Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Martin Damm vs Lukas Rosol Prediction, Head-to-Head, Odds & Pick - Matchstat.com
By Wojtek Kolan
At Matchstat.com we give you unbeatable in-depth analysis of past and current event tennis stats, to give you accurate tennis predictions, picks, odds and value bets. Let's dive in with our Damm vs Rosol analysis and find out who is favored!
Martin Damm vs Lukas Rosol Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Damm 1 - 0 Rosol
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Damm has won 48.43% of points on their second serve, while Rosol has won 0%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Damm, in recent form, has won 45.41% of their opponent's second serve points, while Rosol has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 26.31% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Damm has saved 70.69% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Rosol has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Damm has won 65.33% of matches played (W/L 49/ 26), with Rosol winning 47.06% (W/L 8/ 9) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Damm has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 61% (W/L 63/ 40), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 51% (W/L 42/ 41). Rosol has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 58% (W/L 329/ 240), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 46% (W/L 25/ 29).
- Player level: In the last year, Damm has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 59.57% of matches (W/L 28/ 19), where as Rosol has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 53.85% of matches (W/L 7/ 6). When comparing stats between players to predict the favorite, it is of course all relative to the event level they have been playing at.
- Direct H2H matches: They have played 1 times before with Damm winning 1 times and Rosol being victorious 0 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Damm winning 2 and Rosol winning 0. The last match between Damm and Rosol was at the M25 Prague, 11-05-2022, First, Clay with Martin Damm getting the victory 7-6(4) 6-4.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:43:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Damm and Rosol have played a deciding set 0 times, with Damm winning 0 times and Rosol 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 1 tiebreaks against each other with Damm winning 1, and Rosol 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Damm has played against opponents with an average rank of 265.37 while Rosol has played against players with an average rank of 277.94.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Damm has won 57% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Rosol has won 33% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Damm has converted 33.82% of breakpoint opportunities, and Rosol has converted 0% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
- If you are interested in models that predict tennis matches, this article is a good start (Warning: Stats geeks only)
182
Rank
175
High
20
Age
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
873
Rank
26
High
38
Age
R
Plays
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
Form
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
57% (135-103)
Career Total W/L
55% (666-544)
52% (14-13)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$107,985
Career Prize Money
$1,884,780
0
YTD Titles
0
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
| stats | Martin Damm | Lukas Rosol |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 0 |
| Games Won | 13 | 10 |
| Aces (Total) | 5 | 5 |
| DFs (Total) | 5 | 1 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:43:0 | 1:43:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 58% (44/76) | 53% (36/68) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 77% (34/44) | 67% (24/36) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 50% (16/32) | 66% (21/32) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 40% (2/5) | 33% (1/3) |
| Return Points W% | 34% (23/68) | 34% (26/76) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Deciding Set Win% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7-6(4) 6-4 |
Stats 
Martin Damm
Player
Lukas Rosol
58%
(
44 of
76)
1st Serve %
53%
(
36 of
68)
5
Aces
5
5
Double Faults
1
77%
(
34 of
44)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
24 of
36)
50%
(
16 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
34%
(
26 of
76)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
23 of
68)
73
Total Points Won
71
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Martin Damm | Lukas Rosol |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 52% (14/13) | 0% (0/0) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 48% (31/33) | 0% (0/0) |
| Games Win/Loss | 49% (333/340) | 0% (0/0) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 60% (6/4) | 0% (0/0) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 17% (1/5) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 64% (7/4) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 1.11 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 365 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0.37 | 0 |
| DFs Total | 121 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:49:46 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 325.7 | 0 |
| 1st Serve % | 59% (1283/2175) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st Serve W% | 77% (992/1283) | 0% (0/0) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 48% (432/892) | 0% (0/0) |
| BPs Won% Total | 34% (46/136) | 0% (0/0) |
| Return Pts W% | 33% (688/2078) | 0% (0/0) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 67% (2/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 55% (11/9) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 50% (13/26) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 48% (10/21) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 64% (7/11) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 83% (12/10) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 17% (12/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 20% (15/3) | 0% (0/0) |
Martin Damm Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Filip Krajinovic
Player
Martin Damm
67%
(
61 of
91)
1st Serve %
59%
(
48 of
82)
9
Aces
19
0
Double Faults
5
75%
(
46 of
61)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
36 of
48)
67%
(
20 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
16 of
34)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
27%
(
25 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
30 of
82)
96
Total Points Won
77
|
6-7(2) 6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Clement Chidekh
Player
Martin Damm
56%
(
61 of
109)
1st Serve %
53%
(
49 of
92)
5
Aces
9
9
Double Faults
8
70%
(
43 of
61)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
36 of
49)
48%
(
23 of
48)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
19 of
43)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
21%
(
3 of
14)
39%
(
43 of
109)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
37 of
92)
103
Total Points Won
98
|
6-4 5-7 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tennys Sandgren
Player
Martin Damm
60%
(
44 of
73)
1st Serve %
60%
(
50 of
83)
8
Aces
8
2
Double Faults
6
82%
(
36 of
44)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
33 of
50)
52%
(
15 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
16 of
33)
15%
(
2 of
13)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
22 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
34 of
83)
85
Total Points Won
71
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Mitchell Krueger
Player
Martin Damm
64%
(
27 of
42)
1st Serve %
46%
(
31 of
68)
1
Aces
8
2
Double Faults
7
81%
(
22 of
27)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
22 of
31)
60%
(
9 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
10 of
37)
42%
(
5 of
12)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
26%
(
11 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
36 of
68)
67
Total Points Won
43
|
6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Toby Alex Kodat
51%
(
55 of
107)
1st Serve %
61%
(
57 of
94)
17
Aces
7
9
Double Faults
3
78%
(
43 of
55)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
39 of
57)
52%
(
27 of
52)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
16 of
37)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
10%
(
1 of
10)
35%
(
37 of
107)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
39 of
94)
109
Total Points Won
92
|
6-7(1) 7-5 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Brandon Holt
Player
Martin Damm
63%
(
64 of
102)
1st Serve %
59%
(
54 of
91)
9
Aces
13
0
Double Faults
7
70%
(
45 of
64)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
39 of
54)
45%
(
17 of
38)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
16 of
37)
27%
(
3 of
11)
Break Points Won
21%
(
3 of
14)
39%
(
40 of
102)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
36 of
91)
98
Total Points Won
95
|
7-5 1-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R3 |
Stats
Christopher O'Connell
Player
Martin Damm
65%
(
59 of
91)
1st Serve %
66%
(
49 of
74)
13
Aces
18
1
Double Faults
1
81%
(
48 of
59)
1st Serve Won
82%
(
40 of
49)
50%
(
16 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
13 of
25)
100%
(
1 of
1)
Break Points Won
10%
(
1 of
10)
30%
(
27 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
28%
(
21 of
74)
85
Total Points Won
80
|
7-6(5) 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Tommy Paul
71%
(
30 of
42)
1st Serve %
59%
(
26 of
44)
10
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
70%
(
21 of
30)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
17 of
26)
58%
(
7 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
67%
(
12 of
18)
0%
(
0 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
33%
(
14 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
15 of
44)
43
Total Points Won
43
|
4-6 2-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Zhizhen Zhang
60%
(
50 of
83)
1st Serve %
72%
(
63 of
87)
14
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
4
76%
(
38 of
50)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
43 of
63)
55%
(
18 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
12 of
24)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
33%
(
27 of
83)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
32 of
87)
88
Total Points Won
82
|
7-6(2) 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Bu Yunchaokete
Player
Martin Damm
71%
(
58 of
82)
1st Serve %
56%
(
50 of
90)
13
Aces
13
0
Double Faults
3
79%
(
46 of
58)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
38 of
50)
54%
(
13 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
19 of
40)
8%
(
1 of
12)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
28%
(
23 of
82)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
33 of
90)
92
Total Points Won
80
|
7-6(7) 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
view more
Lukas Rosol Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Carlos Sanchez Jover
Player
Lukas Rosol
51%
(
18 of
35)
1st Serve %
58%
(
19 of
33)
1
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
0
78%
(
14 of
18)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
13 of
19)
65%
(
11 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
7 of
14)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
29%
(
10 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
13 of
33)
38
Total Points Won
30
|
6-3 2-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Lukas Rosol
Player
Tommaso Compagnucci
67%
(
32 of
48)
1st Serve %
56%
(
33 of
59)
1
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
4
63%
(
20 of
32)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
18 of
33)
75%
(
12 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
10 of
26)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
33%
(
16 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
31 of
59)
63
Total Points Won
44
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Edoardo Lavagno
Player
Lukas Rosol
56%
(
56 of
100)
1st Serve %
54%
(
61 of
112)
3
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
8
70%
(
39 of
56)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
43 of
61)
50%
(
22 of
44)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
20 of
51)
33%
(
5 of
15)
Break Points Won
36%
(
4 of
11)
39%
(
39 of
100)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
49 of
112)
110
Total Points Won
102
|
5-7 6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Maximilian Marterer
Player
Lukas Rosol
64%
(
48 of
75)
1st Serve %
55%
(
45 of
82)
8
Aces
1
5
Double Faults
5
69%
(
33 of
48)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
31 of
45)
48%
(
13 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
14 of
37)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
4 of
4)
39%
(
29 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
37 of
82)
83
Total Points Won
74
|
6-4 3-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Lukas Rosol
Player
Mirza Basic
68%
(
42 of
62)
1st Serve %
60%
(
44 of
73)
9
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
3
83%
(
35 of
42)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
32 of
44)
55%
(
11 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
11 of
29)
25%
(
2 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
26%
(
16 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
30 of
73)
76
Total Points Won
59
|
7-6(3) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Martin Krumich
Player
Lukas Rosol
52%
(
54 of
104)
1st Serve %
53%
(
69 of
129)
5
Aces
3
9
Double Faults
11
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
36 of
69)
38%
(
19 of
50)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
33 of
60)
38%
(
6 of
16)
Break Points Won
36%
(
4 of
11)
44%
(
46 of
104)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
60 of
129)
118
Total Points Won
115
|
6-3 4-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Lukas Rosol
Player
Patrik Homola
55%
(
31 of
56)
1st Serve %
57%
(
30 of
53)
3
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
2
81%
(
25 of
31)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
19 of
30)
48%
(
12 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
9 of
23)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
34%
(
19 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
25 of
53)
62
Total Points Won
47
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Rudolf Molleker
Player
Lukas Rosol
62%
(
32 of
52)
1st Serve %
55%
(
36 of
65)
13
Aces
4
3
Double Faults
3
81%
(
26 of
32)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
21 of
36)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
13 of
29)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
27%
(
14 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
31 of
65)
69
Total Points Won
48
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daniel Paty
Player
Lukas Rosol
61%
(
48 of
79)
1st Serve %
52%
(
43 of
83)
14
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
6
79%
(
38 of
48)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
30 of
43)
58%
(
18 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
22 of
40)
20%
(
1 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
10)
29%
(
23 of
79)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
31 of
83)
87
Total Points Won
75
|
7-6(3) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Lukas Rosol
Player
Alan Bojarski
57%
(
37 of
65)
1st Serve %
62%
(
45 of
73)
4
Aces
3
5
Double Faults
5
73%
(
27 of
37)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
28 of
45)
54%
(
15 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
11 of
28)
31%
(
4 of
13)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
35%
(
23 of
65)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
34 of
73)
76
Total Points Won
62
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Damm Vs Rosol Prediction H2H Images To Share
More tennis photos of Damm are available here and Rosol photos here.
Today's H2H Tennis Betting Tips & Predictions
If you are looking to predict tennis or soccer matches, Matchstat.com has you covered! We have league, player and team stats, and specialise in detailed h2h stats between tennis players or soccer teams.
All our predictions are based on machine learning and AI. Matchstat is designed to help you in your analysis and predictions but the responsibility for your final predictions are your own.
It's good to talk... Get in touch with us [email protected]
