Camilo Ugo Carabelli vs Hugo Dellien — Lima CH Round of 32

Lima 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 — 0
Sets
Monday, 6 November 2023
clay
Hugo Dellien
BOL6
Hugo Dellien
#144ATP
1637ELO
1624Clay ELO
$217kYTD
$3.1MCAREER
33 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWWWWLLLLL
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-4 6-1
Dellien H.
Ugo Carabelli C.
662
Dellien H.
410

Camilo Ugo Carabelli defeated Hugo Dellien 6-4 6-1 in the Lima CH round of 32 on clay. The result followed the form book — Camilo Ugo Carabelli came in ranked #58, leading the head-to-head 1–0, defending the title. Camilo Ugo Carabelli extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2024-02-12Buenos AiresQ2clayCamilo Ugo Carabelli4-6 7-6(3) 6-3

Serve vs return

This season
Ugo Carabelli C.serving66% hold

wins 56% of points on serve vs Dellien H.

Dellien H.serving68% hold

wins 57% 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.Dellien H.
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.Dellien H.
1st serve in·Slight edge
63%
71%
1st serve points won·Even
67%
66%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
51%
Service points won·Even
60%
62%
Return points won·Even
41%
40%
Break points saved·Even
60%
62%
Aces / match·Even
2.7
2.3
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.4
1.4

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Ugo Carabelli C.Dellien H.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
78
61
Break points saved·Even
90
89
Break points won·Dominant
62
32
Deciding sets·Slight edge
96
91
Tiebreaks·Dominant
72
47

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Ugo Carabelli C.
7.1
Strong advantageUmpiry Score
Dellien H.
6.6
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.6+117 Clay Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.4Clay Elo 1624
6.6Overall Elo 1759
ELO gap
3.4Overall Elo 1637
2.8
H2H
7.2
6.8
Surface form
7.9
Fatigue & Travel
3.9
Minutes 14d
4.5
4.0
3-set count
0.0
9.0
Prev. match
9.0
Context
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.Dellien H.
Freshness·Dominant
100
51

Ugo Carabelli C.: 15 days rest · Dellien H.: 2 days rest · 5 matches, 126 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Guillen Meza A.
Bicknell B.
7-636-1
Darderi L.
Navone M.
4-66-37-5
Semi-finals
Bicknell B.
Dellien Velasco M.[4]
3-67-666-3
Guillen Meza A.
Olivo R.[2]
7-57-5
Darderi L.
Tabilo A.
7-54-66-3
Navone M.
Comesana F.[8]
3-66-36-2
Quarter-finals
Guillen Meza A.
Huertas Del Pino A.
6-25-76-4
Bicknell B.
Buse I.
3-67-626-4
Olivo R.[2]
Bueno G.[8]
4-66-36-3
Dellien Velasco M.[4]
Lama G.[6]
6-27-66
Navone M.
Andreozzi G.
6-22-2
Tabilo A.
Burruchaga R.
6-27-5
Darderi L.
Varillas J.[1]
6-766-36-0
Comesana F.[8]
Galan D.[3]
6-46-4
R16
Huertas Del Pino A.
Reis Da Silva J.[3]
7-52-66-2
Dellien Velasco M.[4]
Sakamoto P.
5-76-06-0
Bueno G.[8]
Andrade A.
6-36-2
Buse I.
Vallejo A.
7-57-64
Bicknell B.
Ficovich J.[1]
7-54-66-3
Olivo R.[2]
Villanueva G.
0-66-36-4
Guillen Meza A.
Heide G.[5]
6-22-67-64
Lama G.[6]
Otegui J.
7-686-4
Andreozzi G.
Huertas Del Pino A.
6-25-76-4
Comesana F.[8]
Ymer E.
6-44-66-4
Tabilo A.
Huertas Del Pino C.
6-36-4
Burruchaga R.
Lavagno E.
6-36-0
Varillas J.[1]
Reis Da Silva J.
6-26-0
Darderi L.
Ugo Carabelli C.
6-46-2
Navone M.
Guillen Meza A.
6-36-2
Galan D.[3]
Giannessi A.
6-46-3
R32
Heide G.[5]
Monzon I.
6-06-736-1
Andrade A.
Aboian L.
6-36-4
Otegui J.
Franco Descotte M.
6-36-4
Olivo R.[2]
Huertas Del Pino C.
3-67-57-5
Villanueva G.
Prado Angelo J.
6-31-67-5
Sakamoto P.
Justo G.
6-47-65
Dellien Velasco M.[4]
Alves M.
6-12-66-0
Ficovich J.[1]
Farjat T.
6-17-61
Huertas Del Pino A.
Kuzuhara B.
6-41-66-3
Vallejo A.
Boscardin Dias P.
6-26-4
Reis Da Silva J.[3]
Leite W.
6-16-3
Buse I.
Dutra Da Silva D.[7]
3-66-36-2
Bicknell B.
Lilov V.
6-26-4
Guillen Meza A.
Aboian V.
6-16-2
Bueno G.[8]
Cossu M.
6-26-3
Lama G.[6]
Panta Herreros J.
6-746-47-5
Reis Da Silva J.
Vacherot V.
6-36-0
Varillas J.[1]
Meligeni Alves F.
7-646-786-4
Navone M.
Coria F.[2]
6-47-64
Guillen Meza A.
Buse I.
6-726-36-4
Andreozzi G.
Cerundolo J.[7]
6-36-3
Galan D.[3]
Alves M.
3-66-17-65
Huertas Del Pino C.
Diaz Acosta F.[5]
6-26-2
Darderi L.
Feldbausch K.
6-43-67-5
Ymer E.
Agamenone F.
3-66-16-4
Comesana F.[8]
Pacheco Mendez R.
6-46-2
Lavagno E.
Barrios Vera T.[4]
6-42-66-3
Ugo Carabelli C.
Dellien H.[6]
6-46-1
Giannessi A.
Roca Batalla O.
1-66-36-2
Tabilo A.
Vallejo A.
6-46-1
Burruchaga R.
Pucinelli De Almeida M.
6-16-2
Huertas Del Pino A.
Crawford O.
7-56-0