Patrick Kypson vs Keegan Smith — Rome GA CH Round of 32

Rome GA CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Patrick Kypson
USA
Patrick Kypson
#112ATP
1641ELO
1611Hard ELO
$260kYTD
$1.1MCAREER
26 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWLLLWWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 20 February 2023
hard
USA
Keegan Smith
#204ATP
1421ELO
1395Hard ELO
28 yrs · 201 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWWLWLL
Kypson P.
6-1 7-6
Smith K.
Kypson P.
6772
Smith K.
1640

Patrick Kypson defeated Keegan Smith 6-1 7-6 in the Rome GA CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Patrick Kypson came in ranked #112. Patrick Kypson claimed a first win over Keegan Smith in two meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 1–1.

Key context

  • Match story: Patrick Kypson came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–1 7–6.

Head to head

0–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2023-07-31Los CabosQ1hardKeegan Smith6-3 6-7(4) 6-2

Serve vs return

This season
Kypson P.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Smith K.

Smith K.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Kypson P.

Serve-dominated — both hold easily, expect tiebreaks

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
Kypson P.Smith K.
1st serve in·Slight edge
62%
72%
1st serve points won·Even
75%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
53%
53%
Service points won·Even
66%
66%
Return points won·Even
37%
36%
Break points saved·Even
66%
65%
Aces / match·Slight edge
7.2
6.5
Double faults / match·Even
2.2
2.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (194 vs 119). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kypson P.Smith K.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
42
26
Break points saved·Slight edge
93
84
Break points won·Dominant
41
3
Deciding sets·Dominant
17
48
Tiebreaks·Dominant
77
10

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kypson P.
7.0
Strong advantageUmpiry Score
Smith K.
4.9
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
8.5+217 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
1.5Hard Elo 1395
8.4Overall Elo 1641
ELO gap
1.6Overall Elo 1421
5.0
H2H
5.0
4.7
Surface form
3.5
0.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
7.0
Prev. match
8.0
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
Kypson P.Smith K.
Freshness·Slight edge
94
84

Kypson P.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d) · Smith K.: 7 days rest · 1 match, 16 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Thompson J.[1]
Michelsen A.
6-46-2
Semi-finals
Thompson J.[1]
Svajda Z.
7-637-65
Michelsen A.
Hong S.[8]
4-67-56-1
Quarter-finals
Hong S.[8]
Kodat T.
4-66-36-4
Michelsen A.
Leshem E.
7-56-3
Svajda Z.
Ejupovic E.
6-13-66-3
Thompson J.[1]
Gray A.
6-46-2
Hong S.
Kodat T.
4-66-36-4
R16
Ejupovic E.
Harrison R.
3-67-656-2
Michelsen A.
Moraing M.
6-743-1
Svajda Z.
Vukic A.[3]
6-36-3
Kodat T.
Shimabukuro S.
6-43-67-5
Gray A.
Kypson P.
7-636-3
Thompson J.[1]
Squire H.
6-46-1
Hong S.[8]
Decamps G.
6-16-0
Leshem E.
Ponwith N.
6-36-2
Kodat T.
Shimabukuro S.
6-43-67-5
R32
Ejupovic E.
Sandgren T.[6]
6-43-2
Kodat T.
Couacaud E.[4]
6-46-3
Vukic A.[3]
Blanch U.
6-33-66-1
Moraing M.
Harrison C.
1-66-46-3
Svajda Z.
Wong C.
6-36-1
Squire H.
Rincon D.
6-46-2
Thompson J.[1]
Dougaz A.
6-36-4
Michelsen A.
Koepfer D.[7]
6-36-1
Ponwith N.
Hijikata R.[2]
6-46-756-3
Kypson P.
Smith K.
6-17-64
Shimabukuro S.
Fanselow S.
2-66-36-3
Harrison R.
Marchenko I.
6-33-66-3
Gray A.
Galarneau A.[5]
6-46-4
Leshem E.
Mochizuki S.
6-746-36-2
Decamps G.
Cukierman D.
6-16-2
Kodat T.
Couacaud E.
6-46-3