Roman Andres Burruchaga vs Camilo Ugo Carabelli — Umag Quarter-final

Umag · ATP · Quarter-final
Roman Andres Burruchaga
ARG
Roman Andres Burruchaga
#67ATP
1711ELO
1694Clay ELO
$458kYTD
$1.3MCAREER
24 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10
WWLLLLWLLW
—
Sets
Thursday, 16 July 2026 ·
clay
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
ARG
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
#58ATP
1759ELO
1741Clay ELO
$653kYTD
$2.7MCAREER
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10
WWLLWLWWLW
Burruchaga R.
vs
Ugo Carabelli C.

Roman Andres Burruchaga faces Camilo Ugo Carabelli in the Umag quarter-final on clay. Camilo Ugo Carabelli is the paper favourite — ranked #58, defending last year's semi-final, a roughly 50-point clay Elo advantage — but Roman Andres Burruchaga has won their only previous meeting.

Win Probability

Pre-match · updated 22:20 UTC
Burruchaga R.46%
Ugo Carabelli C.54%
Toss-up
50–58%
Slight edge
58–67%
Clear favourite
67–80%
Strong favourite
80%+

Toss-up · Too close to call

Calibrated model · 65% favourite accuracy (2025–26, out-of-sample). Probability is a statistical estimate, not a certainty. How it works.

Key context

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Burruchaga R.
5.2
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
  • Back-to-back day (−0.5)
Ugo Carabelli C.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
  • Back-to-back day (−0.5)
Form & Matchup
4.4Clay Elo 1694
Surface ELO
5.6+47 Clay Elo edge
4.4Overall Elo 1711
ELO gap
5.6Overall Elo 1759
5.9Leads 3–2 on clay
H2H
4.1Trails 2–3 on clay
5.35 of last 10 on clay
Surface form
6.46 of last 10 on clay
Fatigue & Travel
3-set count
4.02 three-setters in 14 days
Context
5.0Didn't play here last year
Defending pts
8.5Reached the semis here last year

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.

Form trajectory

Burruchaga R.Cooling
Ugo Carabelli C.Rising

Direction of recent form — results vs Elo expectation blended with serve/return vs each player's baseline, over the last few months. About

31 vs 27 matches

Statistics

This season
Burruchaga R.Ugo Carabelli C.
1st serve in·Even
63%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
49%
Service points won·Even
61%
61%
Return points won·Slight edge
43%
37%
Break points saved·Slight edge
65%
60%
Aces / match·Even
2.3
2.7
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.8
2.4

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (31 vs 27). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Serve vs return

This season
Burruchaga R.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Ugo Carabelli C.

Ugo Carabelli C.serving62% hold

wins 55% of points on serve vs Burruchaga R.

Serve advantage — Burruchaga R.

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Clutch

Under pressure
Burruchaga R.Ugo Carabelli C.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
66
78
Break points saved·Clear edge
68
90
Break points won·Slight edge
73
62
Deciding sets·Clear edge
84
96
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
65
72

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

Serve & return on clay

Burruchaga R.Ugo Carabelli C.
—
Serve
24
—
Return
28

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

Freshness

Recent load
Burruchaga R.Ugo Carabelli C.
Freshness·Clear edge
86
74

Burruchaga R.: 1 day rest · 1 match, 17 games (7d) · Ugo Carabelli C.: 1 day rest · 1 match, 35 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Weather forecast
29°CClear
Wind 11 km/hHumidity 67%

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2026-02-16Rio de JaneiroR32clayRoman Andres Burruchaga6-3 6-4
R32
R16
Quarter-finals
Semi-finals
Final
—
Cecchinato M.
Burruchaga R.
1-64-6
Dodig M.
Carreno Busta P.
4-62-6
Topo M.
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
7-626-733-6
—
Sesko Z.
Merida Aguilar D.
4-61-6
Lajovic D.
Van Assche L.
6-25-74-6
Droguet T.
Blockx A.[5]
3-66-26-0
Neumayer L.
Prado Angelo J.
3-66-76
Dzumhur D.
Rocha H.
6-26-1
Gomez F.
Mcdonald N.
6-37-64
—
Kopriva V.[8]
Prizmic D.
1-63-6
Molcan A.
Royer V.
6-47-5
Jacquet K.
Trungelliti M.
2-63-6
—
Cobolli F.[1]
Burruchaga R.
2-64-6
Carreno Busta P.
Ugo Carabelli C.[7]
6-35-75-7
Etcheverry T.[3]
Merida Aguilar D.
5-74-6
Van Assche L.
Droguet T.
1-66-15-7
Prado Angelo J.
Dzumhur D.
6-721-6
Gomez F.
Arnaldi M.[4]
3-67-53-6
Prizmic D.
Molcan A.
6-36-750-4
Trungelliti M.
Davidovich Fokina A.[2]
4-65-7
Burruchaga R.
Ugo Carabelli C.
Merida Aguilar D.
Droguet T.
Dzumhur D.
Arnaldi M.
Molcan A.
Davidovich Fokina A.
—
—
—