 | |
| Winners | 20 | 26 | 46 | |
| %Winners | 30% | 37% | 34% | |
| SERVE | ||||
| Aces | 2 | 5 | 7 | |
| Double Faults | 0 | 4 | 4 | |
| 1st in | 27/59 | 32/56 | 59/115 | |
| % 1st in | 46% | 57% | 51% | |
| 1st pts | 20/27 | 26/32 | 46/59 | |
| % 1st pts | 74% | 81% | 78% | |
| 2nd pts | 19/32 | 13/24 | 32/56 | |
| % 2nd pts | 59% | 54% | 57% | |
| Breaks | ||||
| Won | 4 | 4 | 8 | |
| Converted | 4/8 | 4/9 | 8/17 | |
| Converted % | 50% | 44% | 47% | |
| Conceded | 5 | 2 | 7 | |
| Saved | 3/5 | 1/2 | 4 | |
| Saved % | 60% | 50% | 55% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 1 | 3 | |
| Nava | ||||
| R1 Serdarusic |
R2 Cassone |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 6-4 | 6-4 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | 4 | |
| Tot Games | 20 | 20 | 40 | |
| pts | 69-60 | 65-58 | 134-118 | |
| Total points | 129 | 123 | 252 | |
| Winners | 36 | 19 | 55 | |
| %Winners | 52% | 29% | 41% | |
| SERVE | ||||
| Aces | 5 | 2 | 7 | |
| Double Faults | 2 | 3 | 5 | |
| 1st in | 44/64 | 29/51 | 73/115 | |
| % 1st in | 69% | 57% | 63% | |
| 1st pts | 36/44 | 19/29 | 55/73 | |
| % 1st pts | 82% | 66% | 75% | |
| 2nd pts | 10/20 | 11/22 | 21/42 | |
| % 2nd pts | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Breaks | ||||
| Won | 2 | 5 | 7 | |
| Converted | 2/6 | 5/8 | 7/14 | |
| Converted % | 33% | 63% | 50% | |
| Conceded | 2 | 3 | 5 | |
| Saved | 2/2 | 0/3 | 2 | |
| Saved % | 100% | 0% | 50% | |
| Times Broken | 0 | 3 | 3 | |
Head 2 Head
LWWLLWLWWW
LLLLWLLWLL Tennis Scores in Knoxville Challenger
- Martin Damm/Alex RybakovDamm/Alex Rybakov – Shunsuke Mitsui/Filip PieczonkaMitsui/Filip Pieczonka (6-2 6-4) – Stats, scores, rankings
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Denis KudlaKudla – Aidan MchughMchugh (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Alexander RitschardRitschard – Tennys SandgrenSandgren (1-1) – H2H and prediction
