Tomas Machac vs Arthur Cazaux — Mouilleron Le Captif CH Round of 16

Mouilleron Le Captif CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
Tomas Machac
CZE8
Tomas Machac
#53ATP
1866ELO
1829Hard ELO
$832kYTD
$6.8MCAREER
25 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLWWLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 3 October 2022
hard
Arthur Cazaux
FRA
Arthur Cazaux
#98ATP
1793ELO
1738Hard ELO
$46kYTD
$2.3MCAREER
23 yrs · 183 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLWWLW
Machac T.
6-2 6-4
Cazaux A.
Machac T.
662
Cazaux A.
240

Tomas Machac defeated Arthur Cazaux 6-2 6-4 in the Mouilleron Le Captif CH round of 16 on hard. The result followed the form book — Tomas Machac came in ranked #53.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Machac T.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Cazaux A.

Cazaux A.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Machac T.

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

Serve & return on hard

Machac T.Cazaux A.
30
Serve
40
25
Return
19

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

Statistics

This season
Machac T.Cazaux A.
1st serve in·Even
62%
59%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
70%
76%
2nd serve points won·Even
54%
52%
Service points won·Even
64%
66%
Return points won·Even
38%
38%
Break points saved·Even
62%
66%
Aces / match·Clear edge
5.0
7.7
Double faults / match·Even
2.5
2.2

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

Clutch

Under pressure
Machac T.Cazaux A.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
90
65
Break points saved·Even
98
97
Break points won·Dominant
80
27
Deciding sets·Slight edge
94
87
Tiebreaks·Dominant
97
70

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Machac T.
7.2
Strong advantageUmpiry Score
Cazaux A.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.0+92 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.0Hard Elo 1738
5.7Overall Elo 1866
ELO gap
4.3Overall Elo 1793
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
8.9
Surface form
7.6
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
7.8
3-set count
4.0
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
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Sels J.
Pospisil V.
6-46-3
Semi-finals
Pospisil V.
Gaston H.[3]
6-33-66-3
Sels J.
Briand J.
6-26-3
Quarter-finals
Pospisil V.
Wolf J.[2]
4-66-37-63
Gaston H.[3]
Gombos N.[7]
6-46-4
Sels J.
Virtanen O.
6-36-4
Briand J.
Machac T.[8]
6-31-66-3
R16
Wolf J.[2]
Sock J.
7-616-4
Pospisil V.
Marie J.
6-36-3
Briand J.
Bourgue M.
5-76-46-3
Virtanen O.
De Schepper K.
6-26-4
Machac T.[8]
Cazaux A.
6-26-4
Gaston H.[3]
Royer V.
7-656-4
Gombos N.[7]
Sachko V.
6-47-5
Sels J.
Lehecka J.[1]
7-684-2
R32
Royer V.
Furness E.
6-21-0
De Schepper K.
Simon G.
7-656-6
Sachko V.
Fils A.
7-57-5
Wolf J.[2]
Masur D.
6-37-5
Machac T.[8]
Vatutin A.
7-52-66-3
Virtanen O.
Tabur C.
6-36-4
Sels J.
Poljak D.
5-76-46-4
Lehecka J.[1]
Van Rijthoven T.
7-696-4
Pospisil V.
Grenier H.[6]
7-636-4
Briand J.
Gasquet R.[4]
6-27-5
Marie J.
Maestrelli F.
6-16-766-3
Gaston H.[3]
Laaksonen H.
7-664-67-67
Gombos N.[7]
Escoffier A.
2-66-16-2
Sock J.
Gautier A.
6-36-3
Bourgue M.
Bellier A.
6-726-46-3
Cazaux A.
Forejtek J.
7-616-4