Murphy Cassone vs Cooper Williams — Winston Salem CH Round of 32

Winston Salem CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
USA2
Murphy Cassone
#287ATP
1429ELO
1393Hard ELO
23 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWLWLWLL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 8 September 2025
hard
USA
Cooper Williams
#774ATP
21 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLLWWWLWL
Cassone M.
6-1 6-2
Williams C.
Cassone M.
662
Williams C.
120

Murphy Cassone defeated Cooper Williams 6-1 6-2 in the Winston Salem CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Cassone M.serving86% hold

wins 67% of points on serve vs Williams C.

Williams C.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Cassone 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
Cassone M.Williams C.
1st serve in·Even
65%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
71%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
50%
56%
Service points won·Even
64%
65%
Return points won·Even
37%
36%
Break points saved·Even
64%
64%
Aces / match·Slight edge
6.0
4.9
Double faults / match·Clear edge
2.8
1.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (97 vs 7). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Cassone M.
5.2
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 27 days (−0.3)
Williams C.
3.6
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 308 days (−1.5)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.9
Surface form
2.4
0.0
Win streak
Fatigue & Travel
7.0
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
Cassone M.Williams C.
Freshness·
89
—

Cassone M.: 5 days rest · 1 match, 26 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Pinnington Jones J.[4]
Svajda T.
6-26-2
Semi-finals
Pinnington Jones J.[4]
Langmo C.
6-36-4
Svajda T.
Jodar R.
7-57-5
Quarter-finals
Langmo C.
Ghibaudo A.
6-46-4
Pinnington Jones J.[4]
Kim A.
6-46-4
Jodar R.
Krueger M.[3]
6-36-2
Svajda T.
Cassone M.[2]
7-636-2
R16
Jodar R.
Pow L.
6-31-0
Ghibaudo A.
Damm M.
7-656-3
Pinnington Jones J.[4]
Vandecasteele Q.
6-36-3
Kim A.
Bicknell B.
6-11-66-3
Krueger M.[3]
Perez A.
6-47-65
Cassone M.[2]
Sekulic P.
6-16-4
Svajda T.
Rybakov A.[7]
6-36-3
Langmo C.
Blanch D.
3-66-36-3
R32
Langmo C.
Ficovich J.[1]
6-43-66-3
Blanch D.
Shelbayh A.
6-36-4
Damm M.
Van Loben Sels E.
6-36-786-3
Jodar R.
Goode G.
7-56-1
Krueger M.[3]
Zink T.
6-16-2
Svajda T.
Ilagan A.
2-66-16-2
Sekulic P.
Milavsky D.
7-626-4
Cassone M.[2]
Williams C.
6-16-2
Rybakov A.[7]
Kwiatkowski T.
7-636-4
Pow L.
Maloney P.[8]
6-26-3
Kim A.
Matsuda R.
6-36-4
Vandecasteele Q.
Trotter J.
6-26-4
Perez A.
Winter E.
6-24-67-66
Pinnington Jones J.[4]
Bouzige M.
6-16-4
Bicknell B.
Monday J.[5]
6-45-77-5
Ghibaudo A.
Johns G.[6]
6-36-4