Camilo Ugo Carabelli vs Mariano Navone — Lima CH Round of 32

Lima CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
ARG6
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
#58ATP
1759ELO
1741Clay ELO
$653kYTD
$2.7MCAREER
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWWLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 24 October 2022
clay
Mariano Navone
ARG
Mariano Navone
#48ATP
1822ELO
1800Clay ELO
$722kYTD
$3.1MCAREER
25 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLWWWWL
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-2 6-3
Navone M.
Ugo Carabelli C.
662
Navone M.
230

Camilo Ugo Carabelli defeated Mariano Navone 6-2 6-3 in the Lima CH round of 32 on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Mariano Navone came in ranked #48. Camilo Ugo Carabelli extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2026-02-09Buenos AiresR16clayCamilo Ugo Carabelli6-2 7-5

Serve vs return

This season
Ugo Carabelli C.serving59% hold

wins 53% of points on serve vs Navone M.

Navone M.serving61% hold

wins 54% of points on serve vs Ugo Carabelli C.

Baseline battle — serve is shaky, expect plenty of breaks

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

Serve & return on clay

Ugo Carabelli C.Navone M.
24
Serve
0
28
Return
100

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the clay field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Ugo Carabelli C.Navone M.
1st serve in·Slight edge
62%
67%
1st serve points won·Even
67%
64%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
50%
Service points won·Even
60%
59%
Return points won·Even
41%
43%
Break points saved·Even
60%
56%
Aces / match·Slight edge
2.7
1.7
Double faults / match·Even
2.4
2.4

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Ugo Carabelli C.Navone M.
Clutch Rating·Even
78
75
Break points saved·Even
90
86
Break points won·Dominant
62
90
Deciding sets·Clear edge
96
77
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
72
60

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ugo Carabelli C.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Navone M.
6.8
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
4.9Clay Elo 1741
Surface ELO
5.1+60 Clay Elo edge
4.8Overall Elo 1759
ELO gap
5.2Overall Elo 1822
0.0
H2H
10.0
5.7
Surface form
6.6
Fatigue & Travel
7.0
Minutes 14d
2.9
7.0
3-set count
0.0
9.0
Prev. match
7.0
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Ugo Carabelli C.Navone M.
Freshness·Even
100
96

Ugo Carabelli C.: 15 days rest · Navone M.: 13 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Ugo Carabelli C.[3]
Tirante T.[7]
6-27-64
Altmaier D.[4]
Etcheverry T.[2]
6-16-746-4
Semi-finals
Ugo Carabelli C.[3]
Etcheverry T.[1]
6-33-67-5
Tirante T.[7]
Bueno G.
7-654-67-5
Etcheverry T.[2]
Burruchaga R.
6-23-66-3
Altmaier D.[4]
Coria F.[1]
6-36-3
Quarter-finals
Tirante T.[7]
Varillas J.[2]
6-46-3
Bueno G.
Elias G.[8]
2-67-626-0
Ugo Carabelli C.[3]
Mena F.[5]
7-646-1
Etcheverry T.[1]
Olivo R.[6]
7-656-727-5
Coria F.[1]
Mpetshi Perricard G.
7-647-65
Etcheverry T.[2]
Meligeni Alves F.
7-56-2
Altmaier D.[4]
Rodriguez Taverna S.
3-67-56-2
Burruchaga R.
Milojevic N.
7-632-66-4
R16
Tirante T.[7]
Chappell N.
6-46-0
Mena F.[5]
Huertas Del Pino A.
6-36-2
Varillas J.[2]
Otegui J.
6-16-2
Bueno G.
Burruchaga R.
7-57-5
Etcheverry T.[1]
Quiroz R.
6-26-3
Elias G.[8]
Buse I.
7-656-1
Ugo Carabelli C.[3]
Hoyos Franco A.
6-16-1
Olivo R.[6]
Panta Herreros J.
6-16-4
Altmaier D.[4]
Agamenone F.
7-53-66-3
Burruchaga R.
Tirante T.
3-66-26-4
Coria F.[1]
Buse I.
6-44-66-2
Rodriguez Taverna S.
Skatov T.[8]
6-26-2
Meligeni Alves F.
Melzer G.
6-36-1
Milojevic N.
Cecchinato M.[3]
2-66-46-4
Etcheverry T.[2]
Olivieri G.
6-34-66-1
Mpetshi Perricard G.
Ugo Carabelli C.[6]
7-57-5
R32
Otegui J.
Carou I.
6-36-746-1
Varillas J.[2]
Boscardin Dias P.
6-36-2
Chappell N.
Kypson P.
7-57-5
Bueno G.
Ficovich J.[4]
7-56-3
Mena F.[5]
Farjat T.
7-56-0
Hoyos Franco A.
Ballotta G.
7-646-4
Ugo Carabelli C.[3]
Mejia N.
6-26-3
Olivo R.[6]
Dutra Da Silva D.
3-66-37-63
Quiroz R.
Luz O.
3-66-46-2
Etcheverry T.[1]
Gomez J.
6-26-3
Huertas Del Pino A.
Krstin P.
7-644-66-1
Panta Herreros J.
Alvarez N.
6-27-5
Buse I.
Ribeiro E.
6-06-2
Elias G.[8]
Juarez F.
7-623-67-5
Tirante T.[7]
Huertas Del Pino C.
6-36-2
Burruchaga R.
Villanueva G.
6-26-3
Melzer G.
Varillas J.[5]
6-36-4
Etcheverry T.[2]
Choinski J.
6-46-2
Meligeni Alves F.
Comesana F.
6-26-0
Altmaier D.[4]
Kicker N.
5-77-56-4
Buse I.
Dutra Da Silva D.
6-21-66-3
Coria F.[1]
Houkes M.
6-36-3
Tirante T.
Zekic M.
6-46-4
Rodriguez Taverna S.
Casanova H.
6-36-4
Milojevic N.
Alvarez N.
6-35-76-1
Olivieri G.
Seyboth Wild T.
6-17-61
Agamenone F.
Collarini A.
6-46-2
Skatov T.[8]
Bueno G.
6-46-1
Mpetshi Perricard G.
Olivo R.
4-66-36-2
Cecchinato M.[3]
De Jong J.
6-37-66
Ugo Carabelli C.[6]
Navone M.
6-26-3
Burruchaga R.
Reis Da Silva J.
6-767-626-3