Camilo Ugo Carabelli vs Jelle Sels — Prague CH Round of 32

Prague CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
ARG
Camilo Ugo Carabelli
#58ATP
1759ELO
1741Clay ELO
$653kYTD
$2.7MCAREER
27 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWLWWLWLW
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 1 May 2023
clay
NED
Jelle Sels
#524ATP
1313ELO
1283Clay ELO
30 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLLLWLLW
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-2 6-7 6-1
Sels J.
Ugo Carabelli C.
66462
Sels J.
27711

Camilo Ugo Carabelli defeated Jelle Sels 6-2 6-7 6-1 in the Prague CH round of 32 on clay. The result followed the form book — Camilo Ugo Carabelli came in ranked #58.

Key context

  • Match story: Camilo Ugo Carabelli came through a tight passage before pulling clear — 6–2 6–7 6–1.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Ugo Carabelli C.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Sels J.

Sels J.serving63% hold

wins 55% of points on serve vs Ugo Carabelli C.

Serve advantage — Ugo Carabelli C.

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.Sels J.
24
Serve
—
28
Return
—

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

Statistics

This season
Ugo Carabelli C.Sels J.
1st serve in·Even
62%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
67%
67%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
49%
Service points won·Even
60%
60%
Return points won·Even
41%
37%
Break points saved·Even
60%
58%
Aces / match·Slight edge
2.7
3.9
Double faults / match·Even
2.4
2.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 132). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Ugo Carabelli C.Sels J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
78
15
Break points saved·Dominant
90
61
Break points won·Dominant
62
4
Deciding sets·Dominant
96
40
Tiebreaks·Dominant
72
11

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ugo Carabelli C.
7.4
Dominant favouriteUmpiry Score
Sels J.
4.8
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
10.0+458 Clay Elo edge
Surface ELO
0.0Clay Elo 1283
10.0Overall Elo 1759
ELO gap
0.0Overall Elo 1313
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.8
Surface form
5.1
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
8.4
Minutes 14d
7.8
7.0
3-set count
6.0
Prev. match
8.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
6.0

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.Sels J.
Freshness·Even
100
100

Ugo Carabelli C.: 15 days rest · Sels J.: 20 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Stricker D.[7]
Ofner S.[8]
7-676-3
Mensik J.
Koepfer D.[6]
6-46-3
Molleker R.[4]
Debru G.
6-26-2
Semi-finals
Ofner S.[8]
Klein L.
7-640-66-3
Stricker D.[7]
Krajinovic F.[1]
7-55-76-3
Mensik J.
Moro Canas A.
6-27-5
Koepfer D.[6]
Kicker N.
6-46-3
Molleker R.[4]
Vacherot V.[8]
6-47-65
Debru G.
Sousa J.[5]
5-76-36-4
Quarter-finals
Krajinovic F.[1]
Koepfer D.
6-16-2
Klein L.
Kolar Z.
6-37-5
Ofner S.[8]
Barrios Vera T.
6-27-5
Stricker D.[7]
Svrcina D.
4-66-16-3
Kicker N.
Laaksonen H.
W/O
Koepfer D.[6]
Klein L.[4]
6-46-766-1
Moro Canas A.
Mochizuki S.
6-36-4
Mensik J.
Santillan A.
3-66-37-66
Debru G.
Kodat T.
7-646-736-4
Vacherot V.[8]
Paulson A.
7-656-2
Molleker R.[4]
Gomez F.
6-36-3
Sousa J.[5]
Darderi L.[3]
7-53-67-63
R16
Koepfer D.
Gombos N.
6-23-66-3
Klein L.
Agamenone F.
6-37-66
Ofner S.[8]
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-46-2
Stricker D.[7]
Meligeni Alves F.
6-756-26-4
Krajinovic F.[1]
Gaio F.
6-24-66-4
Svrcina D.
Paulson A.
6-13-66-0
Barrios Vera T.
Kopriva V.
6-25-77-67
Kolar Z.
Machac T.[6]
7-56-3
Koepfer D.[6]
Furness E.
7-660-0
Santillan A.
Hardt N.
4-66-46-3
Mochizuki S.
Gombos N.[3]
7-687-62
Kicker N.
Fatic N.
7-56-4
Laaksonen H.
Llamas Ruiz P.
6-36-766-2
Mensik J.
Sachko V.
6-46-4
Moro Canas A.
Svajda Z.
6-42-66-4
Klein L.[4]
Andreozzi G.
5-76-36-3
Vacherot V.[8]
Mena F.
6-26-4
Sousa J.[5]
Forejtek J.
6-04-66-4
Darderi L.[3]
Vrbensky M.
6-46-1
Debru G.
Nicod J.
7-56-1
Gomez F.
Giustino L.
6-36-3
Molleker R.[4]
Chazal M.
6-26-2
Paulson A.
Erhard M.
6-36-3
Kodat T.
Laaksonen H.
6-36-3
Debru G.
Nicod J.
7-56-1
R32
Machac T.[6]
Llamas Ruiz P.
6-16-1
Kolar Z.
Bellier A.
3-66-37-65
Gaio F.
Kuzmanov D.
6-47-65
Gombos N.
Piros Z.[5]
2-2
Koepfer D.
Delbonis F.
6-16-4
Meligeni Alves F.
Martinez P.
6-23-0
Kopriva V.
Sachko V.
5-77-56-2
Paulson A.
Peniston R.
2-67-56-1
Ofner S.[8]
Demin Y.
6-46-756-1
Stricker D.[7]
Ivanovski K.
6-26-2
Ugo Carabelli C.
Sels J.
6-26-746-1
Barrios Vera T.
Albot R.[2]
6-36-3
Svrcina D.
Cerundolo J.[3]
6-36-1
Agamenone F.
Gaston H.[4]
7-57-5
Klein L.
Valkusz M.
6-41-66-1
Krajinovic F.[1]
Choinski J.
6-44-66-2
Moro Canas A.
Harris B.
6-23-66-0
Koepfer D.[6]
Elias G.
1-1
Mensik J.
Albot R.[1]
7-644-66-3
Fatic N.
Added D.
5-76-46-3
Laaksonen H.
Stricker D.[2]
7-54-66-1
Sachko V.
Geerts M.
6-16-1
Svajda Z.
Couacaud E.[5]
6-46-1
Furness E.
Kolar Z.
6-46-3
Kicker N.
Dzumhur D.[7]
6-37-63
Andreozzi G.
Rincon D.
6-46-4
Hardt N.
Gaio F.
6-26-4
Klein L.[4]
Demin Y.
7-56-1
Gombos N.[3]
Molleker R.
6-46-4
Llamas Ruiz P.
Vesely J.
6-47-5
Santillan A.
Tseng C.[8]
6-36-0
Mochizuki S.
Vrbensky M.
7-56-3
Erhard M.
Maestrelli F.
7-605-76-3
Vacherot V.[8]
Kivattsev K.
6-46-4
Kodat T.
Hemery C.
6-41-66-2
Nicod J.
Barton H.
1-66-36-2
Vrbensky M.
Jorda Sanchis D.
6-37-5
Paulson A.
Cias P.
6-46-4
Forejtek J.
Barranco Cosano J.
6-43-66-4
Laaksonen H.
Bourgue M.[7]
4-67-636-2
Mena F.
Lopez Montagud C.
7-56-3
Giustino L.
Jianu F.
6-46-3
Chazal M.
Gengel M.
6-26-2
Gomez F.
Squire H.[6]
4-66-46-3
Sousa J.[5]
Royer V.
6-46-1
Darderi L.[3]
Janvier M.
6-36-777-65
Debru G.
Neumayer L.[1]
2-66-36-4
Molleker R.[4]
Rosol L.
6-36-4
Nicod J.
Barton H.
1-66-36-2