Martin Damm vs Michael Mmoh — Knoxville CH Round of 32

Knoxville CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
Martin Damm
USA
Martin Damm
#104ATP
1706ELO
1657Hard ELO
$338kYTD
$910kCAREER
22 yrs · 203 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLWWWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 6 November 2023
hard
Michael Mmoh
USA1
Michael Mmoh
#188ATP
1613ELO
1599Hard ELO
$85kYTD
$2.4MCAREER
28 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLLLWWWL
Damm M.
6-4 6-3
Mmoh M.
Damm M.
662
Mmoh M.
430

Martin Damm defeated Michael Mmoh 6-4 6-3 in the Knoxville CH round of 32 on hard. The result followed the form book — Martin Damm came in ranked #104, defending last year's round of 32.

Key context

  • Match story: Martin Damm closed it out in two sets, 6–4 6–3.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Damm M.serving88% hold

wins 68% of points on serve vs Mmoh M.

Mmoh M.serving89% hold

wins 69% of points on serve vs Damm M.

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
Damm M.Mmoh M.
1st serve in·Even
60%
64%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
79%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
51%
47%
Service points won·Slight edge
68%
63%
Return points won·Slight edge
33%
39%
Break points saved·Slight edge
66%
61%
Aces / match·Dominant
12.5
6.4
Double faults / match·Slight edge
4.5
4.0

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (147 vs 138). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Damm M.Mmoh M.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
26
66
Break points saved·Even
93
91
Break points won·Dominant
1
31
Deciding sets·Dominant
5
90
Tiebreaks·Slight edge
84
77

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Damm M.
6.6
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Mmoh M.
6.5
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
5.6+57 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.4Hard Elo 1599
5.8Overall Elo 1706
ELO gap
4.2Overall Elo 1613
0.0No prior meetings
H2H
10.0
7.0
Surface form
5.3
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
7.9
Minutes 14d
6.1
4.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
7.0
Context
6.0
Defending pts
8.5

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
Damm M.Mmoh M.
Freshness·Even
97
95

Damm M.: 13 days rest · 1 match (14d) · Mmoh M.: 13 days rest · 2 matches (14d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Michelsen A.[3]
Kudla D.
7-54-66-2
Semi-finals
Michelsen A.[3]
Sandgren T.
6-22-66-4
Kudla D.
Nava E.[5]
5-76-46-1
Quarter-finals
Michelsen A.[3]
Basavareddy N.
6-36-3
Kudla D.
Mchugh A.
6-37-65
Nava E.[5]
Svajda Z.[4]
6-46-4
Sandgren T.
Ritschard A.
7-696-4
R16
Basavareddy N.
Zhukayev B.
6-46-2
Nava E.[5]
Cassone M.
6-46-4
Kudla D.
Damm M.
7-646-3
Ritschard A.
Krueger M.
6-26-4
Svajda Z.[4]
Fanselow S.
6-27-5
Sandgren T.
Holt B.
6-37-5
Michelsen A.[3]
Debru G.
6-33-66-4
Mchugh A.
Kwiatkowski T.
0-66-46-3
R32
Kudla D.
Kypson P.
6-756-36-4
Ritschard A.
Shang J.[8]
3-67-696-2
Cassone M.
Harrison C.
6-16-4
Svajda Z.[4]
Mayo A.
6-36-4
Debru G.
Monday J.
4-67-56-3
Basavareddy N.
Rosenkranz M.
4-66-27-5
Zhukayev B.
Droguet T.[6]
6-46-1
Krueger M.
Karlovskiy E.
7-56-2
Fanselow S.
Kingsley C.
6-46-2
Kwiatkowski T.
Kirchheimer S.
6-756-26-4
Holt B.
Kovacevic A.[2]
6-43-67-61
Michelsen A.[3]
Tomic B.
4-67-656-4
Mchugh A.
Cozbinov A.
3-67-56-3
Sandgren T.
Quinn E.
4-67-667-63
Nava E.[5]
Serdarusic N.
6-46-4
Damm M.
Mmoh M.[1]
6-46-3