Emilio Nava vs Marat Sharipov (RUS) Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
Wojtek Kolan
Published on 03 Jun at 12:56 AM UTC
HEAD TO HEAD
E. Nava vs M. Sharipov (RUS)

USA
1
Win
Played
0
Win
.jpg)
RUS
1
Win
Played
0
Win
Head-to-head: Nava 1 - 0 (RUS)
They have played 2 sets in total, with Emilio Nava winning 2 and Marat Sharipov (RUS) winning 0. The last match between Emilio Nava and Marat Sharipov (RUS) was at the Heilbronn Challenger, 03-06-2025, Round: R1, Surface: Clay, with Emilio Nava getting the victory 6-3 6-3.
| Players | Head To Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Nava | 1 |
| (RUS) | 0 |
Last 1 H2H Matches:
(R1) Heilbronn Challenger(06-03-25)
E. Nava vs M. S. (RUS) H2H Profile
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| $696,545 | Career Prize Money | $0 |
| 59.71% (243-164) | Career Total W/L | 66.08% (189-97) |
| 1 | Clay | 0 |
| 7 | Titles | 9 |
| 1 | Total H2H Matches | 0 |
| 50.00% (6-6) | YTD Win/Loss | 0% (0-0) |
E. Nava vs M. S. (RUS) Match Preview:
- Second Serve Performance: Recently, RUS has been winning 46.62% of points on their second serve, closely matched by Nava's 46.68%. What does this imply? It suggests both players have similar effectiveness on second serves in the last six months.
- Return Game Strength: When returning an opponent's second serve, RUS has achieved a 46.76% success rate compared to Nava's slight advantage at 46.96%. On first serve returns, Nava also leads, winning 25.38% of points against RUS's 23.56%. Could this give Nava an edge by pressuring RUS's service games?
- Under Pressure Performance: RUS has displayed superior ability in saving breakpoints with a 57.58% saving rate, while Nava's rate is 53.61%. This indicates RUS may handle pressure situations more effectively.
- Match Outcomes: Over the past year, RUS has not recorded any wins, contrasting with Nava's 59.26% match win rate. Isn't this a significant indicator of overall form and likely match direction?
- Opponent Quality: Nava has been playing against opponents with an average ranking of 265.25, suggesting slightly tougher competition than RUS has faced, possibly honing Nava's competitive edge.
- Deciding Set Resilience: In matches that reach a deciding set, Nava has a 52% win rate compared to RUS's 0% win rate. Could this be crucial if the match tightens?
- Breakpoint Conversion: Nava is slightly more efficient at converting breakpoints, achieving a 36.54% conversion rate versus RUS's 35.23%. Can this small edge lead to more service breaks?
Editorial Prediction (June 3, 2025, UTC):
The comparisons show that Nava edges RUS in several critical aspects, such as return game performance and stubbornness in deciding sets. These indicators could play a significant role during key match moments.
Although both players demonstrate similar performance on second serves, Nava's advantage in match play experience and overall win rate provides a clearer expectation of proficiency under match conditions.
Given Nava's consistent track record in matches and ability to handle high-pressure situations effectively, Nava is likely favored to triumph in this upcoming contest.
Emilio Nava vs Marat Sharipov (RUS) Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88.
E. Nava vs M. S. (RUS) H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches Won | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 0 |
| 12 | Games Won | 6 |
| 6 | Aces (Total) | 3 |
| 2 | Total Double Faults | 3 |
| 1:6:54 | Average Match Time | 1:6:54 |
| 73% (40/55) | 1st Serve % | 47% (23/49) |
| 75% (30/40) | 1st Serve Win % | 74% (17/23) |
| 47% (7/15) | 2nd Serve Win % | 35% (9/26) |
| 80% (4/5) | Break Pts Won % | 20% (1/5) |
| 47% (23/49) | Return Points Win % | 33% (18/55) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best‑of‑3 Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/1) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/1) |
Recent Performance Stats
E. Nava Recent Matches Played
M. S. (RUS) Recent Matches Played

E. Nava vs M. S. (RUS) Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 59.71% (243/164) | YTD Win/Loss | 66.08% (189/97) |
| 56.65% (541/414) | Sets Win/Loss | 63.20% (407/237) |
| 51.84% (4854/4509) | Games Win/Loss | 55.51% (3375/2705) |
| 55.43% (97/78) | Hard Win/Loss | 73.81% (93/33) |
| 66.86% (113/56) | Clay Win/Loss | 60.33% (73/48) |
| 54.90% (28/23) | Indoor Hard W/L | 58.97% (23/16) |
| 41.67% (5/7) | Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) |
| 0.54 | Aces Per Game | 0.68 |
| 2493 | Aces Total | 2016 |
| 0.26 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.23 |
| 1172 | Total Double Faults | 679 |
| 1:37:23 | Average Match Time | 1:28:45 |
| 370.77 | Average Opponent Rank | 486.12 |
| 63% (17701/28308) | 1st Serve % | 58% (10116/17490) |
| 71% (12630/17701) | 1st Serve Win % | 75% (7607/10116) |
| 51% (5429/10607) | 2nd Serve Win % | 51% (3763/7374) |
| 41% (1033/2495) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 41% (791/1923) |
| 38% (10695/28348) | Return Points Win % | 41% (7317/18018) |
| 51.85% (14/13) | Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 50.00% (14/14) | Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 42.31% (11/15) | Main Tour W/L | 0.00% (0/1) |
| 61.90% (156/96) | Challenger W/L | 58.49% (31/22) |
| 64.86% (48/26) | Futures W/L | 68.10% (158/74) |
| 60% (237/395) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 67% (185/277) |
| 40% (4/10) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 0% (0/3) |
| 50% (87/174) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 56% (52/93) |
| 59% (77/130) | Deciding Set Win % | 60% (45/75) |
| 86% (231/198) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 91% (191/174) |
| 14% (231/33) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 9% (191/17) |
| 25% (176/44) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 16% (95/15) |