John Millman vs Enzo Couacaud — Mauthausen CH Round of 16

Mauthausen CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
AUS1
John Millman
37 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWLWLLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 2 May 2022
clay
FRA
Enzo Couacaud
31 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLWLLLWWL
Millman J.
6-2 7-6
Couacaud E.
Millman J.
6772
Couacaud E.
2620

John Millman defeated Enzo Couacaud 6-2 7-6 in the Mauthausen CH round of 16 on clay. The result followed the form book — John Millman came in leading the head-to-head 1–0. John Millman extended the head-to-head to 2–0.

Key context

  • Match story: John Millman closed it out in two sets, 6–2 7–6.

Head to head

1–0
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2015-06-29WimbledonQ3grassJohn Millman1-6 6-3 6-3 6-2

Serve vs return

This season
Millman J.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Couacaud E.

Couacaud E.serving78% hold

wins 62% of points on serve vs Millman J.

Even serve battle

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
Millman J.Couacaud E.
1st serve in·Slight edge
63%
56%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
68%
73%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
54%
49%
Service points won·Even
63%
63%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Even
61%
60%
Aces / match·Dominant
3.4
6.6
Double faults / match·Dominant
1.4
3.2

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (60 vs 184). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Millman J.Couacaud E.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
70
47
Break points saved·Clear edge
95
79
Break points won·Dominant
64
29
Deciding sets·Slight edge
70
77
Tiebreaks·Dominant
74
29

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Millman J.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Couacaud E.
6.0
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0
H2H
5.0
3.2
Surface form
3.7
0.0Lost last 4
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
8.7
Minutes 14d
8.3
7.0
3-set count
7.0
Prev. match
8.0
Context
5.0
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
Final
Rodionov J.
Lehecka J.[2]
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Rodionov J.
Valkusz M.
6-26-4
Lehecka J.[2]
Novak D.[8]
6-26-3
Quarter-finals
Rodionov J.
Balazs A.
6-43-0
Lehecka J.[2]
Albot R.[5]
6-16-4
Novak D.[8]
Miedler L.
6-766-17-65
Valkusz M.
Millman J.[1]
6-41-66-3
R16
Novak D.[8]
Melzer G.
2-66-30-0
Rodionov J.
Galan D.[3]
7-56-1
Lehecka J.[2]
Misolic F.
6-46-4
Albot R.[5]
Shevchenko A.
2-66-37-69
Miedler L.
Serdarusic N.
7-646-2
Valkusz M.
Kolar Z.[7]
7-646-3
Millman J.[1]
Couacaud E.
6-27-62
Balazs A.
Celikbilek A.
7-603-0
R32
Misolic F.
Rola B.
6-34-66-2
Miedler L.
Gerasimov E.[9]
7-56-4
Serdarusic N.
Fatic N.
7-656-4
Melzer G.
Gojo B.
6-46-3
Novak D.[8]
Masur D.
6-36-4
Rodionov J.
Lacko L.
6-16-0
Galan D.[3]
Hassan B.
6-33-66-3
Kolar Z.[7]
Agamenone F.
1-66-46-3
Couacaud E.
Stebe C.
6-26-1
Millman J.[1]
Sanchez Izquierdo N.
6-34-66-2
Lehecka J.[2]
Skatov T.
6-736-36-4
Balazs A.
Sabanov M.
6-46-4
Shevchenko A.
Neumayer L.
2-66-36-0
Albot R.[5]
Kovalik J.
6-46-0
Celikbilek A.
Moraing M.[6]
4-66-34-2
Valkusz M.
Dzumhur D.
5-2