Daniel Cox vs Mats Rosenkranz — Nottingham CH Qualifying Round 2

Nottingham CH · CHALLENGER · Qualifying Round 2
GBR
Daniel Cox
35 yrs · 170 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWLWLWLWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 6 June 2022
grass
GER11
Mats Rosenkranz
#358ATP
1454ELO
1398Grass ELO
27 yrs · 193 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLWLWWLW
Cox D.
7-5 6-3
Rosenkranz M.
Cox D.
762
Rosenkranz M.
530

Daniel Cox defeated Mats Rosenkranz 7-5 6-3 in the Nottingham CH qualifying round 2 on grass.

Key context

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

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Cox D.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Rosenkranz M.

Rosenkranz M.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Cox D.

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
Cox D.Rosenkranz M.
1st serve in·Even
60%
60%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
69%
76%
2nd serve points won·Even
48%
49%
Service points won·Even
61%
65%
Return points won·Even
38%
36%
Break points saved·Slight edge
56%
64%
Aces / match·Dominant
3.6
8.3
Double faults / match·Even
3.8
3.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (38 vs 155). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Cox D.Rosenkranz M.
Clutch Rating·Even
30
31
Break points saved·Dominant
52
86
Break points won·Dominant
27
1
Deciding sets·Even
67
64
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
14
6

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Cox D.
4.0
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 1799 days (−1.5)
Rosenkranz M.
6.2
Even matchUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.2
Surface form
0.0
Win streak
0.0Lost last 3
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
8.7
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Q2
Copil M.[4]
Mchugh A.[8]
6-46-4
Jung J.[5]
Hussey G.
6-37-63
Squire H.[10]
Broom C.[14]
6-36-756-3
Virtanen O.[12]
Gill F.[13]
7-56-3
Bellier A.[7]
Whitehouse M.
6-37-5
Cox D.
Rosenkranz M.[11]
7-56-3
Q1
Gill F.[13]
Weightman O.
6-46-4
Broom C.[14]
Cukierman D.
7-56-4
Squire H.[10]
Parker S.
7-57-69
Virtanen O.[12]
Fery A.
6-34-66-2
Cox D.
Hoang A.[2]
5-76-47-610
Rosenkranz M.[11]
Reymond A.
6-46-2
Hussey G.
Harris B.[9]
7-647-61
Jung J.[5]
Patten H.
7-56-4
Mchugh A.[8]
Cash J.
3-67-666-0
Copil M.[4]
Wendelken H.
6-47-5
Bellier A.[7]
Strombachs R.
7-627-65
Whitehouse M.
Vavassori A.[3]
6-37-5