Christasha McNeil vs Yiming Dang Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
Wojtek Kolan
Published on 02 Jul at 12:15 AM UTC
HEAD TO HEAD
C. McNeil vs Y. Dang

USA
1
Win
Played
0
Win

CHN
1
Win
Played
0
Win
Head-to-head: McNeil 1 - 0 Dang
They have played 3 sets in total, with Christasha McNeil winning 2 and Yiming Dang winning 1. The last match between Christasha McNeil and Yiming Dang was at the W15 Los Angeles, 01-07-2025, Round: R1, Surface: Hard, with Christasha McNeil getting the victory 6-4 6-7(7) 6-4.
| Players | Head To Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| McNeil | 1 |
| Dang | 0 |
Last 1 H2H Matches:
(R1) W15 Los Angeles(07-01-25)
C. McNeil vs Y. Dang H2H Profile
C. McNeil vs Y. Dang Match Preview:
- Second Serve Performance: Mc Neil has a slight edge, winning 40.42% of points on their second serve compared to Dang's 36.38%. Could this impact the outcome of tight games?
- Return Game Stats: Dang excels, winning 54.21% of points on their opponent's second serve, while Mc Neil achieves 47.59%. Additionally, for first serve returns, Dang leads with 35.19% over Mc Neil's 31.75%. Do these statistics suggest Dang can capitalize on service returns?
- Under Pressure Analysis: Both players show equal resilience, with Dang saving 43.9% of breakpoints and Mc Neil saving 44%. Does this indicate a closely contested match?
- Overall Performance: Over the past year, Dang has won 29.03% of their matches, unlike Mc Neil, who is yet to win a match. Can Mc Neil turn this around?
- Best Surface Win Percentage: Dang performs best on Clay with a 50% win record, whereas Mc Neil lacks sufficient data for comparison. Does this give Dang an advantage if the match is on clay?
- Player Level: Despite playing mostly Challengers/ITF tournaments, Dang has won 23.53% of these matches. Mc Neil has no wins recorded on any tour level, which could be a significant factor.
- Opponent Quality: Dang has competed against players averaging a rank of 378.19. Mc Neil's data is undefined, suggesting less exposure to competitive play. How might this experience benefit Dang?
- Deciding Set Performance: Dang has won 25% of deciding sets while Mc Neil has not yet secured a win in any deciding set. Could this influence live betting strategies?
- Break Point Conversion: Both convert breakpoints similarly, with Dang at 39.5% and Mc Neil at 40%. How might this shape the dynamics of the match?
Editorial Prediction (July 2, 2025, UTC):
As we assess the upcoming tennis match, both players exhibit strengths and weaknesses that are critical to the outcome.
Mc Neil has a marginal advantage on second serve points, while Dang excels in return games, showcasing strong ability to capitalize on opponents' serves.
In pressure scenarios, the difference in breakpoint saving ability is negligible, but previous match performances highlight Dang as more experienced and successful.
Given Dang's superior overall performance and experience against higher-ranked opponents, Dang emerges as the likely favorite to win this match.
Christasha McNeil vs Yiming Dang Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88.
C. McNeil vs Y. Dang H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches Won | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 1 |
| 18 | Games Won | 15 |
| 2 | Aces (Total) | 0 |
| 4 | Total Double Faults | 8 |
| 2:49:47 | Average Match Time | 2:49:47 |
| 58% (60/103) | 1st Serve % | 57% (59/103) |
| 65% (39/60) | 1st Serve Win % | 69% (41/59) |
| 53% (23/43) | 2nd Serve Win % | 36% (16/44) |
| 46% (6/13) | Break Pts Won % | 40% (4/10) |
| 45% (46/103) | Return Points Win % | 40% (41/103) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best‑of‑3 Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/1) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/1) |
Recent Performance Stats
C. McNeil Recent Matches Played
Y. Dang Recent Matches Played

C. McNeil vs Y. Dang Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 58.73% (37/26) | YTD Win/Loss | 40.74% (44/64) |
| 56.16% (82/64) | Sets Win/Loss | 43.21% (105/138) |
| 52.11% (691/635) | Games Win/Loss | 47.94% (1119/1215) |
| 56.67% (17/13) | Hard Win/Loss | 41.67% (35/49) |
| 50.00% (10/10) | Clay Win/Loss | 53.85% (7/6) |
| 76.92% (10/3) | Indoor Hard W/L | 18.18% (2/9) |
| 0.17 | Aces Per Game | 0.16 |
| 109 | Aces Total | 182 |
| 0.26 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.58 |
| 166 | Total Double Faults | 662 |
| 1:27:22 | Average Match Time | 1:37:16 |
| 408.57 | Average Opponent Rank | 406.16 |
| 59% (2073/3535) | 1st Serve % | 56% (3664/6572) |
| 64% (1332/2073) | 1st Serve Win % | 60% (2200/3664) |
| 47% (691/1462) | 2nd Serve Win % | 40% (1171/2908) |
| 51% (209/413) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 46% (385/846) |
| 44% (1560/3515) | Return Points Win % | 46% (3019/6575) |
| 0.00% (0/1) | Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | Main Tour W/L | 0.00% (0/2) |
| 48.57% (17/18) | Challenger W/L | 43.75% (35/45) |
| 74.07% (20/7) | Futures W/L | 34.62% (9/17) |
| 59% (37/63) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 40% (42/104) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 100% (1/1) |
| 23% (3/13) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 45% (14/31) |
| 60% (12/20) | Deciding Set Win % | 38% (11/29) |
| 89% (35/31) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 80% (51/41) |
| 11% (35/4) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 20% (51/10) |
| 21% (28/6) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 5% (57/3) |