Tomas Martin Etcheverry vs Camilo Ugo Carabelli — Concepcion CH Quarter-final

Concepcion CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Tomas Martin Etcheverry
ARG3
Tomas Martin Etcheverry
#30ATP
1812ELO
1767Clay ELO
$1.4MYTD
$6.8MCAREER
26 yrs · 196 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLWLLWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 14 March 2022
clay
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
ARG7
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
#58ATP
1759ELO
1741Clay ELO
$653kYTD
$2.7MCAREER
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWWLWLW
Etcheverry T.
7-6 4-6 7-5
Ugo Carabelli C.
Etcheverry T.
711472
Ugo Carabelli C.
69651

Tomas Martin Etcheverry defeated Camilo Ugo Carabelli 7-6 4-6 7-5 in the Concepcion CH quarter-final on clay. The result followed the form book — Tomas Martin Etcheverry came in ranked #30, leading the head-to-head 2–1. Tomas Martin Etcheverry extended the head-to-head to 3–1.

Key context

Head to head

2–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2025-10-27Paris MastersR64hardCamilo Ugo Carabelli7-5 6-3
2025-08-25US OpenR128hardTomas Martin Etcheverry6-3 6-2 6-0
2025-05-18HamburgR16clayTomas Martin Etcheverry6-4 6-4

Serve vs return

This season
Etcheverry T.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Ugo Carabelli C.

Ugo Carabelli C.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Etcheverry T.

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

Serve & return on clay

Etcheverry T.Ugo Carabelli C.
56
Serve
24
26
Return
28

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

Statistics

This season
Etcheverry T.Ugo Carabelli C.
1st serve in·Even
65%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
72%
67%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
49%
Service points won·Slight edge
65%
60%
Return points won·Even
37%
41%
Break points saved·Even
64%
60%
Aces / match·Dominant
6.4
2.7
Double faults / match·Clear edge
1.6
2.4

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Etcheverry T.Ugo Carabelli C.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
70
78
Break points saved·Slight edge
98
90
Break points won·Dominant
36
62
Deciding sets·Clear edge
83
96
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
87
72

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Etcheverry T.
6.8
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Ugo Carabelli C.
5.4
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
5.8+27 Clay Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.2Clay Elo 1741
6.4Overall Elo 1812
ELO gap
3.6Overall Elo 1759
6.7
H2H
3.3
5.7
Surface form
4.8
7.03-match win streak
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
4.0
Minutes 14d
7.4
4.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
4.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
6.0

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
Etcheverry T.Ugo Carabelli C.
Freshness·Even
96
100

Etcheverry T.: 14 days rest · 1 match (14d) · Ugo Carabelli C.: 15 days rest. 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