Jason Kubler vs Chun Hsin Tseng — Nur-Sultan 4 CH Round of 16

Nur-Sultan 4 CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
AUS
Jason Kubler
#468ATP
1685ELO
1635Hard ELO
33 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWWWWWWLLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 19 July 2021
hard
Chun Hsin Tseng
TPE7
Chun Hsin Tseng
#234ATP
1554ELO
1495Hard ELO
$99kYTD
$1.7MCAREER
24 yrs · 175 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLWLWLW
Kubler J.
0-6 6-3 7-5
Tseng C.
Kubler J.
0672
Tseng C.
6351

Jason Kubler defeated Chun Hsin Tseng 0-6 6-3 7-5 in the Nur-Sultan 4 CH round of 16 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Kubler J.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Tseng C.

Tseng C.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Kubler J.

Even serve battle

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
Kubler J.Tseng C.
1st serve in·Even
62%
58%
1st serve points won·Even
72%
68%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
51%
Service points won·Even
64%
61%
Return points won·Even
38%
39%
Break points saved·Even
61%
61%
Aces / match·Clear edge
5.7
3.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
3.3
2.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (172 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kubler J.Tseng C.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
59
26
Break points saved·Slight edge
90
83
Break points won·Dominant
46
15
Deciding sets·Dominant
79
31
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
37
23

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kubler J.
6.8
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Tseng C.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.9+140 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.1Hard Elo 1495
7.0Overall Elo 1685
ELO gap
3.0Overall Elo 1554
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.5
Surface form
3.8
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
6.4
Minutes 14d
8.6
4.0
3-set count
7.0
6.0
Prev. match
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
Kuznetsov A.
Kubler J.
6-32-1
Semi-finals
Kubler J.
Krutykh O.
6-16-3
Kuznetsov A.
Kotov P.
6-26-746-4
Quarter-finals
Kubler J.
Grenier H.[4]
7-646-1
Kuznetsov A.
Polansky P.[5]
6-23-66-2
Kotov P.
Peniston R.
6-46-2
Krutykh O.
Chappell N.
3-66-37-5
R16
Kubler J.
Tseng C.[7]
0-66-37-5
Chappell N.
Stakhovsky S.[2]
7-646-4
Krutykh O.
Basic M.
4-67-56-2
Polansky P.[5]
Jaziri M.
3-67-57-64
Kuznetsov A.
Zhukayev B.
6-27-5
Peniston R.
Hsu Y.
6-36-4
Kotov P.
De Jong J.[6]
6-37-63
Grenier H.[4]
Nedelko I.
6-5
R32
Stakhovsky S.[2]
Lock B.
6-33-67-5
Basic M.
Santillan A.
6-26-2
Krutykh O.
Wu T.[8]
6-26-2
Grenier H.[4]
Chung Y.
6-756-36-1
Kubler J.
Sultanov K.
6-37-5
Tseng C.[7]
Denolly C.
6-46-4
Jaziri M.
Zakharov A.
6-06-2
Zhukayev B.
Catarina L.
6-26-4
De Jong J.[6]
Yevseyev D.
4-66-06-3
Kotov P.
Leshem E.
3-66-16-4
Peniston R.
Kirkin E.
6-26-3
Chappell N.
Lomakin G.
6-37-63
Polansky P.[5]
Dubrivnyy A.
7-57-65
Nedelko I.
Tashbulatov D.
6-36-2
Kuznetsov A.
Clarke J.[3]
7-666-4
Hsu Y.
Bega A.
6-31-66-3