Emilio Gomez and Juncheng Shang will clash against each other in the final of the Lexington Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Sunday at 1:00 pm on CENTER COURT 1. In the following paragraphs, you can find the head to head analysis and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Emilio Gomez who should win in 3 sets.
Emilio Gomez -> 1.666
Juncheng Shang -> 2.16
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
Here where top tennis events are broadcasted or streamed online (ATP, WTA).
At the challenger level, there will be free live streaming on Challenger TV.
Prediction and head to head Emilio Gomez vs. Juncheng Shang
There is no head to head record between Emilio Gomez and Juncheng Shang since this will be the first time that they will square off in the main tour.
Emilio Gomez
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 6-11 | 0-2 | 6-9 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 16-28 | 8-16 | 2-6 | 5-4 | 1-2 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 47-26 | 38-15 | 1-3 | 8-7 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 37-33 | 25-15 | 9-11 | 3-6 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 12-15 | 2-5 | 4-6 | 6-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 121 (career-high), Emilio got to the final after beating Cannon Kingsley 6-4 3-6 7-5, Ryan Harrison 7-5 6-4, Nicolas Mejia 6-4 7-5 and Enzo Couacaud 4-6 6-4 7-65.
In the semifinal against Couacaud, Emilio recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (4-6 6-4 7-65).During the match, Gomez scored less points (7) than Couacaud. In fact, the world no. 121 won 111 points vs Couacaud’s. That means that Gomez was more focused during the important points. Emilio was quite aggressive to blast 43 winners.
Talking about the service games, Gomez scored 4 aces and he committed only 7 double faults. Emilio Gomez lost the serve 5 times and he saved 9 break points. Furthermore, Gomez put 60% of his first serves in, winning 63% (43/68) of the points behind his 1st serve and 48% (22/46) on the 2nd serve. Gomez broke Couacaud 5 times after converting 31% of his break points (5/16).
Overall Performance in this tournament
Gomez has dropped 2 set in this event to conquer 52% of the points he played.
Gomez has a positive match record in the last 10 years having won 59% of his matches (339-240). 28-9 on hard in 2022. Regarding his performance on the same surface of this tournament, Gomez has a compiled 170-96 win-loss record in the last years on hard.
The Ecuadorian’s best result of the current season was reaching the final in the Salinas Challenger,the Malaga Challenger and the Winnipeg Challenger.
Emilio has an aggregate 32-17 win-loss record in 2022, 28-9 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Lexington Challenger
Juncheng Shang
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 6-8 | 6-8 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 42-27 | 25-10 | 8-7 | 2-6 | 7-4 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 31-23 | 21-14 | 3-3 | 0-2 | 7-4 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 40-24 | 17-8 | 15-10 | 7-5 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 18-5 | 6-3 | 12-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 344 (career-high), the Chinese reached the final after defeating Stefan Dostanic 6-0 4-6 6-3, Mikhail Kukushkin 7-65 6-3, Roman Safiullin 0-6 6-4 7-5 and Aleksandar Kovacevic 3-6 7-65 6-4.
In the semifinal against Kovacevic, The Chinese recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (3-6 7-65 6-4).During the match Shang scored less points (4) than Kovacevic. In fact, the world no. 121 won 95 points vs Kovacevic’s. That means that Shang was more focused during the important points. Juncheng was quite aggressive to blast 45 winners.
Talking about serving, Shang recorded 2 aces and he committed only 4 double faults. Juncheng Shang lost the serve 3 times and he saved 3 break points. Furthermore, Shang put 66% of his first serves in, winning 74% (45/61) of the points behind his 1st serve and 47% (15/32) on the 2nd serve. The Chinese broke Kovacevic 3 times after converting 43% of his break points (3/7).
Overall Performance in this tournament
The Chinese has conceded 3 set in the tournament to win 51% of the points he played.
The Chinese’s best result of the year was getting to the final in M15 Naples.
The Chinese has an aggregate 27-16 win-loss record in 2022, 6-3 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Lexington Challenger
Juncheng has never competed in this tournament before.
H2H Performance in the tournament (main draw)
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Gomez | Shang |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 4 | 4 |
| Tot Set | 10 | 11 |
| Tot Games | 108 | 107 |
| Pts | 357-332 | 339-321 |
| Total Points | 689 | 660 |
| Winners | 138 | 152 |
| %Winners | 39% | 45% |
Both Gomez and Shang played 4 matches. Both players lost a set in the event. Emilio Gomez lost 2 sets, while Juncheng Shang lost 3 sets. Gomez has played 1 set(s) less than Shang (10 vs 11). However, it’s interesting to notice that Gomez played 1 game more than Shang. Gomez scored 138 winners (39% of the total points). On the other side, The Chinese scored 152 winners (45%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Gomez | Shang |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 17 | 7 |
| Avg per match | 4.3 | 1.8 |
| 1st in | 189/332 | 211/339 |
| %1st in | 57% | 62% |
| 1st pts | 138/189 | 152/211 |
| %1st pts | 73% | 72% |
| 2nd pts | 75/143 | 67/128 |
| %2nd pts | 52% | 52% |
Gomez fired 17 aces (4.3 per match). Shang scored 7 aces (1.8 per match). Gomez won 73% points behind his first serve. He was rock solid on his second serve to win 52% of the points. On the other side, Shang won 72% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 52% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Gomez | Shang |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 15 | 13 |
| Converted | 15/44 | 13/24 |
| % Converted | 34% | 54% |
| Conceded | 28 | 29 |
| Saved | 18 | 19 |
| % Saved | 64% | 66% |
| Times Broken | 10 | 10 |
The Ecuadorian broke his opponents 15 times with a 34% conversion rate. The Ecuadorian lost his serve 10 times and he saved 64% of the break points that he conceded. Juncheng broke his opponents 13 times with a 54% conversion rate. The Chinese conceded his serve 10 times and he saved 66% of the break points that he conceded.
| Gomez | ||||||
| R1 Kingsley | R2 Harrison | 1/4 Mejia | 1/2 Couacaud | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 3-6 7-5 | 7-5 6-4 | 6-4 7-5 | 4-6 6-4 7-65 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 10 | |
| Tot Games | 31 | 22 | 22 | 33 | 108 | |
| pts | 105-96 | 75-60 | 66-58 | 111-118 | 357-332 | |
| Total points | 201 | 135 | 124 | 229 | 689 | |
| Winners | 41 | 31 | 23 | 43 | 138 | |
| %Winners | 39% | 41% | 35% | 39% | 39% | |
| SERVE | ||||||
| Aces | 8 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 17 | |
| Double Faults | 3 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 15 | |
| 1st in | 51/95 | 39/65 | 31/58 | 68/114 | 189/332 | |
| % 1st in | 54% | 60% | 53% | 60% | 57% | |
| 1st pts | 41/51 | 31/39 | 23/31 | 43/68 | 138/189 | |
| % 1st pts | 80% | 79% | 74% | 63% | 73% | |
| 2nd pts | 25/44 | 15/26 | 13/27 | 22/46 | 75/143 | |
| % 2nd pts | 57% | 58% | 48% | 48% | 52% | |
| Breaks | ||||||
| Won | 2 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 15 | |
| Converted | 2/9 | 3/9 | 5/10 | 5/16 | 15/44 | |
| Converted % | 22% | 33% | 50% | 31% | 34% | |
| Conceded | 5 | 5 | 4 | 14 | 28 | |
| Saved | 4/5 | 4/5 | 1/4 | 9/14 | 18 | |
| Saved % | 80% | 80% | 25% | 64% | 62% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 10 | |
| Shang | ||||||
| R1 Dostanic | R2 Kukushkin | 1/4 Safiullin | 1/2 Kovacevic | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-0 4-6 6-3 | 7-65 6-3 | 0-6 6-4 7-5 | 3-6 7-65 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 11 | |
| Tot Games | 25 | 22 | 28 | 32 | 107 | |
| pts | 96-79 | 71-56 | 77-87 | 95-99 | 339-321 | |
| Total points | 175 | 127 | 164 | 194 | 660 | |
| Winners | 38 | 38 | 31 | 45 | 152 | |
| %Winners | 40% | 54% | 40% | 47% | 45% | |
| SERVE | ||||||
| Aces | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 7 | |
| Double Faults | 6 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 16 | |
| 1st in | 63/98 | 45/64 | 42/84 | 61/93 | 211/339 | |
| % 1st in | 64% | 70% | 50% | 66% | 62% | |
| 1st pts | 38/63 | 38/45 | 31/42 | 45/61 | 152/211 | |
| % 1st pts | 60% | 84% | 74% | 74% | 72% | |
| 2nd pts | 19/35 | 12/19 | 21/42 | 15/32 | 67/128 | |
| % 2nd pts | 54% | 63% | 50% | 47% | 52% | |
| Breaks | ||||||
| Won | 6 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 13 | |
| Converted | 6/9 | 1/3 | 3/5 | 3/7 | 13/24 | |
| Converted % | 67% | 33% | 60% | 43% | 54% | |
| Conceded | 15 | 1 | 7 | 6 | 29 | |
| Saved | 12/15 | 1/1 | 3/7 | 3/6 | 19 | |
| Saved % | 80% | 100% | 43% | 50% | 68% | |
| Times Broken | 3 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 10 | |