Alexander Frusina - Jayden Templeman | Statistiken

Group Table

Winston-Salem M01, Group A

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Ilyas Milad Fahim	3	3	0	4	0
2	Eric Crivei	3	1	2	2	4
3	Spencer Gray	3	1	2	2	4
4	Henry Lieberman	2	1	1	2	2
5	Luciano Tacchi	1	0	1	0	0

Winston-Salem M01, Group B

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Tal Goodman	3	2	1	4	2
2	Hugo Hashimoto	3	2	1	5	3
3	Joseph Phillips	3	2	1	4	3
4	Martin Mazev	3	0	3	1	6

Winston-Salem M01, Group C

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Aleksa Ciric	3	3	0	6	1
2	David Saye	3	2	1	5	2
3	Nicholas Patrick	3	1	2	2	4
4	Nikola Parichkov	3	0	3	0	6

Winston-Salem M01, Group D

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Matthew Thomson	3	3	0	6	1
2	Justin Chung	3	2	1	4	3
3	Paolo Bompieri	3	1	2	3	4
4	Ariel Zauber	3	0	3	1	6

Winston-Salem M01, Group E

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Alexander Frusina	3	3	0	6	1
2	Logan Zapp	3	2	1	2	2
3	Jayden Templeman	3	1	2	3	5
4	Cornelius Alexander Shalmi	3	0	3	1	4

Winston-Salem M01, Group F

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Joaquin Guilleme	3	3	0	6	0
2	Ian Mayew	3	2	1	4	2
3	Hamza El Amine	3	1	2	2	4
4	Dylan Chang	3	0	3	0	6

Winston-Salem M01, Group G

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Sachin Palta	3	3	0	6	1
2	Shaurya Bharadwaj	3	2	1	5	3
3	Harry Thursfield	3	1	2	1	4
4	Freddy Murray	2	0	2	0	2
5	Tyler Stice	1	0	1	0	2

Winston-Salem M01, Group H

#	Mannschaft	SP	S	N	SW	SL
1	Franco Capalbo	3	3	0	6	0
2	Samuel Nicholson	3	2	1	4	2
3	Robbie Young	2	1	1	2	3
4	Aditya Vyas	3	0	3	1	6
5	Junghee You	1	0	1	0	2

Rangliste

#	Spieler	Punkte
1369	Alexander Frusina	5

Saisonform

Alexander Frusina

75‏%

Formtabelle

2:0

S

2:0

S

2:1

S

N

1:2

SNU-Richtung

Jayden Templeman

40‏%

Formtabelle

2:1

S

N

0:2

N

1:2

2:0

S

N

0:2

SNU-Richtung

Belag Gewinnrate

100‏%

50‏%

''

Gesamt

Asche

Hartplatz

Alexander Frusina

Jayden Templeman

Saison Statistiken

Statistiken	FRU	TEM
First Serves Successful	32.5‏%	50.0‏%
First Serve Won	79.1‏%	63.2‏%
Second Serves Successful	44.9‏%	46.5‏%
Second Serve Won	48.9‏%	56.9‏%
Doppelfehler	3.1‏%	1.6‏%
Service Games Won	56.9‏%	46.7‏%
Asse	5.3‏%	1.0‏%
Serves Won	64.5‏%	61.2‏%
Break point conversion	36.59‏%	34.78‏%
Tie Breaks Played	2	0
Tie Breaks Won	50.0‏%	-‏%