Nicolas Kicker vs Sumit Nagal — Guayaquil CH Round of 16

Guayaquil CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
Nicolas Kicker
ARG
Nicolas Kicker
#322ATP
1385ELO
1373Clay ELO
33 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLWLWWWL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 31 October 2022
clay
Sumit Nagal
IND
Sumit Nagal
#241ATP
1543ELO
1538Clay ELO
28 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWWWLLLL
Kicker N.
6-1 3-6 7-5
Nagal S.
Kicker N.
6372
Nagal S.
1651

Nicolas Kicker defeated Sumit Nagal 6-1 3-6 7-5 in the Guayaquil CH round of 16 on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Sumit Nagal came in ranked #241, leading the head-to-head 1–0. Nicolas Kicker claimed a first win over Sumit Nagal in two meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 1–1.

Key context

  • Match story: Nicolas Kicker came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–1 3–6 7–5.

Head to head

0–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2021-03-01Buenos AiresQ3claySumit Nagal2-6 6-2 6-3

Serve vs return

This season
Kicker N.serving59% hold

wins 53% of points on serve vs Nagal S.

Nagal S.serving61% hold

wins 54% of points on serve vs Kicker N.

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

Statistics

This season
Kicker N.Nagal S.
1st serve in·Even
68%
70%
1st serve points won·Even
64%
64%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
51%
Service points won·Even
59%
60%
Return points won·Even
42%
42%
Break points saved·Even
58%
58%
Aces / match·Even
1.1
1.4
Double faults / match·Even
1.9
1.8

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (170 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kicker N.Nagal S.
Clutch Rating·Even
30
33
Break points saved·Clear edge
56
69
Break points won·Slight edge
45
35
Deciding sets·Clear edge
30
16
Tiebreaks·Dominant
51
84

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kicker N.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Nagal S.
7.5
Dominant favouriteUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
3.2Clay Elo 1373
Surface ELO
6.8+164 Clay Elo edge
3.3Overall Elo 1385
ELO gap
6.7Overall Elo 1543
0.0
H2H
10.0
5.0
Surface form
6.8
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
5.5
Minutes 14d
6.7
4.0
3-set count
4.0
Prev. match
9.0
Context
7.0
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
Kicker N.Nagal S.
Freshness·Even
100
96

Kicker N.: 18 days rest · Nagal S.: 8 days rest · 1 match (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Altmaier D.[3]
Coria F.[1]
6-26-4
Semi-finals
Altmaier D.[3]
Cecchinato M.
7-646-4
Coria F.[1]
Varillas J.[4]
6-42-67-64
Quarter-finals
Altmaier D.[3]
De Jong J.
6-23-66-3
Coria F.[1]
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
6-46-4
Varillas J.[4]
Kicker N.
6-16-3
Cecchinato M.
Choinski J.
6-16-3
R16
Choinski J.
Cerundolo J.[5]
6-736-26-4
Altmaier D.[3]
Torres J.
6-46-3
Kicker N.
Nagal S.
6-13-67-5
Varillas J.[4]
Guillen Meza A.
6-17-63
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
Meligeni Alves F.[8]
6-36-4
Coria F.[1]
Diaz Acosta F.
3-66-17-62
Cecchinato M.
Burruchaga R.
6-12-0
De Jong J.
Agamenone F.[6]
6-24-66-4
R32
Burruchaga R.
Etcheverry T.[2]
6-737-57-5
Choinski J.
Tirante T.
6-37-65
Cerundolo J.[5]
Melzer G.
6-46-2
Torres J.
Quiroz R.
6-37-62
De Jong J.
Casanova H.
6-16-757-5
Guillen Meza A.
Andrade A.
6-46-3
Varillas J.[4]
Ribeiro E.
6-26-1
Meligeni Alves F.[8]
Galarza J.
6-47-63
Coria F.[1]
Comesana F.
6-27-66
Agamenone F.[6]
March C.
7-56-1
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
6-17-68
Diaz Acosta F.
Milojevic N.
7-616-2
Nagal S.
Dutra Da Silva D.
6-26-1
Cecchinato M.
Bicknell B.
6-16-3
Kicker N.
Rodriguez Taverna S.[7]
6-16-4
Altmaier D.[3]
Seyboth Wild T.
1-67-656-2