Marco De Rossi and Lukas Neumayer will face off in the qualifications of the San Marino Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Monday at 10:00 am on CENTER COURT. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Lukas Neumayer who should win in 2 sets.
As per the initial odds, Lukas Neumayer is the pick to win this match.
Lukas Neumayer -> 1.077
Marco De Rossi -> 6.8
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
To be able to watch live streaming bet365, a funded account is required or you need to have placed a bet in the last 24 hours. 18+ BeGambleAware.
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.
Â
Prediction and head to head Marco De Rossi vs. Lukas Neumayer
There is no head to head record between Marco De Rossi and Lukas Neumayer since this will be the first time that they will clash against each other in the main tour.
Marco De Rossi
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 13-16 | 2-1 | 3-9 | 8-5 | 0-0 | 0-1 |
| 2022 | 18-19 | 2-3 | 14-14 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 18-15 | 1-2 | 17-13 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 3-4 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2019 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Currently unranked, De Rossi reached the qualifications after defeating Stefan Palosi 6-3 6-4.
In the qualifications, The Sammarinese had a good straight sets win against Palosi (6-3 6-4). During the match, De Rossi scored 59 points vs Palosi’s 45. The Sammarinese was extremely aggressive to blast 30 winners.
Talking about the service games, De Rossi fired 3 aces and he committed only 5 double faults. Marco De Rossi lost the serve once and he saved 3 break points. Furthermore, De Rossi put 60% of his first serves in, winning 88% (30/34) of the points behind his 1st serve and 43% (10/23) on the 2nd serve. De Rossi was clinical in his return game without wasting any break point and break Palosi 3 times.
De Rossi has a winning record in the last 8 years having won 51% of his matches (36-34). 11-9 on clay in 2022. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this competition, De Rossi has an aggregate28-25 record in the last 8 years on clay.
Marco has an overall 14-12 win-loss record in 2022, 11-9 on clay (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the San Marino Challenger
Lukas Neumayer
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 15-19 | 2-2 | 13-16 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 40-32 | 2-1 | 38-28 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 53-26 | 12-4 | 41-21 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 26-25 | 8-10 | 16-14 | 2-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 0-3 | 0-1 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 347, Neumayer got to the qualifications after beating Marco Miceli 7-64 6-2.
In the qualifications, Lukas had a good straight sets win against Miceli (7-64 6-2). During the match Neumayer scored 76 points vs Miceli’s 58. Neumayer was very aggressive to blast 26 winners.
Talking about serving, Neumayer scored just 1 ace during the entire match and he committed only 1 double fault for the entire match. Lukas Neumayer lost the serve twice and he saved 5 break points. Furthermore, Neumayer put 69% of his first serves in, winning 62% (26/42) of the points behind his 1st serve and 74% (14/19) on the 2nd serve. The Austrian broke Miceli 4 times after converting 57% of his break points (4/7).
Neumayer’s best result of the current season was getting to the final in M15 Antalya and M25 Klosters.
Neumayer has an aggregate 38-16 win-loss record in 2022, 33-13 on clay (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the San Marino Challenger
Neumayer has never competed in this tournament before.
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | De Rossi | Neumayer |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 1 |
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 |
| Tot Games | 19 | 21 |
| Pts | 59-45 | 76-58 |
| Total Points | 104 | 134 |
| Winners | 30 | 26 |
| %Winners | 51% | 34% |
Both De Rossi and Neumayer played 1 match. Also both players started their run from the qualifications.Both players have not conceded a single set in this event so far. Talking about their workload, De Rossi and Neumayer have played the same amount of sets 2. However, De Rossi played 2 games less than Neumayer. The Sammarinese scored 30 winners (51% of the total points). On the other side, Lukas blasted 26 winners (34%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | De Rossi | Neumayer |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 3 | 1 |
| Avg per match | 3 | 1 |
| 1st in | 34/57 | 42/61 |
| %1st in | 60% | 69% |
| 1st pts | 30/34 | 26/42 |
| %1st pts | 88% | 62% |
| 2nd pts | 10/23 | 14/19 |
| %2nd pts | 43% | 74% |
De Rossi struck 3 aces . Neumayer recorded 1 ace . De Rossi won 88% points on his first serve. He pretty effective on his second serve to win 43% of the points. On the other side, Neumayer won 62% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 74% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | De Rossi | Neumayer |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 3 | 4 |
| Converted | 3/3 | 4/7 |
| % Converted | 100% | 57% |
| Conceded | 4 | 7 |
| Saved | 3 | 5 |
| % Saved | 75% | 71% |
| Times Broken | 1 | 2 |
The Sammarinese broke his opponent 3 times with a 100% conversion rate. Marco surrendered his serve once and he saved 75% of the break points that he conceded. Lukas broke his opponent 4 times with a 57% conversion rate. The Austrian conceded his serve twice and he saved 71% of the break points that he conceded.
| De Rossi | |||
| Q1 Palosi |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-3 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 19 | 19 | |
| pts | 59-45 | 59-45 | |
| Total points | 104 | 104 | |
| Winners | 30 | 30 | |
| %Winners | 51% | 51% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 3 | 3 | |
| Double Faults | 5 | 5 | |
| 1st in | 34/57 | 34/57 | |
| % 1st in | 60% | 60% | |
| 1st pts | 30/34 | 30/34 | |
| % 1st pts | 88% | 88% | |
| 2nd pts | 10/23 | 10/23 | |
| % 2nd pts | 43% | 43% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/3 | 3/3 | |
| Converted % | 100% | 100% | |
| Conceded | 4 | 4 | |
| Saved | 3/4 | 3 | |
| Saved % | 75% | 75% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 | |
| Neumayer | |||
| Q1 Miceli |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 7-64 6-2 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 21 | 21 | |
| pts | 76-58 | 76-58 | |
| Total points | 134 | 134 | |
| Winners | 26 | 26 | |
| %Winners | 34% | 34% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 1 | 1 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 1 | |
| 1st in | 42/61 | 42/61 | |
| % 1st in | 69% | 69% | |
| 1st pts | 26/42 | 26/42 | |
| % 1st pts | 62% | 62% | |
| 2nd pts | 14/19 | 14/19 | |
| % 2nd pts | 74% | 74% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 4 | 4 | |
| Converted | 4/7 | 4/7 | |
| Converted % | 57% | 57% | |
| Conceded | 7 | 7 | |
| Saved | 5/7 | 5 | |
| Saved % | 71% | 71% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 2 | |
Head 2 Head
LLWLWWLLLW
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Robin HaaseHaase – Otto VirtanenVirtanen (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Marius CopilCopil – Valentin VacherotVacherot (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Federico GaioGaio – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Marco CecchinatoCecchinato – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Jelle SelsSels – (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Nino SerdarusicSerdarusic – Lorenzo GiustinoGiustino (0-3) – H2H and prediction
- Viktor DurasovicDurasovic – Elmar EjupovicEjupovic (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Matias ZukasZukas – Francesco FortiForti (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Carlos TabernerTaberner – Oriol Roca BatallaRoca Batalla (0-3) – H2H and prediction
- Alexander WeisWeis – Enrico Dalla ValleDalla Valle (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Oleg PrihodkoPrihodko – Andrey ChepelevChepelev (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Nikolas Sanchez-IzquierdoSanchez-Izquierdo – Alexandre MullerMuller (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Filip Cristian JianuCristian Jianu – Ernests GulbisGulbis (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Jesper De JongDe Jong – Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Flavio CobolliCobolli – Fabian MarozsanMarozsan (0-0) – H2H and prediction
