2018 International Challenger Zhangjiagang – Singles

Jason Jung was the defending champion but lost in the final to Yasutaka Uchiyama.

Singles
2018 International Challenger Zhangjiagang
Champion	Yasutaka Uchiyama
Runner-up	Jason Jung
Final score	6–2, 6–2

Uchiyama won the title after defeating Jung 6–2, 6–2 in the final.

Seeds

Jason Jung (Final)
Tatsuma Ito (Second round)
Zhang Ze (First round)
Go Soeda (Second round)
Filip Peliwo (First round)
Miomir Kecmanović (Semifinals)
Hiroki Moriya (Second round)
Alexander Bublik (Semifinals)

Draw

Key

Finals

	Semifinals							Final


	1	Jason Jung	7⁷	6⁵	6

	8	Alexander Bublik	6³	7⁷	0
								1	Jason Jung	2	2

									Yasutaka Uchiyama	6	6
		Yasutaka Uchiyama	6	4	7

	6	Miomir Kecmanović	3	6	5

Top half

	First Round							Second Round							Quarterfinals							Semifinals

	1	J Jung	6	6
	Q	Yuta Shimizu	4	3				1	J Jung	6	6
		Z Li	0	6	3			WC	Zh Zhang	4	4
	WC	Zh Zhang	6	1	6										1	J Jung	7	6
		T-h Yang	4	1^r												A Santillan	5	2
		A Santillan	6	3					A Santillan	7	6⁴	6
	WC	R Te	6	6				WC	R Te	5	7⁷	4
	5	F Peliwo	4	4																		1	J Jung	7⁷	6⁵	6
	4	G Soeda	7	7																		8	A Bublik	6³	7⁷	0
		A Bega	5	5				4	G Soeda	5	6	2
		Y-s Chung	3	6	6				Y-s Chung	7	3	6
		R Safiullin	6	4	3											Y-s Chung	4	4
	Q	D Kelly	7⁷	7											8	A Bublik	6	6
		S-w Kwon	6⁵	5				Q	D Kelly	5	4
	LL	Y Takahashi	3	4				8	A Bublik	7	6
	8	A Bublik	6	6

Bottom half

	First Round							Second Round							Quarterfinals							Semifinals

	7	H Moriya	7⁸	6
	Q	T Lamasine	6⁶	2				7	H Moriya	6	6⁵	3
		Y Uchiyama	6	4					Y Uchiyama	4	7⁷	6
		B Kavčič	3	2^r												Y Uchiyama	6	6
		U Ignatik	6	7⁷												U Ignatik	4	3
		A Šetkić	2	6³					U Ignatik	7⁸	6
		D-h Lee	6	5	6				D-h Lee	6⁶	1
	3	Ze Zhang	3	7	0																		Y Uchiyama	6	4	7
	6	M Kecmanović	6	3	6																	6	M Kecmanović	3	6	5
		M Purcell	3	6	3			6	M Kecmanović	2	6	6
	Q	F Ferreira Silva	4	4					J Rodionov	6	3	3
		J Rodionov	6	6											6	M Kecmanović	6	6
	WC	Y Wu	6	6											WC	Y Wu	4	4
	WC	Y He	3	4				WC	Y Wu	7⁸	4	6
		S Diez	4	1				2	T Ito	6⁶	6	3
	2	T Ito	6	6

gollark: I mean, Go manages to sort of hit the first two and definitely the third.

gollark: Because programmers somehow can't just convert stuff to machine code given a mere 120 billion clock cycles to work with.

gollark: For Haskell.

gollark: Well, somewhat, although incremental compiles seemed quite fast if I remember right.

gollark: I mean, Rust compiles painlessly if slowly, Nim manages that but somewhat quickly, even Haskell complies quite nicely.

References

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.