Luca Nardi and Marc Polmans will face off in the quarter of the Guangzhou Challenger for the 3rd time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Friday at 1:30 pm on COURT 1. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Luca Nardi who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Luca Nardi is the pick to win this match.
Luca Nardi -> 1.533
Marc Polmans -> 2.39
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 Luca Nardi vs. Marc Polmans
This will be the 3rd time that Luca Nardi and Marc Polmans clash against each other. The head to head is 2-0 for Nardi (see full H2H stats), but they have never competed against each other on hard.
The last time that they competed against each other, Nardi won 6-2 6-4 in the quarter in the Kobe Challenger back in 2023.
Luca Nardi
20 - 19win/loss
92
70
WWWWWLLWWW | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 31-27 | 13-14 | 8-5 | 9-4 | 1-4 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 41-36 | 20-10 | 8-13 | 12-12 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 33-20 | 5-2 | 11-10 | 17-8 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 33-24 | 3-3 | 26-13 | 4-8 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 9-9 | 7-2 | 1-2 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 90, Luca got to the quarter after beating Jie Cui 6-4 3-6 7-6(4) and Kris Van Wyk 6-2 7-6(4).
In the 2nd round, The Italian had a good straight sets win against Van Wyk (6-2 7-64). During the match, Nardi scored 75 points vs Van Wyk’s 62. The Italian was quite aggressive to blast 31 winners.
Regarding the service games, Nardi made 2 aces and he committed only 2 double faults. Overall, Luca Nardi was very efficient on serve to win 72% (31/43) of his 1st serve and 56% (14/25) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve twice. The Italian broke Van Wyk 4 times after converting 50% of his break points (4/8).
Overall Performance in this tournament
Luca has lost 1 set in this event to conquer 52% of the points he played.
Nardi has a winning win-loss record in the last 7 years having won 56% of his matches (141-112). 11-9 on hard in 2024. Regarding his performance on the same surface of this competition, Nardi has a compiled46-26 match record in the last 7 years on hard.
His best result of the current season was conquering the title the Naples Challenger where he defeated Pierre-Hugues Herbert in the final 5-7 7-6(3) 6-2.
The Italian has a compiled 20-19 win-loss record in 2024, 11-9 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Guangzhou Challenger
Luca has never competed in this tournament before.
Marc Polmans
16 - 22win/loss
321
116
LLWLWWWLWW | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 24-28 | 18-18 | 4-4 | 0-1 | 2-5 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 50-35 | 32-23 | 14-9 | 2-1 | 2-2 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 18-13 | 14-12 | 0-0 | 4-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 15-28 | 1-6 | 8-13 | 2-6 | 4-3 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 11-16 | 2-6 | 5-4 | 4-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 202, the Australian got to the quarter after beating Vadym Ursu 7-5 6-1 and Paul Jubb 6-3 6-1.
In the 2nd round, The Australian had a good straight sets win against Jubb (6-3 6-1). During the match Polmans scored 57 points vs Jubb’s 35. Marc was very aggressive to blast 26 winners.
Talking about serving, Polmans managed to score 6 aces and he committed only 3 double faults. Marc Polmans was very effective on serve to win 79% (26/33) of his 1st serve and 67% (8/12) on the second serve. This was the main reason for not conceding a single break during the match. Polmans broke Jubb 4 times after converting 67% of his break points (4/6).
Overall Performance in this tournament
The Australian hasn’t dropped yet a set in the tournament to win 60% of the points he played.
Polmans’s best result of the current season was getting to the semifinal in the Sarasota Challenger.
Marc has a compiled 16-22 win-loss record in 2024, 10-13 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Guangzhou Challenger
Previously, his best result was reaching the final in 2023. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament (main draw)
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Nardi | Polmans |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 2 | 2 |
| Tot Set | 5 | 4 |
| Tot Games | 53 | 35 |
| Pts | 192-176 | 128-84 |
| Total Points | 368 | 212 |
| Winners | 75 | 58 |
| %Winners | 39% | 45% |
Both Nardi and Polmans played 2 matches. At the moment, Luca Nardi dropped 1 set while Marc Polmans hasn’t conceded a set so far. Nardi has played 1 set more than Polmans (5 vs 4). Therefore, Nardi played 18 games more than Polmans. Luca scored 75 winners (39% of the total points). On the other side, The Australian blasted 58 winners (45%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Nardi | Polmans |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 9 | 11 |
| Avg per match | 4.5 | 5.5 |
| 1st in | 99/168 | 78/106 |
| %1st in | 59% | 74% |
| 1st pts | 75/99 | 58/78 |
| %1st pts | 76% | 74% |
| 2nd pts | 35/69 | 18/28 |
| %2nd pts | 51% | 64% |
Nardi scored 9 aces (4.5 per match). Polmans scored 11 aces (5.5 per match). Nardi won 76% points behind his first serve. He pretty solid on his second serve to win 51% of the points. On the other side, Polmans won 74% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 64% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Nardi | Polmans |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 7 | 8 |
| Converted | 7/17 | 8/16 |
| % Converted | 41% | 50% |
| Conceded | 15 | 5 |
| Saved | 10 | 4 |
| % Saved | 67% | 80% |
| Times Broken | 5 | 1 |
The Italian broke his opponents 7 times with a 41% conversion rate. Luca conceded his serve 5 times and he saved 67% of the break points that he conceded. Polmans broke his opponents 8 times with a 50% conversion rate. The Australian conceded his serve once and he saved 80% of the break points that he conceded.
| Nardi | ||||
| R1 Cui |
R2 Van |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 3-6 7-64 | 6-2 7-64 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 | 5 | |
| Tot Games | 32 | 21 | 53 | |
| pts | 117-114 | 75-62 | 192-176 | |
| Total points | 231 | 137 | 368 | |
| Winners | 44 | 31 | 75 | |
| %Winners | 38% | 41% | 39% | |
| SERVE | ||||
| Aces | 7 | 2 | 9 | |
| Double Faults | 6 | 2 | 8 | |
| 1st in | 56/100 | 43/68 | 99/168 | |
| % 1st in | 56% | 63% | 59% | |
| 1st pts | 44/56 | 31/43 | 75/99 | |
| % 1st pts | 79% | 72% | 76% | |
| 2nd pts | 21/44 | 14/25 | 35/69 | |
| % 2nd pts | 48% | 56% | 51% | |
| Breaks | ||||
| Won | 3 | 4 | 7 | |
| Converted | 3/9 | 4/8 | 7/17 | |
| Converted % | 33% | 50% | 41% | |
| Conceded | 6 | 9 | 15 | |
| Saved | 3/6 | 7/9 | 10 | |
| Saved % | 50% | 78% | 64% | |
| Times Broken | 3 | 2 | 5 | |
| Polmans | ||||
| R1 Ursu |
R2 Jubb |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 7-5 6-1 | 6-3 6-1 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | 4 | |
| Tot Games | 19 | 16 | 35 | |
| pts | 71-49 | 57-35 | 128-84 | |
| Total points | 120 | 92 | 212 | |
| Winners | 32 | 26 | 58 | |
| %Winners | 45% | 46% | 45% | |
| SERVE | ||||
| Aces | 5 | 6 | 11 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1st in | 45/61 | 33/45 | 78/106 | |
| % 1st in | 74% | 73% | 74% | |
| 1st pts | 32/45 | 26/33 | 58/78 | |
| % 1st pts | 71% | 79% | 74% | |
| 2nd pts | 10/16 | 8/12 | 18/28 | |
| % 2nd pts | 63% | 67% | 64% | |
| Breaks | ||||
| Won | 4 | 4 | 8 | |
| Converted | 4/10 | 4/6 | 8/16 | |
| Converted % | 40% | 67% | 50% | |
| Conceded | 5 | 0 | 5 | |
| Saved | 4/5 | 0/0 | 4 | |
| Saved % | 80% | – | 40% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 0 | 1 | |
Head 2 Head
WWWWWLLWWW
LLWLWWWLWW 
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Mikhail KukushkinKukushkin – Federico Agustin GomezAgustin Gomez (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Christopher O ConnellO Connell – Radu AlbotAlbot (1-2) – H2H and prediction
- Marc PolmansPolmans – (0-2) – H2H and prediction
- Sho ShimabukuroShimabukuro – Terence AtmaneAtmane (1-0) – H2H and prediction
