Odds
Player analysis
T. M. Etcheverry has been inconsistent recently, going 3–2 over the last five matches. Point statistics tell a concerning story — average DS of -1.4, meaning T. M. Etcheverry has been on the wrong side of most exchanges over five matches. The serve has been a concern — averaging only 6.2/10, leaving T. M. Etcheverry vulnerable on second serve and facing frequent return pressure. Break point efficiency is a red flag — T. M. Etcheverry has been losing the important points, with a BP efficiency of -17 over recent matches.
J. Lehecka shows a 4–1 form record, though the level of opposition has been mixed — average ranking of opponents is 39. Point margins have been modest — DS averaging +5.0. Wins have been functional rather than dominant. Serve quality has been average (6.7/10) — neither a weapon nor a significant liability.
Recent form
3W 2L last 5
| 29 Mar | Lehecka | 4-6 4-6 | W |
| 27 Mar | Lehecka | 6-2 6-2 | L |
| 25 Mar | Landaluce | 6-7 5-7 | W |
| 24 Mar | Lehecka | 6-4 6-7 6-2 | L |
| 22 Mar | Quinn | 3-6 6-7 | W |
3W 2L last 5
| 3 Apr | Etcheverry | 4-6 2-6 | W |
| 1 Apr | Etcheverry | 6-7 6-0 6-3 | L |
| 31 Mar | Etcheverry | 1-6 6-1 6-4 | L |
| 24 Mar | Etcheverry | 1-6 3-6 | W |
| 22 Mar | Jodar | 5-7 4-6 | W |
Clay court stats
Avg stats — last 5
Head to head
Career meetings between these two players (all tournaments), not only this event. The match at the top of the page is the current tournament fixture.
| Date | Tournament | Surface | Round | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| US Open | Hard | 1/32-finals | Lehecka | 3-6 6-0 6-2 6-4 | |
| Hamburg | Clay | Quarter-finals | Etcheverry | 7-5 6-3 | |
| Gstaad | Clay | 1/16-finals | Lehecka | 1-6 3-6 | |
| Santiago | Clay | Quarter-finals | Etcheverry | 4-6 3-6 |

