ATP Challenger Tour · Semifinals · AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion San Miguel de Tucuman
Playing styles and historical archetype record
Justo
⚔️ The Gladiator
Ambrogi
⚔️ The Gladiator
Matchup analysis
Both Guido Ivan Justo and Luciano Emanuel Ambrogi are ⚔️ The Gladiator types. Mirror matchups usually come down to execution, fitness, and surface fit. Across 4,864 matches in our dataset, the historical split is about even.
Hypothetical if you put 1u on each player to win every one of their matches · Last 90 days
| Metric | Justo | Ambrogi |
|---|---|---|
| W-L | 6–5 | 5–4 |
| Avg odds | 1.83 | 1.90 |
| ROI % | -10.4% | -16.9% |
| Units P/L | -1.14u | -1.52u |
Small sample: ROI stabilizes with more matches; fewer than 10 in the window is noisy.
Prior meetings and scores · 2 career meetings
2
Justo
0
Ambrogi
Results vs. opponents both players faced · Last 12 months
Justo has a higher win rate against shared opponents (60% vs Ambrogi's 40%).
| Opponent | Justo | Ambrogi |
|---|---|---|
| Juan Manuel La Serna | W 64 63 | W 60 67 62 |
| Lautaro Midon | W 46 63 60 | L 62 36 57 |
| Juan Bautista Torres | W 63 62 | W 61 57 64 |
| Alvaro Guillen Meza | L 67 63 26 | L 63 46 67 |
| Gonzalo Villanueva | W 75 75 | L 63 67 26 |
| Gonzalo Bueno | W 46 62 62 | W 62 61 |
| Tomas Barrios Vera | L 36 64 46 | L 46 26 |
| Benjamin Torrealba | W 62 76 | W 62 64 |
| Juan Estevez | L 67 26 | L 26 67 |
| Adolfo Daniel Vallejo | L 64 26 36 | L 26 46 |
Serve and return comparison · Last 90 days
| Stat | Justo | Ambrogi |
|---|---|---|
| Serve | ||
| 1st Serve In % | 67.1% | 59.4% |
| 1st Serve Pts Won % | 66.9% | 64.5% |
| 2nd Serve Pts Won % | 53.3% | 50% |
| Aces / Match | 1.9 | 2.6 |
| Double Faults / Match | 1.9 | 2.6 |
| Break Points Saved % | 55.9% | 39.9% |
| Return | ||
| 1st Return Pts Won % | 41.9% | 41.3% |
| 2nd Return Pts Won % | 56.7% | 49.7% |
| BP Converted % | 54.9% | 51.1% |
| Rally | ||
| Winners / Match | 17.6 | 23.6 |
| Unforced Errors / Match | 26.9 | 39 |
| Net Pts Won % | 74.9% | 67.5% |
| Total Pts Won % | 54.8% | 51.9% |
| Surface (Clay) | ||
| Clay Win % | 47% | 50% |
Last five matches per player
Hernan Casanova
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion San Miguel de Tucuman · Round of 16
Jun 11
Joaquin Aguilar Cardozo
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion San Miguel de Tucuman · Round of 32
Jun 10
Franco Roncadelli
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion Córdoba · Semifinals
May 13
Lilian Marmousez
Kosice Open 2026 · Round of 32
May 13
Tommaso Compagnucci
CAME CUP 2026 CITTA' DI CERVIA · Round of 16
May 13
Santiago Rodriguez Taverna
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion San Miguel de Tucuman · Round of 16
Jun 11
Juan Sebastian Gomez
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion San Miguel de Tucuman · Round of 32
Jun 10
Guido Ivan Justo
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion Córdoba · Round of 16
May 9
Renzo Olivo
AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion Córdoba · Round of 32
May 7
Lautaro Midon
Copa Internacional de Tenis · Round of 16
Apr 9
Match summary
Luciano Emanuel Ambrogi and Guido Ivan Justo meet in the semifinals of the AAT Challenger IEB+ Edicion San Miguel de Tucuman on clay on June 13. The two have never played each other. Ambrogi is ranked 408th; Justo sits at 254.
Justo has won five straight matches and converted 80% of his last ten outings, while Ambrogi has won just half his last ten and is on a one-match losing streak after 129 days away from competition. The pair have crossed paths against common opponents four times recently, with Justo winning all four encounters. Only Ambrogi defeated Santiago Rodriguez Taverna in that stretch while Justo fell to him.
On clay, Justo has recorded a 75% win rate in his recent sample; Ambrogi holds 60% over the same period. Both players thrive on aggression and physicality from the baseline. The match will test whether Ambrogi can shake off his layoff and convert the rhythm he found against Rodriguez Taverna, and whether Justo's current momentum and superior recent clay record can sustain through a semifinal against an opponent hungry for court time.
Get $25 free
New accounts only. Create a Kalshi account and predict match outcomes.
Claim offerShare this match
