Nerman Fatic vs Chun Hsin Tseng — Rome CH Round of 32

Rome CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
BIH
Nerman Fatic
#396ATP
1496ELO
1478Clay ELO
31 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWWLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 20 April 2026
clay
Chun Hsin Tseng
TPE2
Chun Hsin Tseng
#234ATP
1554ELO
1541Clay ELO
$99kYTD
$1.7MCAREER
24 yrs · 175 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLWLWLW
Fatic N.
6-3 6-4
Tseng C.
Fatic N.
662
Tseng C.
340

Nerman Fatic defeated Chun Hsin Tseng 6-3 6-4 in the Rome CH round of 32 on clay.

Key context

  • Match story: Nerman Fatic closed it out in two sets, 6–3 6–4.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Fatic N.serving64% hold

wins 56% of points on serve vs Tseng C.

Tseng C.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Fatic N.

Serve advantage — Tseng C.

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
Fatic N.Tseng C.
1st serve in·Even
62%
63%
1st serve points won·Even
66%
67%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
51%
Service points won·Even
60%
61%
Return points won·Even
38%
41%
Break points saved·Slight edge
51%
59%
Aces / match·Clear edge
3.8
1.8
Double faults / match·Slight edge
2.1
1.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (15 vs 29). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Fatic N.Tseng C.
Clutch Rating·Even
24
26
Break points saved·Clear edge
63
83
Break points won·Clear edge
36
15
Deciding sets·Slight edge
24
31
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
35
23

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Fatic N.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Tseng C.
5.9
Even matchUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
4.5Clay Elo 1478
Surface ELO
5.5+63 Clay Elo edge
4.6Overall Elo 1496
ELO gap
5.4Overall Elo 1554
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.2
Surface form
3.0
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
5.9
Minutes 14d
8.3
0.0
3-set count
Prev. match
9.0
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
Fatic N.Tseng C.
Freshness·
—
100

Tseng C.: 21 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Guerrieri A.
Svrcina D.[1]
6-42-66-1
Semi-finals
Svrcina D.[1]
Vasami J.
6-37-62
Guerrieri A.
Martin Tiffon P.
6-37-5
Quarter-finals
Vasami J.
Sakellaridis S.[7]
6-46-3
Svrcina D.[1]
Cretu C.
6-36-1
Guerrieri A.
Jianu F.
6-16-4
Martin Tiffon P.
Vavassori A.
6-746-36-3
R16
Sakellaridis S.[7]
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
7-667-63
Cretu C.
Herbert P.
6-36-2
Vasami J.
Cadenasso G.
6-46-2
Jianu F.
Romano F.
6-36-2
Guerrieri A.
Fery A.[3]
6-46-3
Svrcina D.[1]
Bernet H.
6-46-4
Vavassori A.
Djere L.[8]
6-36-4
Martin Tiffon P.
Fatic N.
6-46-2
R32
Herbert P.
Den Ouden G.[5]
6-36-736-3
Cretu C.
Topo M.
6-26-0
Cadenasso G.
Barrena A.[4]
2-66-16-2
Guerrieri A.
Bondioli F.
7-646-2
Fery A.[3]
Added D.
7-664-66-4
Vavassori A.
Mrva M.
7-646-746-3
Martin Tiffon P.
Forejtek J.
6-40-66-4
Svrcina D.[1]
Vasilev A.
6-16-3
Vasami J.
Ferreira Silva F.
4-66-36-2
Sakellaridis S.[7]
Squire H.
7-634-66-4
Bernet H.
Pavlovic L.
6-36-4
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
Dalla Valle E.
6-06-3
Jianu F.
Bertola R.[6]
6-46-2
Romano F.
Coppejans K.
6-16-0
Djere L.[8]
Caniato C.
6-47-64
Fatic N.
Tseng C.[2]
6-36-4