Arnaldi/Musetti — Darderi/Etcheverry 0:2: match report and statistics
ATP. Cincinnati. Doubles · 17.08.2026 15:10 · Finished
Compare teamsWho will win?
Votes: 0- Arnaldi/Musetti0%
- Draw0%
- Darderi/Etcheverry0%
Overview
Arnaldi/Musetti vs Darderi/Etcheverry ended 0:2 on 17.08.2026 15:10 (UTC) in ATP. Cincinnati. Doubles. The win went to Darderi/Etcheverry.
Arnaldi/Musetti, last 2 games: won 1, drawn 0, lost 1. Darderi/Etcheverry, last 4 games: won 0, drawn 0, lost 4.
More on the site: Arnaldi/Musetti results and fixtures, Darderi/Etcheverry results and fixtures, ATP. Cincinnati. Doubles table.
See also all Tennis matches of the day. The statistics are powered by the SportAPI sports data API.
Score by periods
| Team | 1 | 2 | Σ |
|---|---|---|---|
Arnaldi/Musetti | 5 | 6 | 0 |
Darderi/Etcheverry | 7 | 7 | 2 |
Match statistics
- 1 Aces 1
- 6 Double faults 1
- 61% First serve 75%
- 70% (30/43)1st serve points won(39/58) 67%
- 48% (13/27)2nd serve points won(7/19) 37%
- 0% Break points saved 0%
- 33% (19/58)1st serve return points won(13/43) 30%
- 63% (12/19)2nd serve return points won(14/27) 52%
- 0% Break points converted 0%
- 61% (43/70)Service points won(46/77) 60%
- 40% (31/77)Return points won(27/70) 39%
- 50% (74/147)Total points won(73/147) 50%
- 4 Посл. 10 мячей 6
- 0 Match Points Saved 0
- 67% (8/12)Service games won(9/12) 75%
- 25% (3/12)Return games won(4/12) 33%
- 46% (11/24)Total games won(13/24) 54%
Game by game
- 0 : 10:15 0:30 0:40
- 1 : 115:0 30:0 40:0
- 1 : 215:0 15:15 15:30 15:40 30:40
- 2 : 215:0 30:0 40:0
- 2 : 30:15 15:15 15:30 30:30 30:40
- 3 : 315:0 30:0 30:15 30:30 40:30
- 3 : 415:0 30:0 40:0 BP40:15 BP40:30 BP40:40 BP
- 4 : 415:0 15:15 30:15 40:15
- 4 : 50:15 0:30 0:40 15:40
- 5 : 515:0 30:0 30:15 40:15
- 6 : 5Lost serve0:15 15:15 30:15 30:30 30:40 40:40 BP
- Lost serve6 : 615:0 15:15 30:15 30:30 30:40 BP
- Tie-break4 : 70:11:12:12:22:32:43:43:54:54:64:7
Head-to-head
Matches played: 0
draws: 0
The teams have not met yet
Previous matches: Arnaldi/Musetti
Previous matches: Darderi/Etcheverry
Match info
- Tournament
- Cincinnati
- Season
- 2026
- Referee
- Rafael Maia
ATP. Cincinnati. Doubles
Match forecast and markets
- On serve the model gives Arnaldi/Musetti 68% of points and Darderi/Etcheverry 62% — adjusted for the opponent's return.
- Most likely score in sets is 2:0 (47%), then 2:1 (30%).
- About 24.9 games expected; over 21.5 — 64%.
| Market | history | history | Model | Fair odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arnaldi/Musetti wins | 50%1/2 | 100%4/4 | 76% | 1.31 |
| Darderi/Etcheverry wins | 50%1/2 | 0%0/4 | 24% | 4.19 |
| Arnaldi/Musetti wins 1st set | 50%1/2 | 100%4/4 | 68% | 1.47 |
| Deciding set | 50%1/2 | 50%2/4 | 43% | 2.31 |
| Tiebreak in match | 0%0/2 | 50%2/4 | 46% | 2.19 |
| Score in sets | ||||
| 2:0 | 0%0/2 | 50%2/4 | 47% | 2.15 |
| 2:1 | 50%1/2 | 50%2/4 | 30% | 3.38 |
| 1:2 | 0%0/2 | 0%0/4 | 14% | 7.26 |
| 0:2 | 50%1/2 | 0%0/4 | 10% | 9.90 |
Model: serve and return points of each player in recent matches (2 and 4) → game → set → match. History — share of each player's matches where the market came in.
Players' style of play
Arnaldi/Musettimatches: 2
No notable deviations from the sample average.
- Aces per match
- 0.5
- Double faults per match
- 1.5
- First serve in
- 58%
- Service games held
- 76%
- Return games won
- 17%
Darderi/Etcheverrymatches: 4
Strengths
- Double faults per match 1.3 (avg 2.1)Strong
Weaknesses
- Aces per match 2 (avg 2.8)Weak
- Points won on 1st serve 68% (avg 73%)Weak
- Service games held 73% (avg 79%)Weak
- Return points won 31% (avg 35%)Weak
- Comebacks after losing 1st set 0/4Weak
- Aces per match
- 2
- Double faults per match
- 1.3
- First serve in
- 65%
- Service games held
- 73%
- Return games won
- 16%
- Break points converted
- 33%
Compared with the average of all players in these matches (both players and their opponents). Recent 10 matches.
Trends
- 4 defeats in a row100%
Based on recent matches: home team — 2, away team — 4
Win probability
Markov model: each player's chance to win a point on serve → game → set → match. Bars below show how much each point mattered.