Colton Smith and James McCabe will square off in the 2nd round of the Nottingham 2 Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Wednesday at 1:30 pm on COURT 3. In the following paragraphs, you can find the head to head analysis and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Colton Smith who should win in 2 sets.
As per the initial odds, Colton Smith is the pick to win this match.
Colton Smith -> 1.32
James McCabe -> 3.15
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.
Prediction and head to head Colton Smith vs. James McCabe
There is no head to head record between Colton Smith and James McCabe since this will be the first time that they will fight against each other in the main tour.
Colton Smith
20 - 8win/loss
134
134
LWLWWWLWLL | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 23-10 | 5-3 | 4-2 | 5-0 | 9-5 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 34-11 | 22-7 | 0-0 | 12-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 5-4 | 4-2 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 146, the American reached the 2nd round after beating Yosuke Watanuki 7-5 4-6 6-3, James Kent Trotter 6-3 3-6 6-3 and Marco Trungelliti 6-2 4-6 6-3.
In the 1st round, Colton defeated Trungelliti (6-2 4-6 6-3). During the match, Smith scored 104 points vs Trungelliti’s 82. Colton was extremely aggressive to blast 46 winners.
Talking about the service games, Smith struck 8 aces and he was exceptionally consistent in conceding no double faults. Colton Smith lost the serve 3 times and he saved 7 break points. Furthermore, Smith put 71% of his first serves in, winning 69% (46/67) of the points behind his 1st serve and 54% (15/28) on the 2nd serve. The American broke Trungelliti 5 times after converting 50% of his break points (5/10).
Smith has a fantastic match record in the last 4 years having won 72% of his matches (59-23). 6-3 on grass in 2025. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this event, Smith has a composed6-3 win-loss record in the last 4 years on grass.
His best result of the season was winning the title the Cleveland Challenger where he beat Eliot Spizzirri in the final 6-4 6-7(6) 6-3.
Colton has an overall 20-8 win-loss record in 2025, 6-3 on grass (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Nottingham 2 Challenger
The American has never competed in this tournament before.
James McCabe
17 - 18win/loss
181
176
WLWWWLWWWL | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 21-20 | 14-14 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 7-4 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 55-35 | 47-28 | 1-2 | 1-1 | 6-4 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 29-27 | 24-14 | 2-6 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 39-27 | 30-19 | 9-8 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 17-5 | 17-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 183, the Australian got to the 2nd round after beating Harold Mayot 6-3 6-2, Chris Rodesch 3-6 6-3 7-6(2) and George Loffhagen 6-3 7-6(4).
In the 1st round, James had a good straight sets win against Loffhagen (6-3 7-64). During the match McCabe scored 83 points vs Loffhagen’s 71. James was pretty aggressive to blast 41 winners.
Talking about serving, McCabe scored 12 aces and he committed only 4 double faults. James McCabe was exceptionally efficient on serve to win 82% (41/50) of his 1st serve and 52% (15/29) on the second serve. This was the main reason for not conceding a single break during the match. James broke Loffhagen once after converting 17% of his break points (1/6).
James’s best result of the year was reaching the semifinal in the Bengaluru Challenger.
The Australian has an overall 17-18 win-loss record in 2025, 3-2 on grass (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Nottingham 2 Challenger
Previously, his best result was reaching the qualifications in 2024. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Smith | McCabe |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 2 | 3 |
| Tot Set | 6 | 7 |
| Tot Games | 58 | 70 |
| Pts | 205-168 | 231-200 |
| Total Points | 373 | 431 |
| Winners | 92 | 111 |
| %Winners | 45% | 48% |
Smith played 2 matches while McCabe competed in 3 matches. Both players lost a set in the event. Colton Smith dropped 2 sets, while James McCabe dropped 1 set. Smith has played 1 set(s) less than McCabe (6 vs 7). Therefore, Smith played 12 games less than McCabe. Colton scored 92 winners (45% of the total points). On the other side, McCabe scored 111 winners (48%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Smith | McCabe |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 15 | 24 |
| Avg per match | 7.5 | 8 |
| 1st in | 127/184 | 140/217 |
| %1st in | 69% | 65% |
| 1st pts | 92/127 | 111/140 |
| %1st pts | 72% | 79% |
| 2nd pts | 34/57 | 40/77 |
| %2nd pts | 60% | 52% |
Smith recorded 15 aces (7.5 per match). McCabe blasted 24 aces (8 per match). Smith won 72% points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 60% of the points. On the other side, McCabe won 79% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 52% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Smith | McCabe |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 7 | 7 |
| Converted | 7/15 | 7/17 |
| % Converted | 47% | 41% |
| Conceded | 13 | 13 |
| Saved | 9 | 10 |
| % Saved | 69% | 77% |
| Times Broken | 4 | 3 |
The American broke his opponents 7 times with a 47% conversion rate. The American lost his serve 4 times and he saved 69% of the break points that he conceded. James broke his opponents 7 times with a 41% conversion rate. McCabe conceded his serve 3 times and he saved 77% of the break points that he conceded.
| Smith | |||||
| Q1 Watanuki |
Q3 Kent |
R1 Trungelliti |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 7-5 4-6 6-3 | 6-3 3-6 6-3 | 6-2 4-6 6-3 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | |
| Tot Games | 31 | 27 | 27 | 85 | |
| pts | 101-86 | – | 104-82 | 205-168 | |
| Total points | 187 | 0 | 186 | 373 | |
| Winners | 46 | 46 | 92 | ||
| %Winners | 46% | 0% | 44% | 45% | |
| SERVE | |||||
| Aces | 7 | 0 | 8 | 15 | |
| Double Faults | 2 | 0 | 2 | ||
| 1st in | 60/89 | / | 67/95 | 127/184 | |
| % 1st in | 67% | 0% | 71% | 69% | |
| 1st pts | 46/60 | / | 46/67 | 92/127 | |
| % 1st pts | 77% | 0% | 69% | 72% | |
| 2nd pts | 19/29 | / | 15/28 | 34/57 | |
| % 2nd pts | 66% | 0% | 54% | 60% | |
| Breaks | |||||
| Won | 2 | 5 | 7 | ||
| Converted | 2/5 | / | 5/10 | 7/15 | |
| Converted % | 40% | 0% | 50% | 47% | |
| Conceded | 3 | 10 | 13 | ||
| Saved | 2/3 | 0/ | 7/10 | 9 | |
| Saved % | 67% | – | 70% | 46% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 3 | 4 | ||
| McCabe | |||||
| Q1 Mayot |
Q3 Rodesch |
R1 Loffhagen |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-3 6-2 | 3-6 6-3 7-62 | 6-3 7-64 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7 | |
| Tot Games | 17 | 31 | 22 | 70 | |
| pts | 57-37 | 91-92 | 83-71 | 231-200 | |
| Total points | 94 | 183 | 154 | 431 | |
| Winners | 22 | 48 | 41 | 111 | |
| %Winners | 39% | 53% | 49% | 48% | |
| SERVE | |||||
| Aces | 5 | 7 | 12 | 24 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 0 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1st in | 24/44 | 66/94 | 50/79 | 140/217 | |
| % 1st in | 55% | 70% | 63% | 65% | |
| 1st pts | 22/24 | 48/66 | 41/50 | 111/140 | |
| % 1st pts | 92% | 73% | 82% | 79% | |
| 2nd pts | 14/20 | 11/28 | 15/29 | 40/77 | |
| % 2nd pts | 70% | 39% | 52% | 52% | |
| Breaks | |||||
| Won | 3 | 3 | 1 | 7 | |
| Converted | 3/5 | 3/6 | 1/6 | 7/17 | |
| Converted % | 60% | 50% | 17% | 41% | |
| Conceded | 0 | 8 | 5 | 13 | |
| Saved | 0/0 | 5/8 | 5/5 | 10 | |
| Saved % | – | 63% | 100% | 54% | |
| Times Broken | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | |
Head 2 Head
LWLWWWLWLL
WLWWWLWWWL Tennis Scores in Nottingham 2 Challenger
- Colton SmithSmith – Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti (6-2 4-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Lloyd HarrisHarris – Valentin RoyerRoyer (7-66 6-2) – See score progression
- Tristan SchoolkateSchoolkate – Alexander BlockxBlockx (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Terence AtmaneAtmane – Matteo GiganteGigante (4-6 6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Tomas Barrios VeraBarrios Vera – James Kent TrotterKent Trotter (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Shintaro MochizukiMochizuki – Pierre-Hugues HerbertHerbert (6-4 7-67) – See score progression
- Marin CilicCilic – Hugo GrenierGrenier (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Arthur FeryFery – Fabio FogniniFognini (6-3 7-65) – See score progression
- Martin LandaluceLandaluce – Nicolai Budkov KjaerBudkov Kjaer (6-2 2-6 6-2) – See score progression
- James McCabeMcCabe – George LoffhagenLoffhagen (6-3 7-64) – See score progression
- Tristan BoyerBoyer – Mitchell KruegerKrueger (6-1 7-5) – See score progression
- Jaime FariaFaria – Brandon HoltHolt (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Jan ChoinskiChoinski – Eliot SpizzirriSpizzirri (5-7 6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Ryan PenistonPeniston – Daniel Elahi GalanElahi Galan (5-7 6-4 6-2) – See score progression
- Adrian MannarinoMannarino – Arthur CazauxCazaux (6-4 6-3) – See score progression
- Colton SmithSmith – Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti (6-2 4-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Emilio NavaNava – Jack Pinnington JonesPinnington Jones (6-3 6-7(10) 6-3) – See score progression
- Martin LandaluceLandaluce – Nicolai Budkov KjaerBudkov Kjaer (6-2 2-6 6-2) – See score progression
- Tristan SchoolkateSchoolkate – Alexander BlockxBlockx (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Lloyd HarrisHarris – Valentin RoyerRoyer (7-6(6) 6-2) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Adrian MannarinoMannarino – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Marcelo Tomas Barrios VeraTomas Barrios Vera – Tristan SchoolkateSchoolkate (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Lloyd HarrisHarris – Marin CilicCilic (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Terence AtmaneAtmane – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
