Learner Tien vs Mark Lajal — Charlottesville CH Quarter-final

Charlottesville CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Learner Tien
USA2
Learner Tien
#15ATP
1941ELO
1904Hard ELO
$1.3MYTD
$4.4MCAREER
20 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWWWW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 28 October 2024
hard
EST
Mark Lajal
#159ATP
1589ELO
1556Hard ELO
$97kYTD
$654kCAREER
23 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLWWLWLW
Tien L.
3-6 6-1 6-4
Lajal M.
Tien L.
3662
Lajal M.
6141

Learner Tien defeated Mark Lajal 3-6 6-1 6-4 in the Charlottesville CH quarter-final on hard. The result followed the form book — Learner Tien came in ranked #15.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Tien L.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Lajal M.

Lajal M.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Tien L.

Even serve battle

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

Tien L.Lajal M.
32
Serve
—
67
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Tien L.Lajal M.
1st serve in·Even
62%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
70%
73%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
50%
Service points won·Even
63%
64%
Return points won·Even
39%
38%
Break points saved·Even
63%
62%
Aces / match·Clear edge
4.5
6.0
Double faults / match·Even
3.7
3.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (142 vs 159). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Tien L.Lajal M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
90
43
Break points saved·Slight edge
97
89
Break points won·Dominant
83
13
Deciding sets·Dominant
100
42
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
100
81

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Tien L.
8.4
Dominant favouriteUmpiry Score
Lajal M.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
9.3+348 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
0.7Hard Elo 1556
9.1Overall Elo 1941
ELO gap
0.9Overall Elo 1589
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
9.2
Surface form
7.1
9.06-match win streak
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
5.4
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
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
Tien L.Lajal M.
Freshness·Slight edge
91
86

Tien L.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d) · Lajal M.: 4 days rest · 1 match, 28 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Trotter J.
Basavareddy N.
6-36-4
Semi-finals
Basavareddy N.
Galarneau A.
6-46-2
Trotter J.
Tien L.[2]
6-33-66-2
Quarter-finals
Basavareddy N.
Rodesch C.
6-46-767-65
Galarneau A.
Quinn E.
6-36-2
Trotter J.
Smith C.
7-642-67-64
Tien L.[2]
Lajal M.
3-66-16-4
R16
Basavareddy N.
Zahraj P.
6-26-0
Rodesch C.
Jubb P.[8]
6-777-56-4
Galarneau A.
Dietrich D.
6-27-65
Quinn E.
Kasnikowski M.[5]
7-56-0
Smith C.
Opelka R.
6-756-46-4
Trotter J.
Holt B.
6-26-3
Lajal M.
Kypson P.[6]
7-646-3
Tien L.[2]
Mejia N.
6-47-68
R32
Kasnikowski M.[5]
Edmund K.
4-66-46-2
Zahraj P.
Eubanks C.[1]
6-17-67
Basavareddy N.
Spizzirri E.
6-46-3
Rodesch C.
Nanda G.
6-46-3
Jubb P.[8]
Kodat T.
6-46-2
Dietrich D.
Svajda Z.[4]
6-36-3
Galarneau A.
Nakagawa N.
6-46-1
Quinn E.
Couacaud E.
6-17-67
Opelka R.
Popko D.[7]
5-76-17-61
Smith C.
Ilagan A.
6-37-5
Holt B.
Rybakov A.
7-56-4
Trotter J.
Krueger M.[3]
7-57-66
Kypson P.[6]
Tomic B.
6-36-0
Lajal M.
Searle H.
6-36-3
Mejia N.
Kudla D.
0-66-37-5
Tien L.[2]
Zhukayev B.
2-66-46-2