Taro Daniel vs Brandon Holt — Fairfield CH Round of 32

Fairfield CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Taro Daniel
JPN4
Taro Daniel
#194ATP
1567ELO
1512Hard ELO
33 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLWWWWWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 7 October 2019
hard
USA
Brandon Holt
#657ATP
1537ELO
1507Hard ELO
28 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLLLLWW
Daniel T.
6-1 6-4
Holt B.
Daniel T.
662
Holt B.
140

Taro Daniel defeated Brandon Holt 6-1 6-4 in the Fairfield CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Taro Daniel came in ranked #194, leading the head-to-head 1–0. Taro Daniel extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2023-02-27AcapulcoQ2hardTaro Daniel4-6 6-4 6-0

Serve vs return

This season
Daniel T.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Holt B.

Holt B.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Daniel T.

Serve advantage — Holt B.

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Statistics

This season
Daniel T.Holt B.
1st serve in·Slight edge
60%
66%
1st serve points won·Even
69%
69%
2nd serve points won·Even
52%
51%
Service points won·Even
62%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Even
61%
61%
Aces / match·Slight edge
4.1
4.9
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.1
1.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 199). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Daniel T.Holt B.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
42
58
Break points saved·Slight edge
93
85
Break points won·Slight edge
37
31
Deciding sets·Dominant
18
79
Tiebreaks·Clear edge
81
69

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Freshness

Recent load
Daniel T.Holt B.
Freshness·
59
—

Daniel T.: 1 day rest · 4 matches, 83 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-slowfavours grinders
SlowFast
Final
Oconnell C.[12]
Johnson S.[1]
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Oconnell C.[12]
King K.
6-37-62
Johnson S.[1]
Nakashima B.
3-66-16-2
Quarter-finals
Nakashima B.
Daniel T.[4]
7-657-65
Oconnell C.[12]
Draper J.
6-26-3
King K.
Polansky P.[8]
6-37-610
Johnson S.[1]
King D.[9]
6-16-1
R16
Nakashima B.
Duckworth J.[6]
7-657-5
King D.[9]
Rola B.[5]
6-46-2
Polansky P.[8]
Kuhn N.[10]
6-46-4
Johnson S.[1]
King E.
6-36-2
Draper J.
Young D.[17]
6-37-61
King K.
Kudla D.[2]
6-26-3
Oconnell C.[12]
Gomez E.[7]
6-16-2
Daniel T.[4]
Cressy M.[16]
1-67-626-3
R32
King D.[9]
Korda S.
5-76-07-5
Oconnell C.[12]
Quiroz R.
6-36-4
Young D.[17]
Sarkissian A.
2-66-46-0
Kuhn N.[10]
Pervolarakis M.
6-42-66-0
Kudla D.[2]
Svajda Z.
6-13-66-4
King K.
Escobedo E.[15]
7-56-4
Polansky P.[8]
Ritschard A.
6-35-76-4
Draper J.
Sock J.[14]
3-67-626-3
Gomez E.[7]
Mejia N.
6-46-3
Duckworth J.[6]
Corwin F.
6-757-56-0
Nakashima B.
Novikov D.
6-26-4
Daniel T.[4]
Holt B.
6-16-4
Rola B.[5]
Velotti A.
6-16-4
King E.
Krueger M.[13]
7-55-77-64
Johnson S.[1]
Mmoh M.
7-646-4
Cressy M.[16]
Aragone J.
7-646-2
R64
Quiroz R.
Gerch L.
6-36-3
Aragone J.
Smith R.
7-646-4
Draper J.
Rybakov A.
6-12-67-5
Sarkissian A.
Peniston R.
6-26-3
Corwin F.
Peliwo F.
6-16-3
Svajda Z.
Redlicki M.
7-656-2
King K.
Celikbilek A.
6-46-3
Pervolarakis M.
Verbeek S.
6-36-3
Ritschard A.
Bangoura S.
6-46-4
Mejia N.
Leshem E.
2-66-16-4
Nakashima B.
Blanch U.
6-26-4
Holt B.
Altamirano C.
6-26-2
Velotti A.
Sinclair C.
6-767-646-4
Korda S.
Fanselow S.
6-47-64
King E.
Kirchheimer S.
6-756-36-4
Mmoh M.
Zhu E.
6-46-3