Coco Gauff vs Naomi Osaka — San Jose Round of 16

San Jose · WTA · Round of 16
Coco Gauff
USA6
Coco Gauff
#7WTA
2071ELO
2035Hard ELO
$2.9MYTD
$33MCAREER
22 yrs · 175 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 1 August 2022
hard
Naomi Osaka
JPN
Naomi Osaka
#14WTA
1987ELO
1922Hard ELO
$1.1MYTD
$26MCAREER
28 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWLWWWW
Gauff C.
6-4 6-4
Osaka N.
Gauff C.
662
Osaka N.
440

Coco Gauff defeated Naomi Osaka 6-4 6-4 in the San Jose round of 16 on hard. The result followed the form book — Coco Gauff came in ranked #7. Coco Gauff narrowed the head-to-head to 3–3.

Key context

  • Match story: Coco Gauff edged a tight contest from start to finish — 6–4 6–4.

Head to head

2–3
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2025-08-25US OpenR16hardNaomi Osaka6-3 6-2
2024-09-25BeijingR16hardCoco Gauff3-6 6-4 0-0 RET
2021-08-16CincinnatiR32hardNaomi Osaka4-6 6-3 6-4
2020-01-20Australian OpenR32hardCoco Gauff6-3 6-4
2019-08-26US OpenR32hardNaomi Osaka6-3 6-0
View full head-to-head →

Serve vs return

This season
Gauff C.serving79% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Osaka N.

Osaka N.serving75% hold

wins 61% of points on serve vs Gauff 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

Serve & return on hard

Gauff C.Osaka N.
25
Serve
70
100
Return
60

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

Statistics

This season
Gauff C.Osaka N.
1st serve in·Even
60%
56%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
69%
74%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
44%
49%
Service points won·Even
59%
63%
Return points won·Slight edge
48%
42%
Break points saved·Even
56%
60%
Aces / match·Dominant
3.4
6.5
Double faults / match·Dominant
5.8
2.9

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 118). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Gauff C.Osaka N.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
99
91
Break points saved·Even
96
96
Break points won·Even
100
97
Deciding sets·Even
100
99
Tiebreaks·Even
99
95

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Gauff C.
5.9
Even matchUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Osaka N.
4.4
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
  • Extended break: 70 days (−1.2)
Form & Matchup
6.7+113 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.3Hard Elo 1922
6.7Overall Elo 2071
ELO gap
3.3Overall Elo 1987
4.6
H2H
5.4
6.4
Surface form
8.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
7.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Gauff C.Osaka N.
Freshness·Dominant
54
79

Gauff C.: 2 days rest · 3 matches, 85 games (7d) · Osaka N.: 4 days rest · 2 matches, 44 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast

Draw

Final
Kasatkina D.[7]
Rogers S.
6-726-16-2
Semi-finals
Kasatkina D.[7]
Badosa P.[2]
6-26-4
Rogers S.
Kudermetova V.[9]
6-36-4
Quarter-finals
Kudermetova V.[9]
Jabeur O.[3]
7-656-2
Badosa P.[2]
Gauff C.[6]
7-646-2
Rogers S.
Anisimova A.
6-46-4
Kasatkina D.[7]
Sabalenka A.[4]
4-67-56-0
R16
Sabalenka A.[4]
Dolehide C.
5-76-17-5
Kudermetova V.[9]
Liu C.
6-27-5
Badosa P.[2]
Mandlik E.
6-25-77-65
Kasatkina D.[7]
Townsend T.
6-46-0
Jabeur O.[3]
Keys M.
7-56-1
Rogers S.
Sakkari M.[1]
6-16-3
Anisimova A.
Pliskova K.[8]
3-67-56-1
Gauff C.[6]
Osaka N.
6-46-4
R32
Gauff C.[6]
Kalinina A.
6-16-0
Kasatkina D.[7]
Rybakina E.
1-66-26-0
Rogers S.
Andreescu B.
6-46-2
Anisimova A.
Krueger A.
6-27-65
Pliskova K.[8]
Boulter K.
1-67-656-3
Keys M.
Zhang S.
6-46-2
Liu C.
Haddad Maia B.
6-27-5
Townsend T.
Hunter S.
6-16-4
Kudermetova V.[9]
Giorgi C.
7-624-67-5
Dolehide C.
Day K.
7-656-4
Osaka N.
Zheng Q.
6-43-66-1
Mandlik E.
Riske Amritraj A.
6-36-3