James Kent Trotter and Daniel Cukierman will play each other in the 2nd round of the Indian Wells 1 Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Wednesday at 10:00 am on PC6. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is James Kent Trotter who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, James Kent Trotter is the pick to win this match.
James Kent Trotter -> 1.46
Daniel Cukierman -> 2.59
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
To be able to watch live streaming bet365, a funded account is required or you need to have placed a bet in the last 24 hours. 18+ BeGambleAware.
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 James Kent Trotter vs. Daniel Cukierman
There is no head to head record between James Kent Trotter and Daniel Cukierman since this will be the first time that they will fight against each other in the main tour.
James Kent Trotter
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 18-12 | 11-6 | 1-3 | 6-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 19-13 | 15-10 | 0-1 | 4-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 21-11 | 15-7 | 0-0 | 6-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 459, Kent Trotter got to the 2nd round after beating Aidan Mayo 7-65 6-2.
In the 1st round, The Japanese had a good straight sets win against Mayo (7-65 6-2). During the match, Kent Trotter scored 72 points vs Mayo’s 60. Kent Trotter was very aggressive to blast 31 winners.
Talking about the service games, Kent Trotter made 14 aces and he committed only 9 double faults. James Kent Trotter lost the serve once and he saved 4 break points. Furthermore, Kent Trotter put 49% of his first serves in, winning 89% (31/35) of the points behind his 1st serve and 47% (17/36) on the 2nd serve. The Japanese broke Mayo 3 times after converting 43% of his break points (3/7).
Kent Trotter has a winning record in the last 7 years having won 58% of his matches (50-36). 1-0 on hard in 2024. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this event, Kent Trotter has a compiled34-22 win-loss record in the last 7 years on hard.
James has a composed 1-0 win-loss record in 2024, 1-0 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Indian Wells 1 Challenger
Kent Trotter has never competed in this tournament before.
Daniel Cukierman
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 14-11 | 2-2 | 12-8 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 34-25 | 17-11 | 6-5 | 11-9 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 49-28 | 39-14 | 5-7 | 5-6 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 23-13 | 3-4 | 20-8 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 16-7 | 9-6 | 1-0 | 6-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 486, Cukierman reached the 2nd round after beating Vasek Pospisil 3-6 6-1 6-4.
In the 1st round against Pospisil, Daniel recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (3-6 6-1 6-4). During the match Cukierman scored 94 points vs Pospisil’s 87. The Israeli was quite aggressive to blast 36 winners.
Talking about serving, Cukierman was unable to score even 1 ace for the entire match and he committed only 8 double faults. Daniel Cukierman lost the serve 3 times and he saved 1 break points. Furthermore, Cukierman put 65% of his first serves in, winning 68% (36/53) of the points behind his 1st serve and 46% (13/28) on the 2nd serve. Daniel broke Pospisil 5 times after converting 36% of his break points (5/14).
Daniel has an overall 1-0 win-loss record in 2024, 1-0 on hard (See FULL STATS).
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Kent Trotter | Cukierman |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 1 |
| Tot Set | 2 | 3 |
| Tot Games | 21 | 26 |
| Pts | 72-60 | 94-87 |
| Total Points | 132 | 181 |
| Winners | 31 | 36 |
| %Winners | 43% | 38% |
Both Kent Trotter and Cukierman played 1 match. At the moment, Daniel Cukierman lost 1 set while James Kent Trotter hasn’t dropped a set so far. Kent Trotter has played 1 set(s) less than Cukierman (2 vs 3). Therefore, Kent Trotter played 5 games less than Cukierman. The Japanese scored 31 winners (43% of the total points). On the other side, The Israeli struck 36 winners (38%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Kent Trotter | Cukierman |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 14 | 0 |
| Avg per match | 14 | 0 |
| 1st in | 35/71 | 53/81 |
| %1st in | 49% | 65% |
| 1st pts | 31/35 | 36/53 |
| %1st pts | 89% | 68% |
| 2nd pts | 17/36 | 13/28 |
| %2nd pts | 47% | 46% |
Kent Trotter blasted 14 aces . Cukierman didn’t manage to fire a single ace to far. Kent Trotter won 89% points behind his first serve. He pretty solid on his second serve to win 47% of the points. On the other side, Cukierman won 68% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 46% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Kent Trotter | Cukierman |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 3 | 5 |
| Converted | 3/7 | 5/14 |
| % Converted | 43% | 36% |
| Conceded | 5 | 4 |
| Saved | 4 | 1 |
| % Saved | 80% | 25% |
| Times Broken | 1 | 3 |
Kent Trotter broke his opponent 3 times with a 43% conversion rate. James surrendered his serve once and he saved 80% of the break points that he conceded. Daniel broke his opponent 5 times with a 36% conversion rate. The Israeli conceded his serve 3 times and he saved 25% of the break points that he conceded.
| Kent Trotter | |||
| R1 Mayo |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 7-65 6-2 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 21 | 21 | |
| pts | 72-60 | 72-60 | |
| Total points | 132 | 132 | |
| Winners | 31 | 31 | |
| %Winners | 43% | 43% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 14 | 14 | |
| Double Faults | 9 | 9 | |
| 1st in | 35/71 | 35/71 | |
| % 1st in | 49% | 49% | |
| 1st pts | 31/35 | 31/35 | |
| % 1st pts | 89% | 89% | |
| 2nd pts | 17/36 | 17/36 | |
| % 2nd pts | 47% | 47% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/7 | 3/7 | |
| Converted % | 43% | 43% | |
| Conceded | 5 | 5 | |
| Saved | 4/5 | 4 | |
| Saved % | 80% | 80% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 | |
| Cukierman | |||
| R1 Pospisil |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 3-6 6-1 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 26 | 26 | |
| pts | 94-87 | 94-87 | |
| Total points | 181 | 181 | |
| Winners | 36 | 36 | |
| %Winners | 38% | 38% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 0 | 0 | |
| Double Faults | 8 | 8 | |
| 1st in | 53/81 | 53/81 | |
| % 1st in | 65% | 65% | |
| 1st pts | 36/53 | 36/53 | |
| % 1st pts | 68% | 68% | |
| 2nd pts | 13/28 | 13/28 | |
| % 2nd pts | 46% | 46% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 5 | 5 | |
| Converted | 5/14 | 5/14 | |
| Converted % | 36% | 36% | |
| Conceded | 4 | 4 | |
| Saved | 1/4 | 1 | |
| Saved % | 25% | 25% | |
| Times Broken | 3 | 3 | |
Head 2 Head
WWWWWLWWLW
LLLWLWWWWL Tennis Scores in Indian Wells 1 Challenger
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Matias SotoSoto (6-4 7-63) – See score progression
- Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti – Yshai OlielOliel (6-3 6-1) – See score progression
- Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski – Bruno KuzuharaKuzuhara (6-3 7-66) – See score progression
- Nishesh BasavareddyBasavareddy – Murphy CassoneCassone (6-2 6-2) – See score progression
- Stefan KozlovKozlov – Gabriel DebruDebru (6-1 3-6 6-2) – See score progression
- Brandon HoltHolt – Blaise BicknellBicknell (6-2 5-7 6-2) – See score progression
- Learner TienTien – Maxwell MckennonMckennon (6-2 3-6 6-0) – See score progression
- Paul JubbJubb – Patrick BradyBrady (6-3 6-0) – See score progression
- Omni KumarKumar – Federico GaioGaio (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Strong KirchheimerKirchheimer – Ajeet RaiRai (6-2 5-2) – See score progression
- Tim HandelHandel – James TracyTracy (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Daniel CukiermanCukierman – Vasek PospisilPospisil (3-6 6-1 6-4) – See score progression
- Ryan SeggermanSeggerman – Evan ZhuZhu (7-5 6-2) – See score progression
- Benjamin LockLock – Lucas GerchGerch (6-3 6-1) – See score progression
- James Kent TrotterKent Trotter – Aidan MayoMayo (7-65 6-2) – See score progression
- Giovanni OradiniOradini – Sebastian FanselowFanselow (6-3 7-61) – See score progression
- Paul JubbJubb – Patrick BradyBrady (6-3 6-0) – See score progression
- Stefan KozlovKozlov – Gabriel DebruDebru (6-1 3-6 6-2) – See score progression
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Matias SotoSoto (6-4 7-6(3)) – See score progression
- Learner TienTien – Maxwell MckennonMckennon (6-2 3-6 6-0) – See score progression
- Strong KirchheimerKirchheimer – Ajeet RaiRai (6-2 5-2) – See score progression
- Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski – Bruno KuzuharaKuzuhara (6-3 7-6(6)) – See score progression
- Tim HandelHandel – James TracyTracy (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Benjamin LockLock (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski – Tim HandelHandel (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Strong KirchheimerKirchheimer – Brandon HoltHolt (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Paul JubbJubb – Stefan KozlovKozlov (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Omni KumarKumar – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Ryan SeggermanSeggerman – Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- James Kent TrotterKent Trotter – Daniel CukiermanCukierman (0-0) – H2H and prediction
