Tjen vs Kudermetova Prediction: Guangzhou 2026 Round of 32
Tjen's higher ranking separates the players most clearly, but Kudermetova's return record makes the Guangzhou matchup less straightforward.
Janice Tjen faces Polina Kudermetova in Guangzhou's round of 32. Her higher ranking is the clearest separator, with Court Shark's model giving Tjen a 60% chance to win.
A place in the next round
The round of 32 at Guangzhou offers Polina Kudermetova and Janice Tjen a place in the last sixteen on Tuesday. Tjen's higher ranking is the clearest distinction before a match in which recent results offer little support for a strong favorite. The separation is real, but limited.
This hard-court meeting gives Tjen an opportunity to end a two-match losing run, while Kudermetova arrives after a defeat that followed three consecutive wins. Neither enters with an unbroken run of success to defend. For Tjen, the task is to turn her stronger ranking into a result; for Kudermetova, it is to extend the better stretch that preceded her latest loss. They have never met, so there is no direct history to establish whether this particular opponent suits either player.
Ways to win
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Every way the match can finish. The likeliest single result is Janice Tjen in straight sets (41%).
| Result | Chance |
|---|---|
| Polina Kudermetova wins 2-0 | 24% |
| Polina Kudermetova wins 2-1 | 16% |
| Janice Tjen wins 2-1 | 19% |
| Janice Tjen wins 2-0 | 41% |
Tjen's ranking is the clearest separator
Tjen stood at No. 46, while Kudermetova was No. 105. That is the strongest broad distinction between players whose immediate results do not otherwise point consistently toward the same favorite in this matchup. Ranking favors Tjen. It establishes a stronger overall position, though it does not by itself explain how she wins on this surface.
The service records provide a narrower tennis explanation for that advantage: Tjen held 71% of her service games on hard courts, compared with Kudermetova's 67%. Those figures cover the past year rather than just their latest tournaments. My reading is that Tjen has the more dependable starting point on serve, which supports the ranking-based preference without making it decisive. The distinction matters because holding more consistently can reduce the number of successful return games she needs, but the return records complicate that picture.
Kudermetova's return offers a route through
Kudermetova broke serve in 34% of her return games on hard courts over the same window, against Tjen's 26%. That reverses the service comparison and gives the underdog a concrete way to challenge the favorite's apparent advantage. The return favors Kudermetova. If she can regularly threaten Tjen's service games, the ranking difference becomes less useful as a guide to this match.
Recent results also resist a simple preference for Tjen: Kudermetova went 5-5 in her latest matches, while Tjen went 4-6. Their recent hard-court records matched those overall records, so the surface did not produce a separate form advantage for Tjen.
Kudermetova's latest appearance ended in retirement against Elena Rybakina in Ningbo. That leaves a fitness question, but the result alone does not establish its cause or whether it affects this match. Her ability to complete the match without restriction is a concrete condition behind any upset case.
The prediction
Court Shark's model favors Tjen with a 60% win probability, while the market consensus has her at 61%. The two assessments are close. Both favor the higher-ranked player despite Kudermetova's slightly better recent results, rather than identifying an overwhelming favorite in this first meeting between them.
Explore this matchup
Compare both players side by side: recent results, surfaces, serve and return.
Player comparison
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Each measure on the same scale: recent wins, wins on this surface, head-to-head wins and the model's chance.
| Measure | Polina Kudermetova | Janice Tjen |
|---|---|---|
| Wins, last 10 matches | 50% (5-5) | 40% (4-6) |
| Wins, last 10 on hard | 50% (5-5) | 40% (4-6) |
| Model win probability | 40% | 60% |
Recent form
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Each player's most recent completed matches, up to 10, oldest on the left.
| Player | Date | Result | Opponent | Score | Event |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polina Kudermetova | Aug 24, 2026 | L | Linda Fruhvirtova | 1-6 3-6 | US Open |
| Polina Kudermetova | Sep 21, 2026 | L | Kamilla Rakhimova | 6-7(4) 6-4 5-7 | Seoul |
| Polina Kudermetova | Sep 30, 2026 | W | Ye Xin Ma | 6-7(2) 6-3 6-2 | Beijing |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 2, 2026 | W | Clara Tauson | 6-4 4-6 6-4 | Beijing |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 4, 2026 | L | Mirra Andreeva | 4-6 1-6 | Beijing |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 10, 2026 | L | Katie Volynets | 2-6 1-6 | Wuhan |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 17, 2026 | W | Mananchaya Sawangkaew | 6-3 6-4 | WTA Ningbo |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 18, 2026 | W | Anastasia Zakharova | 6-3 6-3 | WTA Ningbo |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 20, 2026 | W | Cristina Bucsa | 7-6(5) 6-2 | WTA Ningbo |
| Polina Kudermetova | Oct 22, 2026 | L | Elena Rybakina | 0-5 RET | WTA Ningbo |
| Janice Tjen | Aug 25, 2026 | L | Yuliia Starodubtseva | 4-6 3-6 | Monterrey |
| Janice Tjen | Sep 1, 2026 | L | Mirra Andreeva | 2-6 2-6 | US Open |
| Janice Tjen | Sep 13, 2026 | W | Darja Vidmanova | 7-6(6) 6-2 | Guadalajara |
| Janice Tjen | Sep 16, 2026 | L | Sloane Stephens | 6-7(4) 6-7(3) | Guadalajara |
| Janice Tjen | Sep 30, 2026 | W | Anhelina Kalinina | 2-6 7-5 6-4 | Beijing |
| Janice Tjen | Oct 2, 2026 | L | Diana Shnaider | 0-6 4-6 | Beijing |
| Janice Tjen | Oct 12, 2026 | W | Aoi Ito | 6-3 6-1 | Wuhan |
| Janice Tjen | Oct 14, 2026 | W | Daria Snigur | 7-5 6-3 | Wuhan |
| Janice Tjen | Oct 15, 2026 | L | Ann Li | 1-6 6-7(1) | Wuhan |
| Janice Tjen | Oct 19, 2026 | L | Ashlyn Krueger | 4-6 4-6 | WTA Osaka |
Win rate by surface
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Share of matches won on each surface across each player's last 50 matches with full statistics.
| Surface | Polina Kudermetova | Janice Tjen |
|---|---|---|
| Hard | 50% (11-11) | 49% (18-19) |
| Clay | 67% (16-8) | 33% (2-4) |
| Grass | Too few matches (4) | 29% (2-5) |
Serve and return on hard courts
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
How often each player held serve and broke serve on hard over their last 50 matches with full statistics, against the tour's all-years average on the surface.
| Measure | Polina Kudermetova | Janice Tjen | Tour average, all years |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service games held | 64% | 72% | 63% |
| Return games broken | 33% | 26% | 37% |
| Matches in sample | 22 | 37 |
Model and market on Polina Kudermetova
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Polina Kudermetova's chance as the market consensus priced it from the opening line, next to the Court Shark model.
| Reading | Polina Kudermetova | Janice Tjen |
|---|---|---|
| Opening consensus | 39% | 61% |
| Latest consensus | 39% | 61% |
| Court Shark model | 40% | 60% |
Model win probability
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
The Court Shark model's chance for each player to win this match.
| Player | Win probability | Recent form (last 10) |
|---|---|---|
| Polina Kudermetova | 40% | 5-5 |
| Janice Tjen | 60% | 4-6 |
How long it could go
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
A 53% chance the match lasts 18 to 27 games; 21 is the middle of the range.
| Total games | Chance |
|---|---|
| 13 | 0.8% |
| 14 | 2.1% |
| 15 | 4.3% |
| 16 | 6.5% |
| 17 | 8.6% |
| 18 | 8.7% |
| 19 | 8.3% |
| 20 | 7.4% |
| 21 | 5.3% |
| 22 | 6.5% |
| 23 | 4.2% |
| 24 | 1.8% |
| 25 | 3.5% |
| 26 | 3.9% |
| 27 | 3.5% |
| 28 | 3.8% |
| 29 | 4.0% |
| 30 | 3.8% |
| 31 | 3.6% |
| 32 | 3.1% |
| 33 | 2.0% |
| 34 | 1.5% |
| 35 | 1.5% |
| 36 | 0.7% |
| 38 | 0.3% |
Service games held: where they stand
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Each dot is one of the WTA top 100 with enough matches in the last 52 weeks. Polina Kudermetova ranks ahead of 1 of 64; Janice Tjen is 31st of 64.
| Player | Service games held | Place |
|---|---|---|
| Polina Kudermetova | 58.6% | Ahead of 1 of 64 |
| Janice Tjen | 69.9% | 31st of 64 |
| Field median | 69.8% | |
| Field best (Elena Rybakina) | 82.7% | 1st |
Two years of form
Article snapshot, Oct 26, 2026 · Not live
Each player's pre-match Elo rating since Dec 28, 2024. Latest: Janice Tjen 1701 (Oct 15, 2026), Polina Kudermetova 1665 (Oct 10, 2026).
| Player | Start of window | Two-year peak | Latest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Polina Kudermetova | 1522 (Dec 28, 2024) | 1705 (Jun 10, 2026) | 1665 (Oct 10, 2026) |
| Janice Tjen | 1500 (Feb 26, 2025) | 1815 (Jan 7, 2026) | 1701 (Oct 15, 2026) |
Court Shark win probabilities are statistical estimates, not advice. No outcome is guaranteed.
Methodology and sources
How we build model estimates and where our information comes from.
Model estimates and observed results
The win probabilities come from the Court Shark match model, trained on completed ATP and WTA matches. A probability says how often a player in this position wins, not that one result will happen. The model's number for a match is recorded before play and never changed afterwards, so it can be checked against the result.
Sources and citations
Results, scores, rankings and serve statistics come from the Court Shark match database. The market consensus is the pre-match price for each player converted to a probability. Figures in this article are a snapshot taken when it was written.
Limitations
Serve and return rates count only matches with full serve statistics, which are sparser for Challenger and lower-level events, and the tour average they are compared with covers every year on record. Head-to-head records count every meeting with a recorded winner, walkovers and retirements included. Charts and tables are a snapshot and do not update after publication.
About the desk
Who works on the Tennis Desk and how an article is put together. Read about the desk
Editorial standards
What we publish, what we check and how we decide what is fit to print. Read our standards
Corrections
Spotted an error? Write to hello@courtshark.ai and we will correct it and note the change. Read the corrections policy