Juncheng Shang vs Ernesto Escobedo — Las Vegas CH Quarter-final

Las Vegas CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
CHN
Juncheng Shang
#274ATP
1746ELO
1698Hard ELO
21 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLWWLWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 24 October 2022
hard
MEX
Ernesto Escobedo
#1650ATP
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLLWWW
Shang J.
6-4 3-6 6-3
Escobedo E.
Shang J.
6362
Escobedo E.
4631

Juncheng Shang defeated Ernesto Escobedo 6-4 3-6 6-3 in the Las Vegas CH quarter-final on hard.

Key context

  • Match story: Juncheng Shang closed it out in three sets, 6–4 3–6 6–3.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Shang J.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Escobedo E.

Escobedo E.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Shang J.

Serve-dominated — both hold easily, expect tiebreaks

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

Shang J.Escobedo E.
34
Serve
—
18
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Shang J.Escobedo E.
1st serve in·Even
64%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
53%
52%
Service points won·Even
63%
64%
Return points won·Even
37%
37%
Break points saved·Even
62%
61%
Aces / match·Clear edge
3.6
5.1
Double faults / match·Even
2.6
2.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (197 vs 121). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Shang J.Escobedo E.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
76
28
Break points saved·Clear edge
96
84
Break points won·Dominant
45
12
Deciding sets·Dominant
94
16
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
86
72

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Shang J.
6.4
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Escobedo E.
6.0
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.5
Surface form
4.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
6.9
Minutes 14d
8.7
7.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
7.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
7.0

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
Sandgren T.
Kozlov S.[4]
7-56-3
Semi-finals
Kozlov S.[4]
Johnson S.[2]
6-31-67-5
Sandgren T.
Shang J.
6-37-65
Quarter-finals
Johnson S.[2]
Ficovich J.[5]
6-10-0
Kozlov S.[4]
Galarneau A.
6-756-46-3
Shang J.
Escobedo E.
6-43-66-3
Sandgren T.
Holt B.
6-776-26-3
R16
Galarneau A.
Nanda G.
6-12-1
Sandgren T.
Pinnington Jones J.
7-56-3
Escobedo E.
Shelton B.[6]
6-26-3
Johnson S.[2]
Krueger M.
7-56-3
Holt B.
Kovacevic A.[8]
7-617-5
Shang J.
Perez A.
7-634-66-3
Kozlov S.[4]
Zhu E.
7-656-2
Ficovich J.[5]
Diallo G.
3-67-656-4
R32
Johnson S.[2]
Elias G.
5-76-37-5
Diallo G.
Couacaud E.
6-46-4
Kozlov S.[4]
Kingsley C.
7-54-66-1
Galarneau A.
Mena F.[7]
6-10-66-4
Kovacevic A.[8]
Nava E.
7-676-2
Krueger M.
Carr S.
7-56-4
Pinnington Jones J.
Pospisil V.[3]
6-43-66-2
Shelton B.[6]
Vacherot V.
6-747-646-4
Shang J.
Cozbinov A.
6-43-66-3
Holt B.
Verboven M.
6-26-2
Escobedo E.
Kumar O.
6-16-4
Sandgren T.
Fanselow S.
3-67-56-3
Ficovich J.[5]
Jubb P.
6-37-5
Nanda G.
Mejia N.
7-616-4
Perez A.
Kudla D.[1]
6-46-3
Zhu E.
Mayo A.
6-47-69