Holger Rune vs Maxime Cressy — Monte Carlo Masters Qualifying Round 2

Monte Carlo Masters · ATP · Qualifying Round 2
Holger Rune
DEN14
Holger Rune
#81ATP
1757ELO
1729Clay ELO
$0YTD
$16MCAREER
23 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLWWWLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 11 April 2022
clay
USA6
Maxime Cressy
#1472ATP
29 yrs · 201 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLLLL
Rune H.
6-3 7-5
Cressy M.
Rune H.
672
Cressy M.
350

Holger Rune defeated Maxime Cressy 6-3 7-5 in the Monte Carlo Masters qualifying round 2 on clay. The result followed the form book — Holger Rune came in ranked #81, leading the head-to-head 2–1, defending last year's round of 64. Holger Rune extended the head-to-head to 3–1.

Key context

  • Match story: Holger Rune closed it out in two sets, 6–3 7–5.

Head to head

2–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2023-06-19Queen's ClubR32grassHolger Rune7-6(4) 7-6(3)
2023-02-06MontpellierSFhardMaxime Cressy7-5 6-7(3) 7-6(4)
2023-01-16Australian OpenR64hardHolger Rune7-5 6-4 6-4

Serve vs return

This season
Rune H.serving90% hold

wins 70% of points on serve vs Cressy M.

Cressy M.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Rune H.

Serve-dominated — both hold easily, expect tiebreaks

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
Rune H.Cressy M.
1st serve in·Even
62%
61%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
73%
79%
2nd serve points won·Even
54%
51%
Service points won·Even
66%
68%
Return points won·Even
36%
32%
Break points saved·Even
65%
64%
Aces / match·Dominant
5.9
13.4
Double faults / match·Dominant
3.2
9.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (200 vs 180). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Rune H.Cressy M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
91
24
Break points saved·Even
99
96
Break points won·Dominant
84
2
Deciding sets·Dominant
98
32
Tiebreaks·Dominant
99
8

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Rune H.
7.1
Strong advantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Cressy M.
5.4
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
7.5
Surface form
2.3
9.05-match win streak
Win streak
0.0Lost last 5
Fatigue & Travel
5.8
Minutes 14d
8.5
7.0
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
7.0
Surface transition
6.0
Context
6.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Weather
16°CClear
Wind 11 km/hHumidity 40%
Q2
Ruusuvuori E.[11]
Cobolli F.
4-66-46-3
Zapata Miralles B.
Sousa J.[13]
6-47-68
Munar J.[10]
Otte O.[7]
6-06-786-2
Rune H.[14]
Cressy M.[6]
6-37-5
Baez S.[4]
Majchrzak K.[9]
6-14-66-1
Dellien H.
Daniel T.
6-46-796-3
Lehecka J.
Bonzi B.[1]
6-46-3
Q1
Otte O.[7]
Vacherot V.
6-47-63
Zapata Miralles B.
Kwon S.[3]
6-756-46-2
Munar J.[10]
Nys H.
6-26-2
Rune H.[14]
Albot R.
6-26-3
Lehecka J.
Laaksonen H.[12]
6-706-46-2
Cobolli F.
Gaston H.[2]
6-46-2
Cressy M.[6]
Van Assche L.
6-36-4
Sousa J.[13]
Taberner C.
6-16-1
Dellien H.
Mannarino A.[5]
6-14-67-5
Baez S.[4]
Cecchinato M.
6-746-17-66
Ruusuvuori E.[11]
Mager G.
6-37-5
Daniel T.
Millman J.[8]
6-26-3
Bonzi B.[1]
Travaglia S.
6-36-3
Majchrzak K.[9]
Ymer M.
6-24-66-4