Mirza Basic — Dinko Dinev 2:0: match report and statistics
Challenger. Split. Qualification · 22.03.2026 15:30 · Finished
Compare teamsWho will win?
Votes: 0- Mirza Basic0%
- Draw0%
- Dinko Dinev0%
Overview
Final score Mirza Basic 2:0 Dinko Dinev, Challenger. Split. Qualification, 22.03.2026 15:30 (UTC). The win went to Mirza Basic.
Mirza Basic, last 6 games: won 3, drawn 0, lost 3. Dinko Dinev, last 5 games: won 1, drawn 0, lost 4.
All meetings of Mirza Basic and Dinko Dinev: 1 (wins of Mirza Basic: 0, wins of Dinko Dinev: 1, draws: 0). The last meeting on 12.02.2023 09:25 ended Dinko Dinev 1:0 Mirza Basic.
More on the site: Mirza Basic, Dinko Dinev, Challenger. Split. Qualification table.
See also Tennis matches today. The statistics are powered by SportAPI, a sports data provider.
Score by periods
| Team | 1 | 2 | Σ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | 6 | 2 | |
| 2 | 4 | 0 |
Match statistics
- 1 Aces 3
- 1 Double faults 0
- 73% First serve 74%
- 69% (24/35)1st serve points won(25/43) 58%
- 77% (10/13)2nd serve points won(6/15) 40%
- 0% Break points saved 0%
- 42% (18/43)1st serve return points won(11/35) 31%
- 60% (9/15)2nd serve return points won(3/13) 23%
- 0% Break points converted 0%
- 14 Winners 15
- 18 Unforced errors 34
- 100 (9/9)Net points won(4/10) 40
- 71% (34/48)Service points won(31/58) 53%
- 47% (27/58)Return points won(14/48) 29%
- 58% (61/106)Total points won(45/106) 42%
- 6 Посл. 10 мячей 4
- 0 Match Points Saved 1
- 89% (8/9)Service games won(5/9) 56%
- 44% (4/9)Return games won(1/9) 11%
- 67% (12/18)Total games won(6/18) 33%
Game by game
- 0 : 115:0 15:15 15:30 15:40
- 1 : 115:0 30:0 30:15 40:15
- 2 : 1Lost serve15:0 30:0 30:15 30:30 30:40 40:40 A:40 BP
- 3 : 115:0 30:0 40:0
- 3 : 215:0 15:15 30:15 30:30 30:40
- Lost serve3 : 30:15 0:30 0:40 BP15:40 BP
- 4 : 3Lost serve15:0 15:15 30:15 40:15 BP40:30 BP
- 5 : 315:0 15:15 30:15 40:15
- 5 : 40:15 0:30 0:40 15:40
- 6 : 415:0 30:0 30:15 30:30 40:30 MP40:40 A:40 MP
Head-to-head
Mirza BasicMatches played: 1
draws: 0
Dinko DinevPrevious matches: Mirza Basic
Previous matches: Dinko Dinev
Match info
- Tournament
- Split
- Season
- 2026
Challenger. Split. Qualification
Match forecast and markets
- On serve the model gives Mirza Basic 64% of points and Dinko Dinev 54% — adjusted for the opponent's return.
- Most likely score in sets is 2:0 (66%), then 2:1 (25%).
- About 21.8 games expected; over 21.5 — 42%.
| Market | Model | Fair odds | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mirza Basic wins | 63%5/8 | 80%4/5 | 91% | 1.10 |
| Dinko Dinev wins | 38%3/8 | 20%1/5 | 9% | 10.55 |
| Mirza Basic wins 1st set | 63%5/8 | 60%3/5 | 81% | 1.23 |
| Deciding set | 13%1/8 | 40%2/5 | 31% | 3.25 |
| Tiebreak in match | 38%3/8 | 0%0/5 | 25% | 4.07 |
| Score in sets | ||||
| 2:0 | 50%4/8 | 40%2/5 | 66% | 1.52 |
| 2:1 | 13%1/8 | 40%2/5 | 25% | 4.01 |
| 1:2 | 0%0/8 | 0%0/5 | 6% | 17.07 |
| 0:2 | 38%3/8 | 20%1/5 | 4% | 27.65 |
Model: serve and return points of each player in recent matches (8 and 5) → game → set → match. History — share of each player's matches where the market came in.
Players' style of play
Mirza Basicmatches: 8
Strengths
- Double faults per match 1.9 (avg 3)Strong
- Points won on 2nd serve 52% (avg 49%)Strong
- Tiebreaks 2/3Strong
- Closing out after winning 1st set 5/5Strong
Weaknesses
- Comebacks after losing 1st set 0/3Weak
- Aces per match
- 3.9
- Double faults per match
- 1.9
- First serve in
- 67%
- Service games held
- 77%
- Return games won
- 23%
Dinko Dinevmatches: 5
Weaknesses
- Aces per match 2.3 (avg 4.1)Weak
- Comebacks after losing 1st set 0/3Weak
- Aces per match
- 2.3
- Double faults per match
- 2.8
- First serve in
- 65%
- Service games held
- 25%
- Return games won
- 25%
Compared with the average of all players in these matches (both players and their opponents). Recent 10 matches.
Trends
3 defeats in a row100%
Matches without a deciding set: 7 of 888%
Losses in 4 of 5 matches80%
Under 24.5 games in 4 of 5 matches80%
Under 21.5 games in 6 of 8 matches75%
Based on recent matches: home team — 8, away team — 5
Win probability
Markov model: each player's chance to win a point on serve → game → set → match. Bars below show how much each point mattered.