Tennys Sandgren vs Joao Sousa — Rome Masters Qualifying Final
Rome Masters · ATP · Qualifying Final
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 14 September 2020
clay
Sandgren T.6-3 6-0
Sousa J.
Sandgren T.
662
Sousa J.
300
Tennys Sandgren defeated Joao Sousa 6-3 6-0 in the Rome Masters qualifying final on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Joao Sousa came in defending last year's round of 32. Tennys Sandgren extended the head-to-head to 2–1.
Key context
- Match story: Tennys Sandgren handed Joao Sousa a second-set bagel in a 6–3 6–0 win.
Head to head
1–1| Date | Tournament | Round | Surface | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-12 | Newport | R32 | grass | Tennys Sandgren | 6-4 7-6(3) |
| 2018-10-29 | Paris Masters | Q2 | hard | Joao Sousa | 6-7(1) 6-3 6-4 |
Serve vs return
This seasonEven serve battle
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·Even
60%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
74%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
50%
Service points won·Even
64%
62%
Return points won·Even
35%
37%
Break points saved·Even
60%
59%
Aces / match·Dominant
8.6
3.4
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.7
2.0
Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (177 vs 195). ATP, WTA & Challenger.
Clutch
Under pressureClutch Rating·Even
36
35
Break points saved·Even
92
91
Break points won·Clear edge
2
14
Deciding sets·Clear edge
28
48
Tiebreaks·Dominant
86
23
Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About
Conditions
Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Weather
32°CClear
Wind 2 km/hHumidity 29%
Q3
Sandgren T.[1]
Sousa J.[9]
6-36-0
Bagnis F.
Ymer M.[11]
7-56-1
Koepfer D.
Kukushkin M.
2-66-46-2
Martinez P.
Martin A.
6-36-2
Davidovich Fokina A.
Moutet C.[15]
6-16-2
Musetti L.
Zeppieri G.
6-15-76-3
Cecchinato M.
Kovalik J.
6-26-1
Coria F.
Dzumhur D.
6-16-1
Q2
Bagnis F.
Duckworth J.
7-646-1
Dzumhur D.
Robredo T.
7-56-4
Sandgren T.[1]
Popyrin A.
6-766-46-2
Musetti L.
Mayer L.
7-646-3
Sousa J.[9]
Ivashka I.
6-47-63
Koepfer D.
Simon G.[2]
7-52-66-3
Zeppieri G.
Dellien H.
7-673-66-0
Ymer M.[11]
Polmans M.
6-46-4
Kovalik J.
Bedene A.[3]
7-656-3
Martinez P.
Viola M.
4-66-26-4
Kukushkin M.
Daniel T.
6-26-2
Cecchinato M.
Klahn B.
6-16-4
Davidovich Fokina A.
Sugita Y.
6-06-1
Coria F.
Diez S.
6-46-2
Martin A.
Chardy J.[7]
6-26-2
Moutet C.[15]
Marcora R.
6-726-32-1
Q1
Klahn B.
Seppi A.
6-24-67-61
Moutet C.[15]
Carballes Baena R.
7-54-2
Martinez P.
Forti F.
6-46-0
Dellien H.
Giannessi A.
7-56-4
Kukushkin M.
Ymer E.
6-736-47-5
Daniel T.
Monteiro T.[16]
4-67-646-4
Marcora R.
Horansky F.
6-26-4
Sousa J.[9]
Darderi L.
3-66-36-1
Viola M.
Kwon S.[13]
7-651-67-65
Chardy J.[7]
Venus M.
6-16-1
Robredo T.
Moroni G.
1-66-36-4
Diez S.
Albot R.[10]
6-47-5
Kovalik J.
Donskoy E.
7-56-4
Duckworth J.
Uchiyama Y.
7-624-0
Zeppieri G.
Norrie C.[14]
6-36-1
Cecchinato M.
Gerasimov E.[12]
6-25-76-3
Koepfer D.
Cobolli F.
7-623-66-0
Martin A.
Galan D.
5-77-647-5
Coria F.
Lorenzi P.
3-66-47-5
Dzumhur D.
Verdasco F.[5]
6-06-2
Mayer L.
Berrettini J.
6-36-2
Polmans M.
Gulbis E.
7-666-1
Bagnis F.
Paul T.[6]
7-56-4
Ivashka I.
Gigante M.
6-34-67-61
Sugita Y.
Harris L.
6-46-2
Musetti L.
Zapata Miralles B.
7-620-66-1
Ymer M.[11]
Giron M.
4-67-57-66
Davidovich Fokina A.
Londero J.[8]
2-66-26-2
Popyrin A.
Saville L.
6-37-66