Sebastian Fanselow vs Learner Tien — Indian Wells 2 CH Quarter-final

Indian Wells 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
GER
Sebastian Fanselow
#1187ATP
34 yrs · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLLWLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 22 January 2024
hard
Learner Tien
USA
Learner Tien
#15ATP
1941ELO
1904Hard ELO
$1.3MYTD
$4.4MCAREER
20 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWWWW
Fanselow S.
7-6 5-7 6-4
Tien L.
Fanselow S.
77562
Tien L.
64741

Sebastian Fanselow defeated Learner Tien 7-6 5-7 6-4 in the Indian Wells 2 CH quarter-final on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Learner Tien came in ranked #15.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Fanselow S.serving70% hold

wins 58% of points on serve vs Tien L.

Tien L.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Fanselow S.

Serve advantage — Tien L.

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

Fanselow S.Tien L.
—
Serve
32
—
Return
67

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

Statistics

This season
Fanselow S.Tien L.
1st serve in·Slight edge
57%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
65%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
52%
Service points won·Slight edge
58%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Slight edge
55%
62%
Aces / match·Clear edge
2.8
4.5
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.4
3.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (51 vs 142). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Fanselow S.Tien L.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
4
90
Break points saved·Dominant
31
97
Break points won·Dominant
5
83
Deciding sets·Dominant
22
100
Tiebreaks·Dominant
51
100

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Fanselow S.
4.7
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Recent retirement (−1.5)
Tien L.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.6
Surface form
6.5
0.0
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
6.0
Minutes 14d
6.8
3-set count
7.0
8.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Fanselow S.Tien L.
Freshness·
—
95

Tien L.: 13 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-slowfavours grinders
SlowFast
Final
Bicknell B.
Svajda Z.[1]
6-36-2
Semi-finals
Svajda Z.[1]
Fanselow S.
6-26-4
Bicknell B.
Ilagan A.
7-656-4
Quarter-finals
Bicknell B.
Holt B.[4]
6-32-2
Svajda Z.[1]
Artnak B.
6-23-66-0
Fanselow S.
Tien L.
7-645-76-4
Ilagan A.
Kwiatkowski T.[8]
1-67-656-3
R16
Holt B.[4]
Kuzuhara B.
6-36-1
Ilagan A.
Handel T.
6-46-4
Fanselow S.
Svajda T.
6-46-4
Kwiatkowski T.[8]
Jubb P.
7-54-66-3
Svajda Z.[1]
Kirchheimer S.
6-26-1
Artnak B.
Krueger M.[6]
6-26-3
Tien L.
Trungelliti M.[3]
6-26-0
Bicknell B.
Oliel Y.
7-56-3
R32
Artnak B.
Trotter J.
6-37-5
Bicknell B.
Mayo A.[7]
6-36-4
Kirchheimer S.
Zhu E.
6-46-4
Kuzuhara B.
Pecotic M.
7-650-66-2
Kwiatkowski T.[8]
Mckennon M.
6-46-3
Svajda Z.[1]
Debru G.
6-46-1
Krueger M.[6]
Kumar O.
7-626-3
Trungelliti M.[3]
Gerch L.
6-26-3
Tien L.
Oradini G.
6-26-3
Fanselow S.
Pospisil V.
6-27-5
Svajda T.
Sandgren T.[5]
0-67-647-63
Oliel Y.
Lock B.
3-67-636-0
Holt B.[4]
Seggerman R.
6-36-4
Jubb P.
Baris O.
7-616-2
Handel T.
Soto M.
6-46-4
Ilagan A.
Gaio F.[2]
6-27-5