Christopher Eubanks vs Juncheng Shang — Charlottesville CH Quarter-final

Charlottesville CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
USA4
Christopher Eubanks
#788ATP
1523ELO
1493Hard ELO
30 yrs · 201 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWLWLLL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 31 October 2022
hard
CHN
Juncheng Shang
#274ATP
1746ELO
1698Hard ELO
21 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLWWLWW
Eubanks C.
4-6 6-1 7-6
Shang J.
Eubanks C.
467102
Shang J.
61681

Christopher Eubanks defeated Juncheng Shang 4-6 6-1 7-6 in the Charlottesville CH quarter-final on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Eubanks C.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Shang J.

Shang J.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Eubanks C.

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

Eubanks C.Shang J.
—
Serve
34
—
Return
18

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

Statistics

This season
Eubanks C.Shang J.
1st serve in·Even
68%
64%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
75%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
53%
Service points won·Even
67%
64%
Return points won·Even
33%
37%
Break points saved·Even
64%
62%
Aces / match·Dominant
10.4
3.6
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.2
2.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 197). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Eubanks C.Shang J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
50
76
Break points saved·Even
96
96
Break points won·Dominant
3
45
Deciding sets·Dominant
67
94
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
74
86

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Eubanks C.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry Score
Shang J.
6.8
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
2.4Hard Elo 1493
Surface ELO
7.6+205 Hard Elo edge
2.2Overall Elo 1523
ELO gap
7.8Overall Elo 1746
10.0No prior meetings
H2H
0.0
5.9
Surface form
6.1
Fatigue & Travel
7.2
Minutes 14d
4.9
7.0
3-set count
0.0
7.0
Prev. match
7.0
Context
6.0
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.

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Shelton B.[6]
Eubanks C.[4]
7-647-5
Semi-finals
Eubanks C.[4]
Nava E.[8]
7-54-66-3
Shelton B.[6]
Jubb P.
7-663-67-5
Quarter-finals
Shelton B.[6]
Gerch L.
6-37-5
Nava E.[8]
Kudla D.[1]
6-26-1
Jubb P.
Montes De La Torre I.
6-36-2
Eubanks C.[4]
Shang J.
4-66-17-68
R16
Jubb P.
Mmoh M.[2]
7-646-3
Gerch L.
Kozlov S.[3]
6-47-63
Shelton B.[6]
Holt B.
6-36-4
Kudla D.[1]
Blanch U.
7-631-66-2
Eubanks C.[4]
Dougaz A.
7-57-68
Montes De La Torre I.
Kovacevic A.[7]
7-646-4
Shang J.
Leshem E.
1-66-36-2
Nava E.[8]
Mena F.
6-26-1
R32
Shelton B.[6]
Rodesch C.
6-46-3
Kudla D.[1]
Fanselow S.
6-46-3
Montes De La Torre I.
Ayeni O.
6-26-2
Holt B.
Sandgren T.
6-13-66-2
Leshem E.
Galarneau A.
7-56-3
Mena F.
Cassone M.
3-66-37-68
Jubb P.
Mchugh A.
6-746-36-3
Kozlov S.[3]
Krueger M.
7-50-67-61
Shang J.
Ficovich J.[5]
6-43-66-3
Dougaz A.
Svajda Z.
3-66-26-1
Mmoh M.[2]
Escobedo E.
7-657-5
Gerch L.
Quinn E.
6-36-3
Eubanks C.[4]
Alvarez Varona N.
6-17-63
Nava E.[8]
Ponwith N.
5-76-26-3
Blanch U.
Mejia N.
6-46-4
Kovacevic A.[7]
Couacaud E.
6-37-69