Li Tu and James Kent Trotter will square off in the 2nd round of the Lexington Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Thursday at 1:30 pm on STADIUM 1. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Li Tu who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Li Tu is the pick to win this match.
Li Tu -> 1.74
James Kent Trotter -> 2.02
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 Li Tu vs. James Kent Trotter
There is no head to head record between Li Tu and James Kent Trotter since this will be the first time that they will square off in the main tour.
Li Tu
21 - 17win/loss
174
172
LWWLWWWWLW | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 43-28 | 37-21 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 4-5 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 38-32 | 29-19 | 0-3 | 3-6 | 6-4 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 50-25 | 34-16 | 15-6 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 41-7 | 28-4 | 0-0 | 13-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 222, Tu reached the 2nd round after beating Taha Baadi 1-6 6-2 6-4.
In the 1st round against Baadi, Li recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (1-6 6-2 6-4). During the match, Tu scored 75 points vs Baadi’s 74. The Australian was very aggressive to blast 32 winners.
Talking about the service games, Tu struck 6 aces and he committed only 1 double fault. Li Tu lost the serve 3 times and he saved 3 break points. Furthermore, Tu put 58% of his first serves in, winning 68% (32/47) of the points behind his 1st serve and 53% (18/34) on the 2nd serve. Tu broke Baadi 3 times after converting 43% of his break points (3/7).
Tu has a solid match record in the last 5 years having won 65% of his matches (149-82). 15-11 on hard in 2024. In connection with his performance on the same surface of this event, Tu has a composed106-50 win-loss record in the last 5 years on hard.
Li’s best result of the current year was reaching the final in M25 Traralgon.
Li has a compiled 20-17 win-loss record in 2024, 15-11 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Lexington Challenger
James Kent Trotter
25 - 17win/loss
193
182
LWWWLWWWWW | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 41-23 | 19-12 | 1-3 | 21-7 | 0-1 | 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. 322, James reached the 2nd round after beating Ozan Baris 6-1 6-4, Yusuke Takahashi 4-6 6-2 6-1 and Tung-Lin Wu 6-3 6-4.
In the 1st round, James had a good straight sets win against Wu (6-3 6-4). During the match Kent scored 64 points vs Wu’s 56. The Japanese was extremely aggressive to blast 31 winners.
About the serving games, Kent made 7 aces and he committed only 5 double faults. Overall, James Kent Trotter was extremely effective on serve to win 72% (31/43) of his 1st serve and 54% (14/26) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve once. Kent broke Wu 3 times after converting 43% of his break points (3/7).
His best result of the year was winning the title the Tyler Challenger where he defeated Brandon Holt in the final 6-2 7-6(3).
Kent has an overall 25-16 win-loss record in 2024, 18-9 on hard (See FULL STATS).
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Tu | Kent |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 3 |
| Tot Set | 3 | 7 |
| Tot Games | 25 | 61 |
| Pts | 75-74 | 203-164 |
| Total Points | 149 | 367 |
| Winners | 32 | 90 |
| %Winners | 43% | 44% |
Tu played 1 match while Kent competed in 3 matches. Kent started his run from the qualifications while Tu had a direct access to the main draw. Both players lost a set in the event. Li Tu lost 1 set, while James Kent Trotter dropped 1 set. Tu has played 4 set(s) less than Kent (3 vs 7). Therefore, Tu played 36 games less than Kent. The Australian scored 32 winners (43% of the total points). On the other side, Kent fired 90 winners (44%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Tu | Kent |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 6 | 19 |
| Avg per match | 6 | 6.3 |
| 1st in | 47/81 | 116/198 |
| %1st in | 58% | 59% |
| 1st pts | 32/47 | 90/116 |
| %1st pts | 68% | 78% |
| 2nd pts | 18/34 | 46/82 |
| %2nd pts | 53% | 56% |
Tu recorded 6 aces . Kent scored 19 aces (6.3 per match). Tu won 68% points behind his first serve. He pretty solid on his second serve to win 53% of the points. On the other side, Kent won 78% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 56% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Tu | Kent |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 3 | 10 |
| Converted | 3/7 | 10/15 |
| % Converted | 43% | 67% |
| Conceded | 6 | 6 |
| Saved | 3 | 4 |
| % Saved | 50% | 67% |
| Times Broken | 3 | 2 |
Li broke his opponent 3 times with a 43% conversion rate. Tu surrendered his serve 3 times and he saved 50% of the break points that he conceded. The Japanese broke his opponents 10 times with a 67% conversion rate. The Japanese conceded his serve twice and he saved 67% of the break points that he conceded.
| Tu | |||
| R1 Baadi |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 1-6 6-2 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 25 | 25 | |
| pts | 75-74 | 75-74 | |
| Total points | 149 | 149 | |
| Winners | 32 | 32 | |
| %Winners | 43% | 43% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 6 | 6 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 1 | |
| 1st in | 47/81 | 47/81 | |
| % 1st in | 58% | 58% | |
| 1st pts | 32/47 | 32/47 | |
| % 1st pts | 68% | 68% | |
| 2nd pts | 18/34 | 18/34 | |
| % 2nd pts | 53% | 53% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/7 | 3/7 | |
| Converted % | 43% | 43% | |
| Conceded | 6 | 6 | |
| Saved | 3/6 | 3 | |
| Saved % | 50% | 50% | |
| Times Broken | 3 | 3 | |
| Kent | |||||
| Q1 Baris |
Q3 Takahashi |
R1 Wu |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-1 6-4 | 4-6 6-2 6-1 | 6-3 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7 | |
| Tot Games | 17 | 25 | 19 | 61 | |
| pts | 58-42 | 81-66 | 64-56 | 203-164 | |
| Total points | 100 | 147 | 120 | 367 | |
| Winners | 26 | 33 | 31 | 90 | |
| %Winners | 45% | 41% | 48% | 44% | |
| SERVE | |||||
| Aces | 3 | 9 | 7 | 19 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 6 | 5 | 12 | |
| 1st in | 33/50 | 40/79 | 43/69 | 116/198 | |
| % 1st in | 66% | 51% | 62% | 59% | |
| 1st pts | 26/33 | 33/40 | 31/43 | 90/116 | |
| % 1st pts | 79% | 83% | 72% | 78% | |
| 2nd pts | 11/17 | 21/39 | 14/26 | 46/82 | |
| % 2nd pts | 65% | 54% | 54% | 56% | |
| Breaks | |||||
| Won | 3 | 4 | 3 | 10 | |
| Converted | 3/4 | 4/4 | 3/7 | 10/15 | |
| Converted % | 75% | 100% | 43% | 67% | |
| Conceded | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | |
| Saved | 0/0 | 2/3 | 2/3 | 4 | |
| Saved % | – | 67% | 67% | 134% | |
| Times Broken | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
Head 2 Head
LWWLWWWWLW
LWWWLWWWWW Tennis Scores in Lexington Challenger
- Micah BraswellBraswell – Bernard TomicTomic (w/o) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Chak Lam Coleman WongLam Coleman Wong – Andres AndradeAndrade (4-6 6-1 6-2) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Joao FonsecaFonseca – Liam DraxlDraxl (7-63 7-5) – Stats, scores, rankings
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Li TuTu – James Kent TrotterKent Trotter (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Omni KumarKumar – Emilio NavaNava (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Gabriel DialloDiallo – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Micah BraswellBraswell – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
