Jerome Kym vs Titouan Droguet — Lille CH Quarter-final

Lille CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
SUI
Jerome Kym
#196ATP
1599ELO
1591Hard ELO
$89kYTD
$731kCAREER
23 yrs · 198 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWWLWWLWL
2 — 1
Sets
Monday, 16 February 2026
hard
Titouan Droguet
FRA6
Titouan Droguet
#116ATP
1717ELO
1650Hard ELO
$273kYTD
$1.1MCAREER
25 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWWWLLWWWL
Kym J.
6-4 5-7 6-2
Droguet T.
Kym J.
6562
Droguet T.
4721

Jerome Kym defeated Titouan Droguet 6-4 5-7 6-2 in the Lille CH quarter-final on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Titouan Droguet came in ranked #116.

Key context

  • Match story: Jerome Kym closed it out in three sets, 6–4 5–7 6–2.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Kym J.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Droguet T.

Droguet T.serving92% hold

wins 72% of points on serve vs Kym 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
Kym J.Droguet T.
1st serve in·Even
62%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
77%
76%
2nd serve points won·Even
53%
56%
Service points won·Even
68%
68%
Return points won·Even
35%
36%
Break points saved·Even
60%
64%
Aces / match·Even
8.5
9.0
Double faults / match·Even
1.8
1.6

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (12 vs 31). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kym J.Droguet T.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
37
64
Break points saved·Even
91
88
Break points won·Even
21
17
Deciding sets·Dominant
17
93
Tiebreaks·Even
83
87

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kym J.
5.3
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Droguet T.
6.9
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
4.5Hard Elo 1591
Surface ELO
5.5+59 Hard Elo edge
4.0Overall Elo 1599
ELO gap
6.0Overall Elo 1717
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
2.0
Surface form
8.2
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
9.1
Minutes 14d
3.4
3-set count
0.0
Context
6.0
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
Kym J.Droguet T.
Freshness·Slight edge
64
69

Kym J.: 1 day rest · 3 matches, 72 games (7d) · Droguet T.: 1 day rest · 3 matches, 61 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Van Assche L.[7]
Blockx A.[4]
6-26-4
Semi-finals
Blockx A.[4]
Kym J.
6-37-64
Van Assche L.[7]
Kouame M.
6-16-1
Quarter-finals
Kouame M.
Basavareddy N.
6-36-3
Kym J.
Droguet T.[6]
6-45-76-2
Blockx A.[4]
Bonzi B.[8]
6-36-4
Van Assche L.[7]
Chidekh C.
6-26-3
R16
Kym J.
Landaluce M.
6-46-3
Bonzi B.[8]
Engel J.
6-26-2
Kouame M.
Schwaerzler J.
6-36-4
Basavareddy N.
Gaston H.[3]
6-46-1
Chidekh C.
Gueymard Wayenburg S.
7-657-64
Droguet T.[6]
Skatov T.
7-666-2
Blockx A.[4]
Bouquier A.
6-17-63
Van Assche L.[7]
Kukushkin M.
6-36-2
R32
Landaluce M.
Misolic F.[1]
6-11-1
Kouame M.
Dodig M.
6-46-2
Droguet T.[6]
Sachko V.
6-04-66-3
Blockx A.[4]
Safiullin R.
6-26-2
Bonzi B.[8]
Glinka D.
6-46-4
Schwaerzler J.
Goffin D.[5]
4-66-36-4
Chidekh C.
Fearnley J.[2]
6-32-66-2
Kym J.
Harris L.
5-77-666-4
Gaston H.[3]
Ofner S.
6-23-66-4
Van Assche L.[7]
Riedi L.
3-67-626-4
Kukushkin M.
Zeppieri G.
6-36-1
Basavareddy N.
Blanchet U.
6-26-2
Skatov T.
Hemery C.
6-16-3
Gueymard Wayenburg S.
Holmgren A.
6-37-5
Bouquier A.
Coppejans K.
7-50-67-5
Engel J.
Massard L.
7-656-3