Sam Barry vs Mico Santiago, Burlingame 2016, Semifinal

FUTURES · Semifinal · Hard · Sat 29 Oct

Final

Sam Barry

WinnerRank #1280

Barry won in 3 sets · 2h 13m

2–1

Set 12–6

Set 27–6⁴

Set 36–2

Mico Santiago

LostRank #1753

Venue

Broadway Tennis Center / Bay Club Broadway

Burlingame, USA· Hard

Court speed

What is court speed?

How much the court helps the server, judged from aces and serve points won and adjusted for who played. 100 is the average ATP tournament court that season.

Very slow< 92Monte Carlo, Rome
Slow92–97Roland Garros, Indian Wells
Average97–103US Open, Dubai
Fast103–108Wimbledon, Shanghai
Very fast108+Basel

Challenger and ITF courts usually read lower: partly the venues, partly the balls and conditions at those levels.

How court speed works

Know how fast this court plays before the first serve

See it with Pro

Altitude

2 m

Above sea level

Indoor venue, weather not factored

Sea level

Match stats

2h 13m

6Aces1

3Double faults5

51Service points won49

14Service games played14

9Service games won9

14Return games played14

7/1258%Break points saved17%1/6

5/683%Break points converted42%5/12

Head to head

1Barry

0Santiago

1 meeting

BurlingameSemifinal · 29 Oct 2016HardThis match
Sam Barry
Sets won: 2Set 1: 2Set 2: 7⁷Set 3: 6
Mico Santiago
Sets won: 1Set 1: 6Set 2: 6⁴Set 3: 2

Match research

Pro

Everything that shapes this match: each player’s run-in and travel, records side by side, and results against similar opponents and in similar conditions. Better information, better-informed decisions.

Run-inEvery match in the last 28 days, rest days and travel between venues.
Tale of the tapeRecords and serve numbers side by side, filtered by period and surface.
Record by opponent rankingHow each player does against the top 10, top 50 or any ranking range.
Similar conditionsResults in comparable heat, humidity, wind and altitude before scheduled matches.

Get the edge with Pro

Sam Barry vs Mico Santiago, Burlingame 2016, Semifinal

Final score

Venue and conditions

Match stats

Head to head

Match research