Matteo Gigante and Chak Lam Coleman Wong will fight against each other in the qualifications of the U.S. Open for the 2nd time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Thursday at 2:00 pm on Court 16. 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 Matteo Gigante who should win in 5 sets.
Matteo Gigante -> 1.86
Chak Lam Coleman Wong -> 1.9
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
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 Matteo Gigante vs. Chak Lam Coleman Wong
This will be the 2nd time that Matteo Gigante and Chak Lam Coleman Wong clash against each other. The head to head is 1-0 for Gigante (see full H2H stats), but they have never competed against each other on hard.
The last time that they competed against each other, Gigante won 6-1 3-6 7-6(4) in the qualifications in the Nottingham 2 Challenger back in June 2025.
Matteo Gigante
26 - 21win/loss
148
125
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 27-23 | 9-9 | 15-8 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 41-25 | 27-10 | 11-10 | 2-4 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 32-29 | 10-5 | 19-18 | 1-5 | 2-1 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 38-20 | 9-1 | 27-15 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 21-15 | 2-2 | 16-7 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 131, Gigante reached the qualifications after beating Edas Butvilas 3-6 6-4 6-2.
In the qualifications against Butvilas, Gigante recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (3-6 6-4 6-2). During the match, Gigante scored 87 points vs Butvilas’s 83. Matteo was quite aggressive to blast 29 winners.
Regarding the service games, Gigante couldn’t to score even 1 ace and he committed only 8 double faults. Matteo Gigante lost the serve 4 times and he saved 6 break points. Furthermore, Gigante put 48% of his first serves in, winning 74% (29/39) of the points behind his 1st serve and 47% (20/43) on the 2nd serve. Matteo broke Butvilas 5 times after converting 42% of his break points (5/12).
Gigante has a winning win-loss record in the last 7 years having won 58% of his matches (168-121). 9-7 on hard in 2025. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this tournament, Gigante has a compiled58-26 record in the last 7 years on hard.
His best result of the season was conquering the title the Rome Challenger where he overcame Vilius Gaubas in the final 6-2 3-6 6-4.
Matteo has an overall 26-20 win-loss record in 2025, 9-7 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously at the U.S. Open
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
21 - 22win/loss
143
128
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 32-30 | 20-18 | 2-6 | 4-2 | 6-4 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 41-36 | 39-26 | 0-2 | 2-4 | 0-4 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 53-27 | 42-19 | 9-7 | 2-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 24-19 | 20-12 | 3-5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 11-7 | 5-4 | 6-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 174, Chak got to the qualifications after beating Chris Rodesch 6-4 6-2.
In the qualifications, Lam Coleman Wong had a good straight sets win against Rodesch (6-4 6-2). During the match Lam Coleman Wong scored 63 points vs Rodesch’s 43. Chak was pretty aggressive to blast 24 winners.
About the serving games, Lam Coleman Wong made 5 aces and he was pretty steady in conceding no double faults for the entire match. Chak Lam Coleman Wong was exceptionally efficient on serve to win 83% (24/29) of his 1st serve and 81% (13/16) on the second serve. This was the main reason for not conceding a single break during the match. Lam Coleman Wong broke Rodesch 3 times after converting 75% of his break points (3/4).
Lam Coleman Wong has an overall 20-22 win-loss record in 2025, 11-11 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously at the U.S. Open
Previously, his best result was reaching the qualifications in 2024. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Gigante | Lam Coleman Wong |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 1 |
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 |
| Tot Games | 27 | 18 |
| Pts | 87-83 | 63-43 |
| Total Points | 170 | 106 |
| Winners | 29 | 24 |
| %Winners | 33% | 38% |
Both Gigante and Lam Coleman Wong played 1 match. Also both players started their run from the qualifications.At the moment, Matteo Gigante conceded 1 set while Chak Lam Coleman Wong hasn’t lost a set so far. Gigante has played 1 set more than Lam Coleman Wong (3 vs 2). Therefore, Gigante played 9 games more than Lam Coleman Wong. Matteo scored 29 winners (33% of the total points). On the other side, Chak bagged 24 winners (38%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Gigante | Lam Coleman Wong |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 0 | 5 |
| Avg per match | 0 | 5 |
| 1st in | 39/82 | 29/45 |
| %1st in | 48% | 64% |
| 1st pts | 29/39 | 24/29 |
| %1st pts | 74% | 83% |
| 2nd pts | 20/43 | 13/16 |
| %2nd pts | 47% | 81% |
Gigante didn’t manage to fire a single ace to far. Lam Coleman Wong scored 5 aces . Gigante won 74% points behind his first serve. He extremely effective on his second serve to win 47% of the points. On the other side, Lam Coleman Wong won 83% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 81% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Gigante | Lam Coleman Wong |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 5 | 3 |
| Converted | 5/12 | 3/4 |
| % Converted | 42% | 75% |
| Conceded | 10 | 0 |
| Saved | 6 | 0 |
| % Saved | 60% | 0% |
| Times Broken | 4 | 0 |
Matteo broke his opponent 5 times with a 42% conversion rate. Matteo lost his serve 4 times and he saved 60% of the break points that he conceded. The broke his opponent 3 times with a 75% conversion rate. Lam Coleman Wong was rock solid on his serve as he has never conceded a single service game after saving 0 break points.
| Gigante | |||
| Q1 Butvilas | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 3-6 6-4 6-2 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 27 | 27 | |
| pts | 87-83 | 87-83 | |
| Total points | 170 | 170 | |
| Winners | 29 | 29 | |
| %Winners | 33% | 33% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 0 | 0 | |
| Double Faults | 8 | 8 | |
| 1st in | 39/82 | 39/82 | |
| % 1st in | 48% | 48% | |
| 1st pts | 29/39 | 29/39 | |
| % 1st pts | 74% | 74% | |
| 2nd pts | 20/43 | 20/43 | |
| % 2nd pts | 47% | 47% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 5 | 5 | |
| Converted | 5/12 | 5/12 | |
| Converted % | 42% | 42% | |
| Conceded | 10 | 10 | |
| Saved | 6/10 | 6 | |
| Saved % | 60% | 60% | |
| Times Broken | 4 | 4 | |
| Lam Coleman Wong | |||
| Q1 Rodesch | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 6-2 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 18 | 18 | |
| pts | 63-43 | 63-43 | |
| Total points | 106 | 106 | |
| Winners | 24 | 24 | |
| %Winners | 38% | 38% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 5 | 5 | |
| Double Faults | 0 | 0 | |
| 1st in | 29/45 | 29/45 | |
| % 1st in | 64% | 64% | |
| 1st pts | 24/29 | 24/29 | |
| % 1st pts | 83% | 83% | |
| 2nd pts | 13/16 | 13/16 | |
| % 2nd pts | 81% | 81% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/4 | 3/4 | |
| Converted % | 75% | 75% | |
| Conceded | 0 | 0 | |
| Saved | 0/0 | 0 | |
| Saved % | – | 0% | |
| Times Broken | 0 | 0 | |
Tennis Scores – U.S. Open
- Giulio ZeppieriZeppieri – Hady HabibHabib (4-6 7-67 7-5) – See score progression
- Kyrian JacquetJacquet – Liam DraxlDraxl (7-5 6-2) – See score progression
- Yuta ShimizuShimizu – Sho ShimabukuroShimabukuro (6-73 6-3 6-3) – See score progression
- Benjamin HassanHassan – Tomas Barrios VeraBarrios Vera (6-2 7-63) – See score progression
- Daniel Merida AguilarMerida Aguilar – Dalibor SvrcinaSvrcina (1-6 6-3 7-5) – See score progression
- Luca Van AsscheVan Assche – Dusan LajovicLajovic (6-3 6-1) – See score progression
- Jaime FariaFaria – Rio NoguchiNoguchi (3-6 6-4 6-3) – See score progression
- Zsombor PirosPiros – Arthur BouquierBouquier (7-5 7-62) – See score progression
- Kimmer CoppejansCoppejans – Alex BarrenaBarrena (6-4 6-74 6-3) – See score progression
- Alexander BlockxBlockx – Joao Lucas Reis Da SilvaLucas Reis Da Silva (6-2 6-1) – See score progression
- Michael ZhengZheng – Yasutaka UchiyamaUchiyama (6-2 6-3) – See score progression
- Beibit ZhukayevZhukayev – Jack Pinnington JonesPinnington Jones (3-6 7-66 7-612) – See score progression
- Juan Manuel CerundoloManuel Cerundolo – Calvin HemeryHemery (6-4 6-3) – See score progression
- Henrique RochaRocha – Pierre-Hugues HerbertHerbert (6-4 6-71 6-4) – See score progression
- Ignacio BuseBuse – Lukas NeumayerNeumayer (7-62 6-75 6-1) – See score progression
- Shintaro MochizukiMochizuki – Jurij RodionovRodionov (6-2 4-6 6-2) – See score progression
- Garrett JohnsJohns – Colton SmithSmith (6-3 6-3) – See score progression
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Santiago Rodriguez TavernaRodriguez Taverna (6-3 5-7 6-1) – See score progression
- Otto VirtanenVirtanen – Benjamin WillwerthWillwerth (6-75 6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Thiago Agustin TiranteAgustin Tirante – Jack KennedyKennedy (6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Andrea CollariniCollarini – Jan ChoinskiChoinski (7-64 6-4) – See score progression
- Leandro RiediRiedi – Luka PavlovicPavlovic (6-2 7-63) – See score progression
- Martin DammDamm – Stefano TravagliaTravaglia (6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Oliver CrawfordCrawford – Alex BoltBolt (5-7 6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Yibing WuWu – Juan Pablo FicovichPablo Ficovich (6-3 6-3) – See score progression
- Bernard TomicTomic – Patrick KypsonKypson (6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Titouan DroguetDroguet – Alibek KachmazovKachmazov (6-1 4-2 ret.) – See score progression
- Zachary SvajdaSvajda – August HolmgrenHolmgren (6-2 7-61) – See score progression
- Rei SakamotoSakamoto – Tyler ZinkZink (4-6 7-5 7-68) – See score progression
- Jerome KymKym – Carlos TabernerTaberner (7-62 6-1) – See score progression
- Roman Andres BurruchagaAndres Burruchaga – Justin EngelEngel (3-6 6-3 7-5) – See score progression
- Jason Murray KublerMurray Kubler – George LoffhagenLoffhagen (6-4 7-5) – See score progression
- Francesco PassaroPassaro – Yu Hsiou HsuHsiou Hsu (6-3 1-6 6-4) – See score progression
- Fajing SunSun – Pol Martin TiffonMartin Tiffon (3-6 7-65 4-1 ret.) – See score progression
- Ugo BlanchetBlanchet – Borna GojoGojo (7-62 3-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Mikhail KukushkinKukushkin – Andrea PellegrinoPellegrino (7-64 6-3) – See score progression
- James McCabeMcCabe – Francesco MaestrelliMaestrelli (6-3 6-72 6-4) – See score progression
- Daniel Elahi GalanElahi Galan – Guy Den OudenDen Ouden (6-1 7-5) – See score progression
- Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti – Christopher EubanksEubanks (7-5 3-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Cristian GarinGarin – Yosuke WatanukiWatanuki (6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- James DuckworthDuckworth – Facundo BagnisBagnis (6-4 6-2) – See score progression
- Jesper De JongDe Jong – Vilius GaubasGaubas (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Marc-Andrea HueslerHuesler – Stefano NapolitanoNapolitano (6-3 6-72 6-4) – See score progression
- Jan-Lennard StruffStruff – Clement ChidekhChidekh (6-4 6-1) – See score progression
- Martin LandaluceLandaluce – Clement TaburTabur (6-4 6-4) – See score progression
- Taro DanielDaniel – Vitaliy SachkoSachko (6-1 7-5) – See score progression
- Arthur CazauxCazaux – Mark LajalLajal (6-4 6-1) – See score progression
- Dmitry PopkoPopko – Thiago Seyboth WildSeyboth Wild (7-64 6-3) – See score progression
- Matteo GiganteGigante – Edas ButvilasButvilas (3-6 6-4 6-2) – See score progression
- Lloyd HarrisHarris – Daniel EvansEvans (6-4 3-6 7-5) – See score progression
- Nikoloz BasilashviliBasilashvili – Gauthier OnclinOnclin (7-66 5-7 6-1) – See score progression
- Harold MayotMayot – Johannus MondayMonday (7-5 6-3) – See score progression
- Pablo Llamas RuizLlamas Ruiz – Yannick HanfmannHanfmann (1-6 6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Dino PrizmicPrizmic – Alexis GalarneauGalarneau (7-67 6-1) – See score progression
- Murphy CassoneCassone – Thiago Moura MonteiroMoura Monteiro (6-3 5-7 7-5) – See score progression
- Patrick MaloneyMaloney – Elias YmerYmer (6-3 7-63) – See score progression
- Hugo GrenierGrenier – Omar JasikaJasika (6-73 6-3 6-3) – See score progression
- Federico Agustin GomezAgustin Gomez – Lukas KleinKlein (6-2 6-4) – See score progression
- Andres MartinMartin – Viktor DurasovicDurasovic (6-2 6-3) – See score progression
- Billy HarrisHarris – James Kent TrotterKent Trotter (3-6 6-1 6-2) – See score progression
- Rodrigo Pacheco MendezPacheco Mendez – Sascha Gueymard WayenburgGueymard Wayenburg (6-72 6-3 6-1) – See score progression
- Chak Lam Coleman WongLam Coleman Wong – Chris RodeschRodesch (6-4 6-2) – See score progression
- Jay ClarkeClarke – Jack SatterfieldSatterfield (7-65 6-1) – See score progression
- Federico CinaCina – Dominic StrickerStricker (6-2 6-2) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- James DuckworthDuckworth – (2-0) – H2H and prediction
- Bernard TomicTomic – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Nikoloz BasilashviliBasilashvili – Marc-Andrea HueslerHuesler (1-1) – H2H and prediction
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Andrea CollariniCollarini (0-2) – H2H and prediction
- Taro DanielDaniel – Jan-Lennard StruffStruff (3-3) – H2H and prediction
- Christian GarinGarin – Marco TrungellitiTrungelliti (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Hugo GrenierGrenier – (1-1) – H2H and prediction
- Billy HarrisHarris – Mikhail KukushkinKukushkin (2-1) – H2H and prediction
- Fajing SunSun – Lloyd HarrisHarris (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Federico Agustin GomezAgustin Gomez – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Ugo BlanchetBlanchet – Dmitry PopkoPopko (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Zsombor PirosPiros – Thiago Agustin TiranteAgustin Tirante (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Oliver CrawfordCrawford – Garrett JohnsJohns (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Juan Manuel CerundoloManuel Cerundolo – Yuta ShimizuShimizu (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Otto VirtanenVirtanen – (2-1) – H2H and prediction
- Beibit ZhukayevZhukayev – (0-2) – H2H and prediction
- Jesper De JongDe Jong – Harold MayotMayot (1-1) – H2H and prediction
- Patrick MaloneyMaloney – Daniel Elahi GalanElahi Galan (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Francesco PassaroPassaro – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Kyrian JacquetJacquet – Jason Murray KublerMurray Kubler (0-0) – H2H and prediction