Martin Krumich vs Jesper De Jong — Prague CH Round of 32

Prague CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
CZE
Martin Krumich
#278ATP
1459ELO
1423Clay ELO
23 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLWLWWLWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 2 May 2022
clay
Jesper De Jong
NED6
Jesper De Jong
#73ATP
1711ELO
1696Clay ELO
$612kYTD
$2.3MCAREER
26 yrs · 180 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WLWLWWWWWL
Krumich M.
7-6 7-6
De Jong J.
Krumich M.
78782
De Jong J.
66660

Martin Krumich defeated Jesper De Jong 7-6 7-6 in the Prague CH round of 32 on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Jesper De Jong came in ranked #73.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Krumich M.serving63% hold

wins 55% of points on serve vs De Jong J.

De Jong J.serving70% hold

wins 58% of points on serve vs Krumich M.

Baseline battle — serve is shaky, expect plenty of breaks

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

Serve & return on clay

Krumich M.De Jong J.
—
Serve
49
—
Return
32

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the clay field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Krumich M.De Jong J.
1st serve in·Even
59%
59%
1st serve points won·Even
68%
72%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
50%
Service points won·Even
59%
63%
Return points won·Even
41%
40%
Break points saved·Even
60%
59%
Aces / match·Clear edge
3.9
5.6
Double faults / match·Even
2.9
3.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (122 vs 199). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Krumich M.De Jong J.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
24
56
Break points saved·Clear edge
70
90
Break points won·Clear edge
53
37
Deciding sets·Dominant
9
69
Tiebreaks·Dominant
22
57

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Krumich M.
4.1
Heavy underdogUmpiry Score
De Jong J.
7.3
Strong advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
1.1Clay Elo 1423
Surface ELO
8.9+272 Clay Elo edge
1.6Overall Elo 1459
ELO gap
8.4Overall Elo 1711
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
0.0
Surface form
5.2
0.0Lost last 3
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
7.4
Minutes 14d
6.5
7.0
3-set count
4.0
9.0
Prev. match
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.

Freshness

Recent load
Krumich M.De Jong J.
Freshness·Slight edge
67
78

Krumich M.: 1 day rest · 4 matches, 88 games (7d) · De Jong J.: 1 day rest · 1 match, 25 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Slowlow bounce, long rallies
SlowFast
Final
Ofner S.
Svrcina D.
6-06-4
Cachin P.[5]
Giustino L.
6-37-64
Krutykh O.[2]
Gerch L.
6-36-726-2
Semi-finals
Svrcina D.
Machac T.[6]
W/O
Ofner S.
Tseng C.[3]
7-51-66-1
Cachin P.[5]
Blancaneaux G.
2-66-26-3
Giustino L.
Kuzmanov D.
7-644-66-2
Gerch L.
Domingues J.
6-44-66-3
Krutykh O.[2]
Mensik J.
7-56-3
Quarter-finals
Ofner S.
Forejtek J.
6-27-65
Tseng C.[3]
Barranco Cosano J.
2-66-37-63
Machac T.[6]
Rosol L.
7-636-0
Svrcina D.
Giustino L.
6-04-1
Blancaneaux G.
Tabur C.
6-06-1
Cachin P.[5]
Fabbiano T.
6-36-3
Giustino L.
Gaio F.[8]
6-33-67-67
Kuzmanov D.
Marterer M.
6-16-0
Krutykh O.[2]
Moreno De Alboran N.[8]
6-43-67-68
Gerch L.
Gigante M.
7-56-2
Domingues J.
Navone M.
7-636-3
Mensik J.
Cuevas M.
7-56-2
R16
Forejtek J.
Altmaier D.[1]
6-16-4
Rosol L.
Moraing M.[2]
4-66-36-4
Machac T.[6]
Furness E.
3-67-656-4
Svrcina D.
Krutykh O.
6-36-4
Barranco Cosano J.
Novak D.[5]
7-692-66-3
Ofner S.
Rodionov J.[8]
6-17-66
Giustino L.
Nava E.
5-77-657-64
Tseng C.[3]
Miedler L.
6-26-2
Marterer M.
Krumich M.
6-36-1
Giustino L.
Donati M.
6-16-3
Blancaneaux G.
Rosol L.
1-66-27-63
Fabbiano T.
Peniston R.
6-14-66-0
Gaio F.[8]
Forejtek J.
7-652-67-5
Tabur C.
Kopriva V.[4]
6-26-4
Kuzmanov D.
Borges N.[2]
6-17-5
Cachin P.[5]
Furness E.
6-06-3
Moreno De Alboran N.[8]
Collignon R.
7-55-77-5
Cuevas M.
Gengel M.
6-06-1
Mensik J.
Rosol L.
6-26-4
Navone M.
Squire H.[5]
7-56-1
Gigante M.
Vrbensky M.
6-26-3
Krutykh O.[2]
Nouza P.
6-36-4
Domingues J.
Sachko V.[3]
7-57-5
Gerch L.
Andreev A.
6-46-4
R32
Furness E.
Muller A.
6-23-0
Tseng C.[3]
Moro Canas A.
6-46-4
Barranco Cosano J.
Domingues J.
6-21-66-2
Moraing M.[2]
Marterer M.
6-43-67-611
Nava E.
Pouille L.[4]
6-36-1
Novak D.[5]
Karlovskiy E.
7-646-766-4
Miedler L.
Lamasine T.
2-66-26-3
Rodionov J.[8]
Haase R.
6-16-4
Altmaier D.[1]
Krumich M.
5-77-56-4
Giustino L.
Peniston R.
6-26-3
Forejtek J.
Tiurnev E.
6-36-756-4
Ofner S.
Lestienne C.
6-26-2
Krutykh O.
Popko D.[9]
6-46-1
Svrcina D.
Ionel N.
6-36-4
Rosol L.
Horansky F.
7-656-1
Machac T.[6]
Vrbensky M.
6-33-1
Rosol L.
Sachko V.
6-30-0
Marterer M.
Paulson A.
7-627-66
Borges N.[2]
Bonadio R.
6-26-4
Forejtek J.
Gerch L.
7-54-66-3
Blancaneaux G.
Ficovich J.[7]
6-46-3
Tabur C.
Purcell M.
6-46-3
Peniston R.
Vukic A.[1]
6-16-3
Donati M.
Uchida K.
2-66-46-3
Fabbiano T.
Oliel Y.
2-66-36-2
Kopriva V.[4]
Basic M.
6-36-2
Kuzmanov D.
Marchenko I.
6-16-3
Cachin P.[5]
Svrcina D.
6-36-1
Gaio F.[8]
Michalski D.
6-36-1
Giustino L.
Copil M.
3-67-627-5
Krumich M.
De Jong J.[6]
7-667-66
Furness E.
Ofner S.
7-633-2
Krutykh O.[2]
Copil M.
6-14-67-65
Collignon R.
Gautier A.
6-46-1
Cuevas M.
Krumich M.
2-66-36-3
Squire H.[5]
Neumayer L.
6-16-4
Navone M.
Fils A.
6-46-1
Domingues J.
Vocel M.
6-36-1
Sachko V.[3]
Dellien Velasco M.
6-26-1
Gerch L.
Ilkel C.[7]
6-46-2
Vrbensky M.
De Schepper K.
7-57-65
Gigante M.
Burruchaga R.
7-652-66-2
Moreno De Alboran N.[8]
Moro Canas A.
6-33-67-5
Gengel M.
Roca Batalla O.[4]
6-46-746-3
Andreev A.
Rosenkranz M.
6-36-3
Nouza P.
Cornea V.
6-36-736-2
Mensik J.
Menendez Maceiras A.
6-34-0
Rosol L.
Kirkin E.[6]
4-66-47-61