Juncheng Shang vs Edan Leshem — Charlottesville CH Round of 16

Charlottesville CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
CHN
Juncheng Shang
#274ATP
1746ELO
1698Hard ELO
21 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLWWLWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 31 October 2022
hard
ISR
Edan Leshem
29 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLLWWLLL
Shang J.
1-6 6-3 6-2
Leshem E.
Shang J.
1662
Leshem E.
6321

Juncheng Shang defeated Edan Leshem 1-6 6-3 6-2 in the Charlottesville CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Shang J.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Leshem E.

Leshem E.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Shang J.

Serve advantage — Shang J.

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.Leshem 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.Leshem E.
1st serve in·Even
64%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
53%
49%
Service points won·Even
64%
60%
Return points won·Even
37%
38%
Break points saved·Even
62%
59%
Aces / match·Slight edge
3.7
2.5
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.7
3.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (197 vs 41). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Shang J.Leshem E.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
76
1
Break points saved·Dominant
96
47
Break points won·Dominant
45
7
Deciding sets·Dominant
94
11
Tiebreaks·Dominant
86
20

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
Leshem E.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
6.1
Surface form
3.4
Win streak
0.0Lost last 3
Fatigue & Travel
4.9
Minutes 14d
9.0
0.0
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
8.0
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.

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