Li Tu vs Jose Rubin Statham — Zhangjiagang CH Round of 16

Zhangjiagang CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
AUS5
Li Tu
#464ATP
1488ELO
1471Hard ELO
30 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 28 August 2023
hard
NZL
Jose Rubin Statham
39 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWLLLLL
Tu L.
6-2 6-2
Statham J.
Tu L.
662
Statham J.
220

Li Tu defeated Jose Rubin Statham 6-2 6-2 in the Zhangjiagang CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Tu L.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Statham J.

Statham J.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Tu L.

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

Statistics

This season
Tu L.Statham J.
1st serve in·Even
61%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
73%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
51%
Service points won·Even
64%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
35%
Break points saved·Even
60%
60%
Aces / match·Even
6.2
5.7
Double faults / match·Even
2.7
2.9

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (184 vs 71). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Tu L.Statham J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
27
0
Break points saved·Dominant
82
33
Break points won·Slight edge
8
2
Deciding sets·Clear edge
20
6
Tiebreaks·Dominant
64
22

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Tu L.
4.4
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Statham J.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
0.0No prior meetings
H2H
10.0
2.9
Surface form
3.8
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
6.4
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Atmane T.[2]
Haliak M.
6-16-2
Semi-finals
Haliak M.
Mccabe J.[8]
6-23-2
Atmane T.[2]
Berankis R.[7]
6-13-66-3
Quarter-finals
Mccabe J.[8]
Te R.
7-663-66-0
Berankis R.[7]
Sinclair C.
7-56-746-1
Atmane T.[2]
Tu L.[5]
6-37-5
Haliak M.
Takahashi Y.
6-46-4
R16
Berankis R.[7]
Strombachs R.
6-46-2
Te R.
Peliwo F.
6-36-1
Haliak M.
Xiao L.
6-46-1
Atmane T.[2]
Ayeni O.
6-13-66-2
Tu L.[5]
Statham J.
6-26-2
Takahashi Y.
Sakellaridis S.
6-36-1
Mccabe J.[8]
Giustino L.
6-43-66-1
Sinclair C.
Ly N.
6-31-66-1
R32
Mccabe J.[8]
Saville L.
7-632-66-3
Tu L.[5]
Sekulic P.
6-36-4
Te R.
Yunchaokete B.[1]
6-776-37-66
Sakellaridis S.
Zhu E.
7-57-66
Ayeni O.
Weber A.
6-26-2
Sinclair C.
Uchida K.[3]
6-33-66-4
Strombachs R.
Liu H.
6-43-66-3
Berankis R.[7]
Uchiyama Y.
6-47-5
Takahashi Y.
Cui J.
6-26-2
Haliak M.
Mukund S.
6-37-5
Xiao L.
Noguchi R.[4]
6-34-66-2
Giustino L.
Sheyngezikht L.
6-46-1
Statham J.
Li H.
6-33-67-62
Ly N.
Chappell N.
5-76-36-2
Peliwo F.
Palan D.
6-23-66-2
Atmane T.[2]
Sun F.
4-67-617-69