Jason Kubler vs Li Tu — Playford CH Round of 32

Playford CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
AUS5
Jason Kubler
#465ATP
1685ELO
1635Hard ELO
33 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWWWWWWLLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 24 November 2025
hard
AUS
Li Tu
#421ATP
1488ELO
1471Hard ELO
30 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
Kubler J.
6-3 6-3
Tu L.
Kubler J.
662
Tu L.
330

Jason Kubler defeated Li Tu 6-3 6-3 in the Playford CH round of 32 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Li Tu came in ranked #421, defending last year's quarter-final, but Jason Kubler had been the form player, winning 4 of their last 4 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Kubler J.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Tu L.

Tu L.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Kubler J.

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
Kubler J.Tu L.
1st serve in·Even
62%
61%
1st serve points won·Even
74%
74%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
50%
Service points won·Even
66%
65%
Return points won·Even
39%
36%
Break points saved·Even
60%
60%
Aces / match·Slight edge
6.8
8.0
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.5
3.3

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (38 vs 61). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kubler J.Tu L.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
59
27
Break points saved·Slight edge
90
82
Break points won·Dominant
46
8
Deciding sets·Dominant
79
20
Tiebreaks·Dominant
37
64

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kubler J.
6.6
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Tu L.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.8+164 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
3.2Hard Elo 1471
7.0Overall Elo 1685
ELO gap
3.0Overall Elo 1488
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
4.7
Surface form
2.3
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
4.9
Minutes 14d
8.9
4.0
3-set count
8.0
Prev. match
8.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
7.0

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.

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Hijikata R.[2]
Sweeny D.[7]
6-06-786-4
Semi-finals
Hijikata R.[2]
Bolt A.[4]
6-36-3
Sweeny D.[7]
Duckworth J.[1]
7-665-77-65
Quarter-finals
Hijikata R.[2]
Mccabe J.[6]
7-626-2
Duckworth J.[1]
Noguchi R.[8]
7-656-2
Sweeny D.[7]
Sekulic P.
6-26-4
Bolt A.[4]
Overbeck C.
7-656-4
R16
Overbeck C.
Kubler J.[5]
6-33-1
Sekulic P.
Tomic B.[3]
3-67-646-4
Sweeny D.[7]
Shiraishi H.
6-26-4
Bolt A.[4]
Marinkov P.
6-37-5
Mccabe J.[6]
Polmans M.
6-27-63
Duckworth J.[1]
Singh K.
6-46-1
Noguchi R.[8]
Moriya H.
6-46-4
Hijikata R.[2]
Sach T.
6-36-2
R32
Marinkov P.
Ellis B.
2-66-36-4
Duckworth J.[1]
Imamura M.
6-36-2
Singh K.
Isomura K.
5-76-46-3
Noguchi R.[8]
Delaney J.
6-26-4
Tomic B.[3]
Gengel M.
6-26-3
Sekulic P.
Hewitt C.
7-56-2
Shiraishi H.
Matsuda R.
6-43-67-5
Sweeny D.[7]
Bass F.
3-66-16-3
Kubler J.[5]
Tu L.
6-36-3
Bolt A.[4]
Bouzige M.
6-46-2
Polmans M.
Matsuoka H.
4-66-46-1
Sach T.
Wu T.
7-53-66-2
Hijikata R.[2]
Kumasaka T.
6-26-0
Moriya H.
Langmo C.
6-46-3
Overbeck C.
Dellavedova M.
3-67-56-2
Mccabe J.[6]
Bicknell B.
6-46-1