Sasi Kumar Mukund vs Roberto Cid — Little Rock CH Round of 32

Little Rock CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
IND
Sasi Kumar Mukund
1306ELO
1281Hard ELO
29 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWLWLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 31 May 2021
hard
DOM7
Roberto Cid
32 yrs · 193 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWLLLLW
Mukund S.
6-3 6-4
Cid R.
Mukund S.
662
Cid R.
340

Sasi Kumar Mukund defeated Roberto Cid 6-3 6-4 in the Little Rock CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Mukund S.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Cid R.

Cid R.serving70% hold

wins 58% of points on serve vs Mukund S.

Serve advantage — Mukund S.

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Statistics

This season
Mukund S.Cid R.
1st serve in·Even
58%
60%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
69%
63%
2nd serve points won·Even
50%
46%
Service points won·Slight edge
61%
56%
Return points won·Even
37%
40%
Break points saved·Slight edge
56%
51%
Aces / match·Dominant
5.4
2.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.5
3.4

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (169 vs 79). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Mukund S.Cid R.
Clutch Rating·Even
0
0
Break points saved·Slight edge
20
15
Break points won·Clear edge
5
26
Deciding sets·Slight edge
13
4
Tiebreaks·Dominant
56
1

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Mukund S.
4.5
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 35 days (−0.7)
Cid R.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.0
Surface form
4.4
0.0Lost last 5
Win streak
0.0Lost last 3
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
8.9
Prev. match
8.0
6.0
Surface transition
6.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Sock J.
Gomez E.[3]
7-56-4
Semi-finals
Gomez E.[3]
Oliveira G.
6-46-2
Sock J.
Krueger M.[5]
6-41-66-3
Quarter-finals
Oliveira G.
Crawford O.
1-67-52-0
Gomez E.[3]
Blanch U.
6-26-0
Sock J.
Kwiatkowski T.[6]
6-737-656-4
Krueger M.[5]
Jung J.[1]
3-66-26-1
R16
Gomez E.[3]
Galarneau A.
6-46-4
Crawford O.
Kelly D.
6-46-1
Oliveira G.
Mukund S.
4-66-46-2
Blanch U.
Eubanks C.[8]
6-47-64
Kwiatkowski T.[6]
Ritschard A.
5-76-36-2
Krueger M.[5]
King D.
6-36-2
Jung J.[1]
Moriya H.
6-36-4
Sock J.
Escobedo E.[4]
6-777-697-65
R32
Crawford O.
Polansky P.[9]
7-56-2
Kelly D.
Chappell N.
6-17-5
Oliveira G.
Harrison R.
7-57-66
Mukund S.
Cid R.[7]
6-36-4
Gomez E.[3]
Velotti A.
7-626-3
Eubanks C.[8]
Mejia N.
6-37-63
Kwiatkowski T.[6]
Kozlov S.
6-26-1
Ritschard A.
King K.
7-654-66-4
Escobedo E.[4]
Young D.
6-36-0
Krueger M.[5]
Khan Z.
6-26-4
King D.
Tirante T.
6-46-4
Moriya H.
Jarry N.
6-46-2
Jung J.[1]
Harrison C.
6-16-2
Sock J.
Quiroz R.
6-36-1
Galarneau A.
Aragone J.
6-36-3
Blanch U.
Svajda Z.
5-76-36-3