Cedrik Marcel Stebe vs Nerman Fatic — Forli 2 CH Round of 32

Forli 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Cedrik Marcel Stebe
GER5
Cedrik Marcel Stebe
#366ATP
1556ELO
1523Hard ELO
35 yrs · 183 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWWLWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 10 January 2022
hard
BIH
Nerman Fatic
#396ATP
1496ELO
1417Hard ELO
31 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWWLWLW
Stebe C.
7-6 6-4
Fatic N.
Stebe C.
7762
Fatic N.
6340

Cedrik Marcel Stebe defeated Nerman Fatic 7-6 6-4 in the Forli 2 CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Stebe C.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Fatic N.

Fatic N.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Stebe C.

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
Stebe C.Fatic N.
1st serve in·Even
60%
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
40%
39%
Break points saved·Even
59%
60%
Aces / match·Slight edge
3.4
4.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.3
2.3

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (91 vs 188). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Stebe C.Fatic N.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
51
24
Break points saved·Clear edge
75
63
Break points won·Dominant
10
36
Deciding sets·Dominant
86
24
Tiebreaks·Dominant
68
35

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Stebe C.
5.0
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
  • Recent retirement (−1.5)
Fatic N.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.3+106 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.7Hard Elo 1417
5.7Overall Elo 1556
ELO gap
4.3Overall Elo 1496
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.5
Surface form
5.7
0.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
7.2
Minutes 14d
9.2
Prev. match
9.0
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
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Draper J.[8]
Clarke J.[3]
6-36-0
Semi-finals
Clarke J.[3]
Andreev A.
6-46-756-3
Draper J.[8]
Piros Z.
6-43-1
Quarter-finals
Piros Z.
Pospisil V.[1]
7-637-63
Clarke J.[3]
Jubb P.
6-47-60
Andreev A.
Furness E.
7-664-66-3
Draper J.[8]
Ritschard A.
3-67-56-3
R16
Andreev A.
Tiurnev E.
6-46-3
Furness E.
Mchugh A.
4-66-16-4
Clarke J.[3]
Escoffier A.
2-66-26-3
Jubb P.
Stebe C.[5]
4-67-56-1
Draper J.[8]
Nardi L.
6-06-1
Ritschard A.
Copil M.
7-646-3
Piros Z.
Gojo B.
6-756-16-3
Pospisil V.[1]
Gigante M.
7-686-3
R32
Tiurnev E.
Hoang A.[2]
6-767-686-2
Furness E.
Mukund S.
7-646-0
Mchugh A.
Uchida K.[7]
6-16-3
Clarke J.[3]
Mejia N.
4-66-36-4
Escoffier A.
Forti F.
7-666-746-3
Stebe C.[5]
Fatic N.
7-636-4
Draper J.[8]
Quiroz R.
6-16-4
Copil M.
Kotov P.[4]
7-55-76-4
Gojo B.
Istomin D.[6]
6-26-4
Pospisil V.[1]
Brouwer G.
5-77-656-4
Ritschard A.
Napolitano S.
7-657-5
Jubb P.
Wu T.
6-26-736-1
Gigante M.
Vatutin A.
6-26-4
Piros Z.
Potenza L.
6-36-4
Andreev A.
Jaziri M.
6-26-3
Nardi L.
Setkic A.
7-637-5