Coco Gauff vs Qiang Wang — Miami Round of 64

Miami · WTA · Round of 64
Coco Gauff
USA14
Coco Gauff
#7WTA
2071ELO
2035Hard ELO
$2.9MYTD
$33MCAREER
22 yrs · 175 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 21 March 2022
hard
CHN
Qiang Wang
34 yrs · 172 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLLLL
Gauff C.
7-5 6-4
Wang Q.
Gauff C.
762
Wang Q.
540

Coco Gauff defeated Qiang Wang 7-5 6-4 in the Miami round of 64 on hard. The result followed the form book — Coco Gauff came in leading the head-to-head 2–1, defending last year's round of 64. Coco Gauff extended the head-to-head to 3–1.

Key context

Head to head

2–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2022-01-17Australian OpenR128hardQiang Wang6-4 6-2
2021-05-31Roland GarrosR64clayCoco Gauff6-3 7-6(1)
2021-05-17ParmaFclayCoco Gauff6-1 6-3
View full head-to-head →

Serve vs return

This season
Gauff C.serving77% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Wang Q.

Wang Q.serving62% hold

wins 55% of points on serve vs Gauff C.

Serve advantage — Gauff C.

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 hard

Gauff C.Wang Q.
25
Serve
—
100
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Gauff C.Wang Q.
1st serve in·Even
60%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
69%
62%
2nd serve points won·Even
44%
48%
Service points won·Even
59%
57%
Return points won·Slight edge
48%
43%
Break points saved·Even
56%
54%
Aces / match·Clear edge
3.4
1.9
Double faults / match·Dominant
5.8
2.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 54). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Gauff C.Wang Q.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
99
27
Break points saved·Dominant
96
46
Break points won·Dominant
100
74
Deciding sets·Dominant
100
46
Tiebreaks·Dominant
99
22

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gauff C.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Wang Q.
7.0
Strong advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
0.0
H2H
10.0
5.3
Surface form
5.7
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
8.0
Minutes 14d
8.7
7.0
Prev. match
7.0
6.2
Country comfort
5.2
Context
6.0
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
Gauff C.Wang Q.
Freshness·
60
—

Gauff C.: 3 days rest · 3 matches, 85 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Weather
25°CMainly clear
Wind 21 km/hHumidity 57%

Draw

Final
Swiatek I.[2]
Osaka N.
6-46-0
Semi-finals
Swiatek I.[2]
Pegula J.[16]
6-27-5
Osaka N.
Bencic B.[22]
4-66-36-4
Quarter-finals
Swiatek I.[2]
Kvitova P.[28]
6-36-3
Pegula J.[16]
Badosa P.[5]
4-1
Osaka N.
Collins D.[9]
6-26-1
Bencic B.[22]
Saville D.
6-16-2
R16
Bencic B.[22]
Sasnovich A.
6-26-3
Saville D.
Bronzetti L.
5-76-47-5
Osaka N.
Riske Amritraj A.
6-36-4
Collins D.[9]
Jabeur O.[8]
6-26-4
Badosa P.[5]
Fruhvirtova L.
6-26-3
Kvitova P.[28]
Kudermetova V.[21]
7-656-4
Swiatek I.[2]
Gauff C.[14]
6-36-1
Pegula J.[16]
Kalinina A.
6-0
R32
Osaka N.
Muchova K.
W/O
Bronzetti L.
Kalinskaya A.
W/O
Jabeur O.[8]
Kanepi K.
6-36-0
Sasnovich A.
Begu I.
7-56-746-4
Bencic B.[22]
Watson H.
6-46-1
Riske Amritraj A.
Li A.
6-23-66-3
Collins D.[9]
Zvonareva V.
6-16-4
Badosa P.[5]
Putintseva Y.
6-36-2
Pegula J.[16]
Rybakina E.[17]
6-36-4
Kalinina A.
Haddad Maia B.
2-66-46-2
Kvitova P.[28]
Davis L.
7-56-1
Saville D.
Siniakova K.
6-01-0
Fruhvirtova L.
Azarenka V.[12]
6-23-0
Swiatek I.[2]
Brengle M.
6-06-3
Kudermetova V.[21]
Rogers S.
6-17-5
Gauff C.[14]
Zhang S.
7-617-5
R64
Kudermetova V.[21]
Galfi D.
5-1
Kanepi K.
Sorribes Tormo S.[32]
3-67-56-0
Sasnovich A.
Kasatkina D.[25]
7-656-4
Siniakova K.
Raducanu E.[11]
3-66-47-5
Begu I.
Sabalenka A.[1]
6-46-4
Bencic B.[22]
Kostyuk M.
6-36-1
Saville D.
Tan H.
6-46-2
Bronzetti L.
Voegele S.
6-26-1
Kalinskaya A.
Pliskova K.[6]
6-36-3
Muchova K.
Fernandez L.[18]
6-47-63
Collins D.[9]
Bondar A.
6-33-66-4
Zvonareva V.
Zidansek T.[19]
6-36-2
Jabeur O.[8]
Linette M.
7-616-2
Badosa P.[5]
Bouzkova M.
7-57-5
Putintseva Y.
Tsurenko L.
6-34-67-5
Fruhvirtova L.
Mertens E.[20]
7-52-66-1
Azarenka V.[12]
Alexandrova E.
6-42-67-65
Pegula J.[16]
Stephens S.
6-16-4
Rybakina E.[17]
Ruse E.
6-47-5
Kalinina A.
Keys M.[26]
3-66-36-4
Haddad Maia B.
Sakkari M.[4]
4-66-16-2
Davis L.
Hunter S.
6-46-1
Kvitova P.[28]
Burel C.
6-13-66-3
Rogers S.
Ostapenko J.[10]
6-37-60
Swiatek I.[2]
Golubic V.
6-26-0
Brengle M.
Samsonova L.[29]
6-46-0
Watson H.
Svitolina E.[15]
4-66-37-64
Osaka N.
Kerber A.[13]
6-26-3
Zhang S.
Cirstea S.[24]
6-16-1
Riske Amritraj A.
Cornet A.[31]
6-26-2
Gauff C.[14]
Wang Q.
7-56-4
Li A.
Kontaveit A.[3]
6-03-66-4
R128
Kanepi K.
Zanevska M.
6-2
Haddad Maia B.
Parrizas Diaz N.
7-626-2
Bondar A.
Garcia C.
7-5
Begu I.
Baptiste H.
6-766-16-1
Sasnovich A.
Wang X.
7-666-4
Putintseva Y.
Schunk N.
4-66-36-1
Fruhvirtova L.
Kovinic D.
6-06-4
Stephens S.
Udvardy P.
6-46-3
Ruse E.
Konjuh A.
6-36-4
Burel C.
Frech M.
6-37-5
Rogers S.
Anisimova A.
3-66-06-3
Wang Q.
Krueger A.
4-67-56-2
Brengle M.
Eala A.
6-26-1
Golubic V.
Flipkens K.
6-44-66-4
Watson H.
Rus A.
6-757-56-4
Siniakova K.
Marino R.
3-66-26-1
Li A.
Sherif M.
2-66-36-4
Riske Amritraj A.
Teichmann J.
7-656-3
Zvonareva V.
Doi M.
6-46-1
Muchova K.
Martincova T.
7-637-63
Linette M.
Zheng Q.
7-646-4
Zhang S.
Tauson C.
6-44-62-1
Galfi D.
Kucova K.
6-06-0
Kalinina A.
Gorgodze E.
6-23-66-3
Davis L.
Yuan Y.
6-46-1
Kalinskaya A.
Montgomery R.
4-66-47-64
Osaka N.
Sharma A.
6-36-4
Kostyuk M.
Van Uytvanck A.
4-66-26-1
Saville D.
Minnen G.
7-56-3
Bronzetti L.
Tomljanovic A.
4-67-666-2
Bouzkova M.
Siegemund L.
6-16-2
Alexandrova E.
Paolini J.
6-16-2