Conchita Martinez vs Patty Schnyder — Rome Semi-final
Rome · WTA · Semi-final
0 — 0
Sets
Monday, 5 May 1997
clay
Martinez C.6-2 6-2
Schnyder P.
Martinez C.
662
Schnyder P.
22–
Conchita Martinez defeated Patty Schnyder 6-2 6-2 in the Rome semi-final on clay. The result followed the form book — Conchita Martinez came in leading the head-to-head 6–3. Conchita Martinez extended the head-to-head to 7–3.
Key context
- Match story: Conchita Martinez dropped just 4 games past Patty Schnyder.
Head to head
6–3| Date | Tournament | Round | Surface | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005-08-29 | US Open | R128 | hard | Patty Schnyder | 4-6 6-4 6-2 |
| 2004-04-24 | Fed Cup WG R1: ESP vs SUI | RR | clay | Conchita Martinez | 6-3 6-4 |
| 2004-04-12 | Charleston | SF | clay | Conchita Martinez | 6-4 6-3 |
| 2002-10-14 | Zurich | SF | hard | Patty Schnyder | 6-0 6-3 |
| 2002-06-24 | Wimbledon | R64 | grass | Conchita Martinez | 6-1 6-3 |
| 2001-04-30 | Hamburg | R16 | clay | Patty Schnyder | 6-3 2-6 6-2 |
| 2000-03-20 | Miami | R32 | hard | Conchita Martinez | 7-5 6-4 |
| 1998-09-19 | Fed Cup WG1 F: SUI vs ESP | RR | hard | Conchita Martinez | 6-3 2-6 9-7 |
| 1997-10-27 | Kremlin Cup | R16 | carpet | Conchita Martinez | 7-5 2-6 6-1 |
Serve vs return
This seasonBaseline battle — serve is shaky, expect plenty of breaks
Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About
Statistics
This season1st serve in·Slight edge
59%
64%
1st serve points won·Even
61%
62%
2nd serve points won·Even
46%
50%
Service points won·Even
55%
58%
Return points won·Even
47%
43%
Break points saved·Even
57%
57%
Aces / match·Even
2.0
2.4
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.6
2.4
Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (18 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.
Conditions
Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Weather
20°CClear
Wind 12 km/hHumidity 48%
Draw
Quarter-finals
Martinez C.
Kruger J.
6-06-4
Schnyder P.
Sanchez Vicario A.
6-16-1
Pierce M.
Dragomir Ilie R.
6-36-4
Paulus B.
Spirlea I.
6-46-2
R16
Martinez C.
Likhovtseva E.
6-26-1
Sanchez Vicario A.
Appelmans S.
6-36-4
Schnyder P.
Coetzer A.
7-67-5
Kruger J.
Habsudova K.
6-26-4
Spirlea I.
Monami D.
6-16-3
Paulus B.
Lubiani F.
6-26-1
Pierce M.
Seles M.
7-67-6
Dragomir Ilie R.
Majoli I.
4-66-46-3
R32
Martinez C.
Rubin C.
6-26-3
Pierce M.
Grossman A.
6-26-2
Seles M.
Schett B.
7-56-0
Dragomir Ilie R.
Callens E.
3-66-26-0
Majoli I.
Arendt N.
7-64-66-3
Lubiani F.
Huber A.
6-26-2
Paulus B.
Gersi A.
6-16-3
Monami D.
Tauziat N.
6-76-16-2
Spirlea I.
Torrens Valero C.
7-57-6
Kruger J.
Schultz Mccarthy B.
6-27-5
Habsudova K.
Labat F.
6-46-3
Likhovtseva E.
Savchenko L.
6-36-3
Sanchez Vicario A.
Suarez P.
6-26-2
Appelmans S.
Pizzichini G.
6-46-3
Schnyder P.
Testud S.
7-66-0
Coetzer A.
Kournikova A.
6-24-66-1
R64
Paulus B.
Brandi K.
3-66-37-5
Suarez P.
Studenikova K.
7-57-6
Dragomir Ilie R.
Canepa A.
6-36-0
Gersi A.
Diaz Oliva M.
7-56-3
Lubiani F.
Chladkova D.
6-26-4
Arendt N.
Golarsa L.
6-36-2
Appelmans S.
Sawamatsu N.
6-36-1
Schett B.
Kleinova S.
4-66-27-5
Grossman A.
Tanasugarn T.
6-46-3
Pierce M.
Cecchini S.
6-16-1
Callens E.
Ellwood A.
6-43-66-4
Tauziat N.
Sukova H.
6-46-2
Monami D.
Begerow P.
6-36-0
Torrens Valero C.
Pitkowski Malcor S.
2-66-36-3
Pizzichini G.
Fusai A.
3-66-27-5
Testud S.
Oremans M.
6-33-67-6
Schnyder P.
Basuki Y.
6-06-1
Kournikova A.
Wang S.
6-46-3
Rubin C.
Capriati J.
7-66-2
Savchenko L.
Perfetti F.
6-23-66-2
Likhovtseva E.
Sidot A.
6-46-3
Schultz Mccarthy B.
Nagyova H.
6-36-4
Kruger J.
Sugiyama A.
6-36-2
Labat F.
Barabanschikova O.
6-17-6