Max Houkes vs Clement Tabur — Kigali 2 CH Quarter-final

Kigali 2 CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
NED
Max Houkes
#244ATP
1460ELO
1444Clay ELO
26 yrs · 188 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WLLLLLLLWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 3 March 2025
clay
Clement Tabur
FRA
Clement Tabur
#178ATP
1607ELO
1553Clay ELO
$199kYTD
$640kCAREER
26 yrs · 173 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
WWWLLWWLWL
Houkes M.
6-2 7-6
Tabur C.
Houkes M.
6772
Tabur C.
2650

Max Houkes defeated Clement Tabur 6-2 7-6 in the Kigali 2 CH quarter-final on clay. The upset overturned the form book — Clement Tabur came in ranked #178, defending last year's final.

Key context

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

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Houkes M.serving64% hold

wins 56% of points on serve vs Tabur C.

Tabur C.serving72% hold

wins 59% of points on serve vs Houkes M.

Serve advantage — Tabur C.

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
Houkes M.Tabur C.
1st serve in·Even
62%
62%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
65%
71%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
52%
Service points won·Slight edge
59%
64%
Return points won·Even
41%
40%
Break points saved·Slight edge
58%
63%
Aces / match·Slight edge
3.0
4.0
Double faults / match·Slight edge
3.1
2.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (67 vs 76). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Houkes M.Tabur C.
Clutch Rating·Slight edge
23
30
Break points saved·Slight edge
66
74
Break points won·Slight edge
29
23
Deciding sets·Even
34
33
Tiebreaks·Dominant
16
45

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Houkes M.
6.1
Even matchUmpiry Score
Tabur C.
6.7
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
4.4Clay Elo 1444
Surface ELO
5.6+110 Clay Elo edge
3.8Overall Elo 1460
ELO gap
6.2Overall Elo 1607
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
5.6
Surface form
5.3
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
3.6
Minutes 14d
8.7
4.0
3-set count
8.0
Prev. match
7.0
Context
6.0
Defending pts

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
Houkes M.Tabur C.
Freshness·Dominant
100
69

Houkes M.: 21 days rest · Tabur C.: 1 day rest · 3 matches, 68 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Royer V.[4]
Den Ouden G.
6-26-4
Semi-finals
Royer V.[4]
Houkes M.
7-676-2
Den Ouden G.
Pavlovic L.
6-36-4
Quarter-finals
Houkes M.
Tabur C.
6-27-65
Royer V.[4]
Pennaforti G.
6-37-65
Pavlovic L.
Cecchinato M.
7-636-746-4
Den Ouden G.
Hemery C.[2]
6-736-02-0
R16
Pennaforti G.
Neumayer L.[5]
7-56-4
Cecchinato M.
Michalski D.
6-46-1
Den Ouden G.
Ionel N.
7-56-1
Houkes M.
Marti Pujolras A.
5-76-46-3
Tabur C.
Blancaneaux G.[7]
7-616-3
Royer V.[4]
Agamenone F.
7-637-62
Hemery C.[2]
Denolly C.
6-36-4
Pavlovic L.
Erhard M.
6-46-4
R32
Marti Pujolras A.
De Jong J.[1]
7-53-2
Houkes M.
Sanchez Jover C.
6-36-1
Tabur C.
Neuchrist M.
7-666-4
Blancaneaux G.[7]
Picchione A.
6-36-4
Royer V.[4]
Roca Batalla O.
6-24-66-3
Agamenone F.
Martin A.
7-666-756-3
Pennaforti G.
Schwaerzler J.
6-46-2
Neumayer L.[5]
Chazal M.
6-26-4
Michalski D.
Jianu F.[8]
6-23-66-2
Cecchinato M.
Gakhov I.
7-57-65
Pavlovic L.
Taberner C.[3]
7-646-2
Den Ouden G.
Misolic F.
6-26-2
Hemery C.[2]
Erel Y.
6-37-64
Erhard M.
Janvier M.
6-36-2
Ionel N.
Tomic B.[6]
6-47-69
Denolly C.
Coulibaly E.
6-46-1