Mitchell Krueger and Ryan Seggerman will fight against each other in the 2nd round of the Tiburon Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Thursday at 10:00 am on Court 2. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Ryan Seggerman who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Ryan Seggerman is the pick to win this match.
Ryan Seggerman -> 1.65
Mitchell Krueger -> 2.08
Here where top tennis events are broadcasted or streamed online (ATP, WTA).
At the challenger level, there will be free live streaming on Challenger TV.
Â
Prediction and head to head Mitchell Krueger vs. Ryan Seggerman
There is no head to head record between Mitchell Krueger and Ryan Seggerman since this will be the first time that they will play each other in the main tour.
Mitchell Krueger
11 - 19win/loss
412
135
WLLWLWWLLL | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 11-19 | 5-11 | 4-6 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2025 | 29-32 | 12-17 | 9-7 | 7-5 | 1-3 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 42-31 | 30-17 | 9-7 | 2-6 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 29-29 | 15-19 | 4-4 | 10-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 29-28 | 18-15 | 6-5 | 1-6 | 4-2 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 412, the American got to the 2nd round after defeating Keegan Smith 7-6(1) 6-7(2) 6-4.
In the 1st round, The American defeated Smith (7-61 6-72 6-4). During the match, Krueger and Smith scored the same amount of points (116). However, the world no. 412 was stronger during the important points and that was the most significant difference in the match. Mitchell was exceptionally aggressive to blast 52 winners.
Talking about the service games, Krueger struck 5 aces and he committed only 5 double faults. Mitchell Krueger lost the serve 4 times and he saved 5 break points. Furthermore, Krueger put 70% of his first serves in, winning 60% (52/87) of the points behind his 1st serve and 55% (21/38) on the 2nd serve. Mitchell broke Smith 5 times after converting 45% of his break points (5/11).
Krueger has a unfavourable win-loss record in the last 10 years having won only 49% of his matches (266-275). 5-11 on hard in 2026. . Talking about his performance on the same surface of this competition, Krueger has a compiled 169-158 match record in the last years on hard.
The American has an aggregate 11-19 win-loss record in 2026, 5-11 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Tiburon Challenger
Previously, his best result was reaching the quarter in 2015, 2016, 2022 and 2025. See his history.
Ryan Seggerman
14 - 8win/loss
672
348
WWWLLLWLWW | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 14-8 | 4-3 | 9-4 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 2025 | 7-14 | 3-4 | 2-7 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 26-24 | 13-11 | 12-8 | 1-4 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 29-13 | 25-11 | 2-1 | 2-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 5-3 | 5-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 672, Seggerman reached the 2nd round after defeating Andrew Fenty 6-7(6) 7-5 6-2, Alex Rybakov 7-6(6) 6-3 and Aidan Mayo 1-6 6-4 6-4.
In the 1st round against Mayo, Seggerman recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (1-6 6-4 6-4).During the match Seggerman scored less points (5) than Mayo. In fact, the world no. 412 won 87 points vs Mayo’s. That means that Seggerman was more focused during the important points. Ryan was very aggressive to blast 43 winners.
Talking about serving, Seggerman bagged 15 aces and he committed only 1 double fault for the entire match. Ryan Seggerman lost the serve 4 times and he saved 7 break points. Furthermore, Seggerman put 64% of his first serves in, winning 65% (43/66) of the points behind his 1st serve and 43% (16/37) on the 2nd serve. The American broke Mayo 3 times after converting 43% of his break points (3/7).
Seggerman has a compiled 14-8 win-loss record in 2026, 4-3 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Tiburon Challenger
Seggerman has never competed in this tournament before.
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Krueger | Seggerman |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 3 |
| Tot Set | 3 | 8 |
| Tot Games | 36 | 82 |
| Pts | 116-116 | 273-255 |
| Total Points | 232 | 528 |
| Winners | 52 | 136 |
| %Winners | 45% | 50% |
Krueger played 1 match while Seggerman competed in 3 matches. Seggerman started his run from the qualifications while Krueger had a direct access to the main draw. Both players lost a set in the event. Mitchell Krueger dropped 1 set, while Ryan Seggerman surrendered 2 sets. Krueger has played 5 set(s) less than Seggerman (3 vs 8). Therefore, Krueger played 46 games less than Seggerman. The American scored 52 winners (45% of the total points). On the other side, Ryan made 136 winners (50%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Krueger | Seggerman |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 5 | 44 |
| Avg per match | 5 | 14.7 |
| 1st in | 87/125 | 178/282 |
| %1st in | 70% | 63% |
| 1st pts | 52/87 | 136/178 |
| %1st pts | 60% | 76% |
| 2nd pts | 21/38 | 51/104 |
| %2nd pts | 55% | 49% |
Krueger scored 5 aces . Seggerman made 44 aces (14.7 per match). Krueger won 60% points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 55% of the points. On the other side, Seggerman won 76% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 49% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Krueger | Seggerman |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 5 | 8 |
| Converted | 5/11 | 8/24 |
| % Converted | 45% | 33% |
| Conceded | 9 | 17 |
| Saved | 5 | 12 |
| % Saved | 56% | 71% |
| Times Broken | 4 | 5 |
Mitchell broke his opponent 5 times with a 45% conversion rate. Krueger dropped his serve 4 times and he saved 56% of the break points that he conceded. Seggerman broke his opponents 8 times with a 33% conversion rate. The American conceded his serve 5 times and he saved 71% of the break points that he conceded.
| Krueger | |||
| R1 Smith |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 7-61 6-72 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 36 | 36 | |
| pts | 116-116 | 116-116 | |
| Total points | 232 | 232 | |
| Winners | 52 | 52 | |
| %Winners | 45% | 45% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 5 | 5 | |
| Double Faults | 5 | 5 | |
| 1st in | 87/125 | 87/125 | |
| % 1st in | 70% | 70% | |
| 1st pts | 52/87 | 52/87 | |
| % 1st pts | 60% | 60% | |
| 2nd pts | 21/38 | 21/38 | |
| % 2nd pts | 55% | 55% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 5 | 5 | |
| Converted | 5/11 | 5/11 | |
| Converted % | 45% | 45% | |
| Conceded | 9 | 9 | |
| Saved | 5/9 | 5 | |
| Saved % | 56% | 56% | |
| Times Broken | 4 | 4 | |
| Seggerman | |||||
| Q1 Fenty |
Q3 Rybakov |
R1 Mayo |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-76 7-5 6-2 | 7-66 6-3 | 1-6 6-4 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| Tot Games | 33 | 22 | 27 | 82 | |
| pts | 111-99 | 75-64 | 87-92 | 273-255 | |
| Total points | 210 | 139 | 179 | 528 | |
| Winners | 60 | 33 | 43 | 136 | |
| %Winners | 54% | 44% | 49% | 50% | |
| SERVE | |||||
| Aces | 26 | 3 | 15 | 44 | |
| Double Faults | 5 | 2 | 1 | 8 | |
| 1st in | 72/113 | 40/66 | 66/103 | 178/282 | |
| % 1st in | 64% | 61% | 64% | 63% | |
| 1st pts | 60/72 | 33/40 | 43/66 | 136/178 | |
| % 1st pts | 83% | 83% | 65% | 76% | |
| 2nd pts | 18/41 | 17/26 | 16/37 | 51/104 | |
| % 2nd pts | 44% | 65% | 43% | 49% | |
| Breaks | |||||
| Won | 4 | 1 | 3 | 8 | |
| Converted | 4/8 | 1/9 | 3/7 | 8/24 | |
| Converted % | 50% | 11% | 43% | 33% | |
| Conceded | 6 | 0 | 11 | 17 | |
| Saved | 5/6 | 0/0 | 7/11 | 12 | |
| Saved % | 83% | – | 64% | 147% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 0 | 4 | 5 | |
Head 2 Head
WWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWW Tennis Scores in Tiburon Challenger
- Sebastian GorznyGorzny – Nishesh BasavareddyBasavareddy (6-2 6-4) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Michael MmohMmoh – Patrick MaloneyMaloney (7-5 6-3) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Abedallah ShelbayhShelbayh – Tristan BoyerBoyer (7-62 6-1) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Jeff WolfWolf – Braden ShickShick (6-4 6-75 6-4) – Stats, scores, rankings
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Federico Agustin GomezAgustin Gomez – (0-1) – H2H and prediction
- Jeff WolfWolf – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Ryan SeggermanSeggerman – Mitchell KruegerKrueger (0-0) – H2H and prediction
