Matej Dodig vs Sumit Nagal Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
Wojtek Kolan
Published on 12 Jul at 02:41 PM UTC
HEAD TO HEAD
M. Dodig vs S. Nagal

CRO
1
Win
Played
0
Win

IND
1
Win
Played
0
Win
Head-to-head: Dodig 1 - 0 Nagal
They have played 2 sets in total, with Matej Dodig winning 2 and Sumit Nagal winning 0. The last match between Matej Dodig and Sumit Nagal was at the Trieste Challenger, 12-07-2025, Round: SF, Surface: Clay, with Matej Dodig getting the victory 6-3 6-4.
| Players | Head To Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Dodig | 1 |
| Nagal | 0 |
Last 1 H2H Matches:
(SF) Trieste Challenger(07-12-25)
M. Dodig vs S. Nagal H2H Profile
M. Dodig vs S. Nagal Match Preview:
- Nagal and Dodig differ in second serve performance, with Dodig winning 45.62% of points compared to Nagal's 39.02%. Could this stat be a crucial factor for their upcoming match? It often impacts match outcomes.
- Return game stats show Nagal slightly ahead on second serve returns with 47.65% over Dodig's 46.63%. On first serve returns, Nagal also leads slightly with 31.26% compared to Dodig's 29.54%.
- Dodig outperforms Nagal under pressure, saving 54.76% of breakpoints, whereas Nagal saves 51.24%.
- Over the past year, Dodig has a stronger match win rate at 48.28% compared to Nagal's 38.78%.
- Nagal excels on clay with a 62% career win rate, while Dodig's best performance is on hard courts, winning 68% of matches.
- In challenger/ITF tournaments, Nagal has a slighter edge, winning 50% of matches, while Dodig has won 45.83%.
- Nagal has faced more challenging opponents, with an average rank of 201.16, opposed to Dodig who has faced players with an average rank of 315.62.
- If the match progresses to a deciding set, Nagal has an advantage, winning 60% of such sets compared to Dodig's 43%.
- Nagal also holds a slight edge in break point conversion, turning 37.01% of opportunities, whereas Dodig has a 33.33% conversion rate.
Editorial Prediction (July 12, 2025, UTC):
The upcoming tennis match between Nagal and Dodig presents an intriguing competition, with both players showcasing distinct strengths and weaknesses.
Dodig's second serve efficiency and ability to save breakpoints might grant him an edge in critical moments, whereas Nagal's slightly better return game and break point conversion could make a difference if the match becomes a grinding affair.
While both players have had similar performances in the lower-tier tournaments, Nagal's experience with tougher opponents and superior performance in deciding sets could provide him a crucial advantage.
Considering these factors, Nagal appears more likely to emerge victorious in this closely contested match.
Matej Dodig vs Sumit Nagal Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88.
M. Dodig vs S. Nagal H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches Won | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 0 |
| 12 | Games Won | 7 |
| 3 | Aces (Total) | 1 |
| 1 | Total Double Faults | 4 |
| 1:33:41 | Average Match Time | 1:33:41 |
| 62% (38/61) | 1st Serve % | 75% (42/56) |
| 76% (29/38) | 1st Serve Win % | 64% (27/42) |
| 61% (14/23) | 2nd Serve Win % | 50% (7/14) |
| 100% (3/3) | Break Pts Won % | 33% (1/3) |
| 39% (22/56) | Return Points Win % | 30% (18/61) |
| 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
M. Dodig Recent Matches Played
| OPPONENT | RESULT | SCORE | H2H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
QF | L | 6-3 2-6 6-4 | ||
R2 | W | 7-5 6-3 | ||
R1 | W | 7-5 3-6 6-4 | ||
Q3 | W | 7-6(4) 6-3 | ||
Q1 | W | 7-5 6-1 | ||
S. Nagal Recent Matches Played
| OPPONENT | RESULT | SCORE | H2H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
QF | L | 7-6(5) 6-4 | ||
R2 | W | 6-3 3-6 6-3 | ||
R1 | W | 6-3 6-1 | ||
Q3 | W | 6-4 1-6 7-5 | ||
Q1 | W | 6-4 6-2 | ||

M. Dodig vs S. Nagal Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 63.13% (125/73) | YTD Win/Loss | 59.35% (365/250) |
| 59.61% (276/187) | Sets Win/Loss | 58.02% (832/602) |
| 53.10% (2322/2051) | Games Win/Loss | 53.25% (7036/6176) |
| 68.18% (15/7) | Hard Win/Loss | 56.65% (98/75) |
| 63.01% (92/54) | Clay Win/Loss | 62.14% (256/156) |
| 60.00% (18/12) | Indoor Hard W/L | 40.74% (11/16) |
| 0% (0/0) | Grass Win/Loss | 0.00% (0/3) |
| 0.34 | Aces Per Game | 0.13 |
| 714 | Aces Total | 831 |
| 0.27 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.2 |
| 578 | Total Double Faults | 1318 |
| 1:47:36 | Average Match Time | 1:33:45 |
| 399.69 | Average Opponent Rank | 481.13 |
| 58% (8135/13916) | 1st Serve % | 68% (25789/38100) |
| 70% (5708/8135) | 1st Serve Win % | 64% (16550/25789) |
| 50% (2901/5781) | 2nd Serve Win % | 50% (6191/12297) |
| 41% (609/1486) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 44% (2012/4564) |
| 40% (5526/13692) | Return Points Win % | 43% (16784/39097) |
| 0% (0/0) | Slam W/L | 33.33% (10/20) |
| 0% (0/0) | Masters W/L | 35.71% (5/9) |
| 50.00% (1/1) | Cups W/L | 60.00% (6/4) |
| 33.33% (1/2) | Main Tour W/L | 42.37% (25/34) |
| 53.33% (56/49) | Challenger W/L | 58.60% (201/142) |
| 76.14% (67/21) | Futures W/L | 75.00% (117/39) |
| 62% (121/194) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 60% (355/591) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 25% (4/16) |
| 56% (30/54) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 57% (89/155) |
| 58% (40/69) | Deciding Set Win % | 49% (94/193) |
| 85% (124/105) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 85% (382/324) |
| 15% (124/19) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 15% (382/56) |
| 27% (74/20) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 17% (233/40) |