Evan Furness vs Nerman Fatic — Forli 1 CH Round of 32

Forli 1 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
FRA8
Evan Furness
27 yrs · 173 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLWLLWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 3 January 2022
hard
BIH
Nerman Fatic
#396ATP
1496ELO
1417Hard ELO
31 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWWLWLW
Furness E.
6-2 6-3
Fatic N.
Furness E.
662
Fatic N.
230

Evan Furness defeated Nerman Fatic 6-2 6-3 in the Forli 1 CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Furness E.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Fatic N.

Fatic N.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Furness E.

Even 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 season
Furness E.Fatic N.
1st serve in·Even
59%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
49%
Service points won·Even
60%
61%
Return points won·Even
38%
39%
Break points saved·Even
58%
60%
Aces / match·Slight edge
3.0
4.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.2
2.4

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (113 vs 188). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Furness E.Fatic N.
Clutch Rating·Even
22
24
Break points saved·Clear edge
47
63
Break points won·Clear edge
18
36
Deciding sets·Clear edge
44
24
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
49
35

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Furness E.
4.4
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 63 days (−1.2)
Fatic N.
5.7
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Injury return: 28 days (−0.3)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.1
Surface form
6.7
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
Surface transition
6.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Nardi L.
Mukund S.
6-36-1
Semi-finals
Mukund S.
Piros Z.[7]
6-37-64
Nardi L.
Stebe C.[2]
W/O
Quarter-finals
Stebe C.[2]
Potenza L.
7-56-3
Mukund S.
Benchetrit E.
6-37-65
Piros Z.[7]
Clarke J.[1]
6-36-3
Nardi L.
Harrison C.[3]
1-67-56-2
R16
Clarke J.[1]
Mchugh A.
7-667-66
Stebe C.[2]
Lenz J.
6-27-62
Potenza L.
Zhang Z.
7-56-4
Nardi L.
Furness E.[8]
6-756-46-1
Benchetrit E.
Wu T.[4]
7-616-3
Piros Z.[7]
Vrbensky M.
6-26-3
Mukund S.
Yevseyev D.
6-36-2
Harrison C.[3]
Vatutin A.
6-02-66-2
R32
Mchugh A.
Angelini L.
6-46-0
Yevseyev D.
Oliveira G.[6]
6-46-4
Stebe C.[2]
Lazarov A.
7-636-3
Lenz J.
Hsu Y.
6-46-4
Zhang Z.
Napolitano S.
7-633-67-64
Potenza L.
Ritschard A.[5]
5-76-47-68
Nardi L.
Catarina L.
3-66-36-2
Furness E.[8]
Fatic N.
6-26-3
Mukund S.
Forti F.
7-636-3
Benchetrit E.
Geerts M.
6-16-2
Wu T.[4]
Andreev A.
7-55-76-2
Piros Z.[7]
Wessels L.
6-46-4
Vrbensky M.
Viola M.
6-46-2
Clarke J.[1]
Jahn J.
6-46-2
Harrison C.[3]
Setkic A.
2-67-57-63
Vatutin A.
Chappell N.
6-756-26-2
Mchugh A.
Angelini L.
6-46-0