Tennys Sandgren and Sebastian Fanselow will face off in the 2nd round of the Cleveland Challenger for the 4th time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Wednesday at 11:00 am on STADIUM. 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 Tennys Sandgren who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Tennys Sandgren is the pick to win this match.
Tennys Sandgren -> 1.56
Sebastian Fanselow -> 2.33
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 Tennys Sandgren vs. Sebastian Fanselow
This will be the 4th time that Tennys Sandgren and Sebastian Fanselow clash against each other. The head to head is 3-0 for Sandgren (see full H2H stats), but they have never played each other on indoor hard courts.
The last time that they competed against each other, Sandgren won 3-6 7-5 6-3 in the 1st round in the Las Vegas Challenger back in 2022.
Tennys Sandgren
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 13-9 | 4-4 | 5-3 | 4-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 27-25 | 20-19 | 0-1 | 7-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 25-23 | 19-11 | 1-5 | 5-7 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 11-24 | 5-12 | 1-7 | 2-2 | 3-3 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 12-13 | 7-5 | 5-3 | 0-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 266, the American reached the 2nd round after defeating Tim Handel 6-76 7-5 6-4.
In the 1st round against Handel, The American recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (6-76 7-5 6-4). During the match, Sandgren scored 109 points vs Handel’s 104. Sandgren was extremely aggressive to blast 53 winners.
Talking about the service games, Sandgren overwhelmed his opponent with 23 aces and he committed only 5 double faults. Overall, Tennys Sandgren was exceptionally effective on serve to win 75% (53/71) of his 1st serve and 58% (23/40) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve once. Sandgren broke Handel 3 times after converting 43% of his break points (3/7).
Sandgren has winning win-loss record in the last 10 years having won 56% of his matches (283-223). 1-0 on indoor hard courts in 2024. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this tournament, Sandgren has a composed 46-39 record in the last years on indoor hard courts.
The American has an overall 5-4 win-loss record in 2024, 1-0 on indoor hard courts (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Cleveland Challenger
Sebastian Fanselow
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 25-30 | 7-9 | 10-15 | 8-5 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 56-31 | 24-9 | 20-15 | 12-7 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 27-31 | 5-11 | 17-13 | 5-7 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 35-28 | 17-13 | 13-11 | 5-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 34-15 | 34-13 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 313, the German reached the 2nd round after defeating William Grant 7-63 6-1.
In the 1st round, Sebastian had a good straight sets win against Grant (7-63 6-1). During the match Fanselow scored 79 points vs Grant’s 60. The German was pretty aggressive to blast 29 winners.
About the serving games, Fanselow managed to score 7 aces and he committed only 1 double fault for the entire match. Sebastian Fanselow was quite effective on serve to win 81% (29/36) of his 1st serve and 53% (19/36) on the second serve. This was the main reason for not conceding a single break during the match. The German broke Grant 3 times after converting 38% of his break points (3/8).
Sebastian’s best result of the season was getting to the semifinal in the Indian Wells 2 Challenger.
Fanselow has a composed 7-4 win-loss record in 2024, 4-2 on indoor hard courts (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Cleveland Challenger
Previously, his best result was reaching the 1st round in 2022. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Sandgren | Fanselow |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 1 |
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 |
| Tot Games | 35 | 20 |
| Pts | 109-104 | 79-60 |
| Total Points | 213 | 139 |
| Winners | 53 | 29 |
| %Winners | 49% | 37% |
Both Sandgren and Fanselow played 1 match. At the moment, Tennys Sandgren lost 1 set while Sebastian Fanselow hasn’t conceded a set so far. Sandgren has played 1 set more than Fanselow (3 vs 2). Therefore, Sandgren played 15 games more than Fanselow. Tennys scored 53 winners (49% of the total points). On the other side, Fanselow bagged 29 winners (37%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Sandgren | Fanselow |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 23 | 7 |
| Avg per match | 23 | 7 |
| 1st in | 71/111 | 36/72 |
| %1st in | 64% | 50% |
| 1st pts | 53/71 | 29/36 |
| %1st pts | 75% | 81% |
| 2nd pts | 23/40 | 19/36 |
| %2nd pts | 58% | 53% |
Sandgren managed to score 23 aces . Fanselow fired 7 aces . Sandgren won 75% points on his first serve. He very solid his second serve to win 58% of the points. On the other side, Fanselow won 81% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 53% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Sandgren | Fanselow |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 3 | 3 |
| Converted | 3/7 | 3/8 |
| % Converted | 43% | 38% |
| Conceded | 4 | 3 |
| Saved | 3 | 3 |
| % Saved | 75% | 100% |
| Times Broken | 1 | 0 |
Sandgren broke his opponent 3 times with a 43% conversion rate. The American conceded his serve once and he saved 75% of the break points that he conceded. Sebastian broke his opponent 3 times with a 38% conversion rate. Sebastian was rock solid on his serve as he has never conceded a single service game after saving 3 break points.
| Sandgren | |||
| R1 Handel |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-76 7-5 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 35 | 35 | |
| pts | 109-104 | 109-104 | |
| Total points | 213 | 213 | |
| Winners | 53 | 53 | |
| %Winners | 49% | 49% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 23 | 23 | |
| Double Faults | 5 | 5 | |
| 1st in | 71/111 | 71/111 | |
| % 1st in | 64% | 64% | |
| 1st pts | 53/71 | 53/71 | |
| % 1st pts | 75% | 75% | |
| 2nd pts | 23/40 | 23/40 | |
| % 2nd pts | 58% | 58% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/7 | 3/7 | |
| Converted % | 43% | 43% | |
| Conceded | 4 | 4 | |
| Saved | 3/4 | 3 | |
| Saved % | 75% | 75% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 | |
| Fanselow | |||
| R1 Grant |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 7-63 6-1 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 20 | 20 | |
| pts | 79-60 | 79-60 | |
| Total points | 139 | 139 | |
| Winners | 29 | 29 | |
| %Winners | 37% | 37% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 7 | 7 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 1 | |
| 1st in | 36/72 | 36/72 | |
| % 1st in | 50% | 50% | |
| 1st pts | 29/36 | 29/36 | |
| % 1st pts | 81% | 81% | |
| 2nd pts | 19/36 | 19/36 | |
| % 2nd pts | 53% | 53% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/8 | 3/8 | |
| Converted % | 38% | 38% | |
| Conceded | 3 | 3 | |
| Saved | 3/3 | 3 | |
| Saved % | 100% | 100% | |
| Times Broken | 0 | 0 | |
Head 2 Head
LWLWLWWWLW
LWLWLLLLLW Tennis Scores in Cleveland Challenger
- James Kent TrotterKent Trotter – Zachary SvajdaSvajda (4-6 6-3 7-61) – See score progression
- Noah RubinRubin – Matija PecoticPecotic (5-7 6-3 7-5) – See score progression
- Stefan KozlovKozlov – Strong KirchheimerKirchheimer (3-6 6-1 7-63) – See score progression
- Murphy CassoneCassone – Roberto Cid SuberviCid Subervi (6-1 7-67) – See score progression
- Emilio NavaNava – Gabi Adrian BoitanAdrian Boitan (7-64 6-1) – See score progression
- Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski – Nick ChappellChappell (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Patrick MaloneyMaloney – Ezekiel ClarkClark (6-2 6-3) – See score progression
- Denis KudlaKudla – Keegan SmithSmith (1-6 6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Sebastian FanselowFanselow – William GrantGrant (7-63 6-1) – See score progression
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Thomas FancuttFancutt (6-4 7-5) – See score progression
- Patrick BradyBrady – Lucas GerchGerch (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Quinn VandecasteeleVandecasteele – Bruno KuzuharaKuzuhara (6-4 4-6 7-63) – See score progression
- Tennys SandgrenSandgren – Tim HandelHandel (6-76 7-5 6-4) – See score progression
- Ethan QuinnQuinn – Aidan MayoMayo (6-3 6-3) – See score progression
- Patrick KypsonKypson – Nathan PonwithPonwith (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- James DuckworthDuckworth – Toby Alex KodatAlex Kodat (6-3 6-0) – See score progression
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Thomas FancuttFancutt (6-4 7-5) – See score progression
- Emilio NavaNava – Gabi Adrian BoitanAdrian Boitan (7-6(4) 6-1) – See score progression
- Patrick BradyBrady – Lucas GerchGerch (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Murphy CassoneCassone – Roberto Cid SuberviCid Subervi (6-1 7-6(7)) – See score progression
- Denis KudlaKudla – Keegan SmithSmith (1-6 6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski – Nick ChappellChappell (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- James Kent TrotterKent Trotter – Zachary SvajdaSvajda (4-6 6-3 7-6(1)) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- James DuckworthDuckworth – Patrick MaloneyMaloney (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Tennys SandgrenSandgren – Sebastian FanselowFanselow (3-0) – H2H and prediction
- Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski – James Kent TrotterKent Trotter (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Noah RubinRubin – Denis KudlaKudla (2-0) – H2H and prediction
- Emilio NavaNava – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
