Santiago Fa Rodriguez Taverna vs Francisco Cerundolo — Concepcion CH Quarter-final

Concepcion CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Santiago Fa Rodriguez Taverna
ARG8
Santiago Fa Rodriguez Taverna
1331ELO
1322Clay ELO
26 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWLWLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 17 January 2022
clay
Francisco Cerundolo
ARG4
Francisco Cerundolo
#22ATP
1931ELO
1868Clay ELO
$1.9MYTD
$11MCAREER
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLWWL
Rodriguez Taverna S.
6-3 7-6
Cerundolo F.
Rodriguez Taverna S.
6772
Cerundolo F.
3610

Santiago Fa Rodriguez Taverna defeated Francisco Cerundolo 6-3 7-6 in the Concepcion CH quarter-final on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Francisco Cerundolo came in defending last year's final, but Santiago Fa Rodriguez Taverna had arrived on a 5-match winning run.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Rodriguez Taverna S.serving66% hold

wins 56% of points on serve vs Cerundolo F.

Cerundolo F.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Rodriguez Taverna S.

Serve advantage — Cerundolo F.

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Serve & return on clay

Rodriguez Taverna S.Cerundolo F.
—
Serve
23
—
Return
100

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the clay field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Rodriguez Taverna S.Cerundolo F.
1st serve in·Even
60%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
67%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
51%
Service points won·Even
60%
62%
Return points won·Even
38%
40%
Break points saved·Even
60%
62%
Aces / match·Even
3.6
3.4
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.6
3.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Rodriguez Taverna S.Cerundolo F.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
38
88
Break points saved·Dominant
72
98
Break points won·Dominant
4
86
Deciding sets·Clear edge
76
94
Tiebreaks·Dominant
39
93

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Rodriguez Taverna S.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Cerundolo F.
8.1
Dominant favouriteUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
0.0Clay Elo 1322
Surface ELO
10.0+547 Clay Elo edge
0.0Overall Elo 1331
ELO gap
10.0Overall Elo 1931
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
8.4
Surface form
7.2
9.05-match win streak
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
4.9
Minutes 14d
6.8
7.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
7.0
Surface transition
6.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
Opponent rise
2.0

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.

Freshness

Recent load
Rodriguez Taverna S.Cerundolo F.
Freshness·Clear edge
82
98

Rodriguez Taverna S.: 5 days rest · 1 match, 34 games (7d) · Cerundolo F.: 14 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Galan D.[3]
Rodriguez Taverna S.[8]
6-13-66-3
Etcheverry T.[3]
Dellien H.[1]
6-36-2
Semi-finals
Rodriguez Taverna S.[8]
Lama G.
6-36-4
Galan D.[3]
Dellien H.[1]
6-42-67-63
Etcheverry T.[3]
Olivo R.
2-66-26-4
Dellien H.[1]
Barrios Vera T.[5]
6-36-0
Quarter-finals
Rodriguez Taverna S.[8]
Cerundolo F.[4]
6-37-61
Galan D.[3]
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
6-16-2
Dellien H.[1]
Sakamoto P.
6-26-4
Lama G.
Mena F.[6]
6-12-66-2
Olivo R.
Varillas J.[2]
7-622-66-2
Dellien H.[1]
Tirante T.
6-06-3
Etcheverry T.[3]
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
7-694-67-5
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
6-23-66-1
R16
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
Rubin N.
6-26-2
Galan D.[3]
Moreno De Alboran N.
4-66-16-2
Sakamoto P.
Folliot Q.
6-46-3
Lama G.
Villanueva G.
2-66-46-4
Cerundolo F.[4]
Franco Descotte M.
6-36-4
Mena F.[6]
Rodriguez C.
6-26-4
Dellien H.[1]
Kirchheimer S.
6-06-1
Rodriguez Taverna S.[8]
Alvarez N.
6-37-65
Olivo R.
Mena F.[8]
6-36-1
Tirante T.
Furness E.
7-646-0
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
Diez S.
6-16-2
Varillas J.[2]
Collarini A.
6-46-2
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
Jarry N.[4]
6-43-66-3
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Denolly C.
6-26-3
Etcheverry T.[3]
Lama G.
6-37-61
Dellien H.[1]
Jubb P.
6-12-0
R32
Rodriguez C.
Burruchaga R.
W/O
Villanueva G.
Martin A.[2]
6-26-3
Franco Descotte M.
Hernandez F.
6-06-0
Alvarez N.
Hidalgo D.
4-67-656-4
Rodriguez Taverna S.[8]
Leite W.
6-16-3
Moreno De Alboran N.
Reyes Varela M.
6-46-2
Sakamoto P.
Olivo R.[5]
6-16-1
Kirchheimer S.
Becerra Otarola I.
6-26-0
Cerundolo F.[4]
Dutra Da Silva D.
7-56-3
Dellien H.[1]
Castro C.
6-06-1
Lama G.
Vernier M.
6-26-2
Mena F.[6]
Gomez Herrera C.
6-34-66-4
Galan D.[3]
Merino A.
6-06-1
Rubin N.
Nunez V.
6-26-2
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
Achondo G.
6-06-0
Dellien H.[1]
Dutra Da Silva D.
6-16-0
Tirante T.
Nunez D.
7-656-3
Varillas J.[2]
Rodriguez Taverna S.
7-624-66-3
Lama G.
Bueno G.
6-46-4
Diez S.
Torres J.
6-46-2
Barrios Vera T.[5]
Juarez F.
3-67-56-3
Jarry N.[4]
Villanueva G.
6-26-1
Furness E.
Kopriva V.[6]
6-26-1
Jubb P.
Olivieri G.
7-56-3
Olivo R.
De Jong J.
1-67-606-2
Denolly C.
Oliveira G.
6-06-2
Etcheverry T.[3]
Fernandez Flores D.
6-15-76-2
Collarini A.
Kicker N.
6-46-3
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
Melzer G.
3-66-37-5
Mena F.[8]
Casanova H.
6-10-1
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
Cachin P.
6-33-1