M. Damm
To Win
A. Lofman
To Win
Martin Damm vs Dane Sweeny Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
W L W W W W L W W W
Form
L L L W L W L L L LHead-To-Head: Damm 2 - 0 Sweeny
They have played 5 sets in total, with Damm winning 4 and Sweeny winning 1. The last match between Damm and Sweeny was at the M25 Tbilisi, 12-05-2025, Round: Q3, Surface: Hard, with Martin Damm getting the victory 6-2 6-1.
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Martin Damm | 2 |
| Dane Sweeny | 0 |
LAST H2H MATCH: M25 Tbilisi(12-05-2025)
Martin Damm
Dane Sweeny
6
2
6
1
| Damm | Stats | Sweeny |
|---|---|---|
| 75% (24-8) | YTD Win/Loss | 48% (15-16) |
| 2 | Head-to-Head | 0 |
| 545 | Ranking | 570 |
| 175 | Highest Rank | 194 |
| 21 | Age | 24 |
| - | Plays | R |
| 6 | Titles | 7 |
| 58% (160-118) | Career Total W/L | 54% (180-151) |
| $107,985 | Career Prize Money | $346,065 |
| 1 | YTD Titles | 0 |
| 2 | Hard H2H | 0 |
Upcoming Match
14 Jun 2025 / Semifinals
ODDS
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Tu VS Quinn PREDICTION Grass
Terra Wortmann Open - Halle atp
14 Jun 2025 / Q1 round
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
Tien VS Jarry PREDICTION Grass
Terra Wortmann Open - Halle atp
14 Jun 2025 / Q1 round
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-2 6-1 |
Stats 
Martin Damm
Player
Dane Sweeny
64%
(
25 of
39)
1st Serve %
60%
(
29 of
48)
6
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
3
96%
(
24 of
25)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
15 of
29)
57%
(
8 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
18%
(
7 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
26 of
48)
58
Total Points Won
29
|
||||
| 6-1 6-7(5) 6-1 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Dane Sweeny
60%
(
49 of
82)
1st Serve %
53%
(
46 of
86)
7
Aces
0
5
Double Faults
2
80%
(
39 of
49)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
28 of
46)
55%
(
18 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
20 of
40)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
30%
(
25 of
82)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
38 of
86)
95
Total Points Won
73
|
||||
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2 | H2H Matches | 0 |
| 4 | Sets Won | 1 |
| 30 | Games Won | 12 |
| 13 | Aces (Total) | 4 |
| 6 | Total Double Faults | 5 |
| 1:44:46 | Average Match Time | 1:44:46 |
| 61% (74/121) | 1st Serve % | 56% (75/134) |
| 85% (63/74) | 1st Serve Win % | 57% (43/75) |
| 55% (26/47) | 2nd Serve Win % | 46% (27/59) |
| 63% (10/16) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 40% (2/5) |
| 48% (64/134) | Return Points Win % | 26% (32/121) |
| 100% (2/2) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 0% (0/2) |
| 0% (0/1) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 100% (1/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (2/2) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (2/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (2/0) |
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Damm vs Sweeny Match Preview :
- Recently, Sweeny has won 44.88% of their points on the second serve, whereas Damm boasts a slightly better rate at 47.37%. Does this indicate an advantage for Damm? It might suggest so.
- In terms of returning the opponent's second serve, Sweeny leads with 48.76% compared to Damm's 47.57% success rate. On first serve returns, Sweeny has a more pronounced edge, winning 27.7% of points against Damm's 19.77%.
- Under pressure, Damm has fared better, saving 62.62% of breakpoints in recent matches, while Sweeny has saved 57.71%.
- Performance over the last year shows Damm with a clear advantage, securing victories in 48.15% of matches compared to Sweeny's 40.91%.
- Both players excel on hard courts, but Damm's win percentage is superior at 62% versus Sweeny's 58%.
- Looking at the competitive level, Damm excels in Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments, winning 80% of matches, a stark contrast to Sweeny's lower success rate at Challengers/ITF > $10K tournaments.
- In direct encounters, Damm has the upper hand with one match victory, including a 2-1 set lead over Sweeny.
- Sweeny's matches have been against higher-ranked opponents, with an average rank of 347.2, compared to Damm's 429.11. Is this a cautionary point for Damm despite his overall success?
- If the match extends to a deciding set, Sweeny has the edge, having won 50% of such encounters versus Damm's 38% win rate.
- Sweeny's breakpoint conversion rate of 37.8% surpasses Damm's at 28.81%, a potentially critical factor in pressure situations.
Editorial Prediction (May 12, 2025, UTC):
Sweeny and Damm have exhibited interesting dynamics in their head-to-head encounters, with Damm edging out in their previous match.
Recent second serve performance and breakpoint conversion indicate slight nuances that could impact the game's outcome significantly.
While Sweeny demonstrates a potential advantage in returning first serves and navigating deciding sets, Damm's proficiency in saving breakpoints and comfortable success in lower-tier tournaments indicates solid match play under pressure.
Considering these insights, Martin Damm shows a favorable edge overall and is most likely to emerge victorious in the upcoming encounter.
Damm vs Sweeny Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88
Martin Damm Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Moritz Kudernatsch
63%
(
30 of
48)
1st Serve %
69%
(
42 of
61)
10
Aces
5
4
Double Faults
2
77%
(
23 of
30)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
25 of
42)
56%
(
10 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
21%
(
4 of
19)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
31%
(
15 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
32 of
61)
65
Total Points Won
44
|
6-0 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Peetu Pohjola
68%
(
15 of
22)
1st Serve %
50%
(
15 of
30)
5
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
1
73%
(
11 of
15)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
10 of
15)
71%
(
5 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
8 of
15)
100%
(
1 of
1)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
27%
(
6 of
22)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
28
Total Points Won
24
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Maikel De Boes
63%
(
35 of
56)
1st Serve %
54%
(
31 of
57)
6
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
2
77%
(
27 of
35)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
20 of
31)
33%
(
7 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
10 of
26)
27%
(
3 of
11)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
39%
(
22 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
27 of
57)
61
Total Points Won
52
|
7-5 7-5 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Saba Purtseladze
Player
Martin Damm
54%
(
61 of
113)
1st Serve %
62%
(
63 of
102)
24
Aces
21
7
Double Faults
5
82%
(
50 of
61)
1st Serve Won
89%
(
56 of
63)
58%
(
30 of
52)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
21 of
39)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
29%
(
33 of
113)
Rtn Points Won
25%
(
25 of
102)
105
Total Points Won
110
|
7-5 6-7(4) 7-6(7) | H2H | ||
| QF | w/o | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Robert Strombachs
80%
(
28 of
35)
1st Serve %
63%
(
26 of
41)
6
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
1
96%
(
27 of
28)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
15 of
26)
71%
(
5 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
9%
(
3 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
20 of
41)
52
Total Points Won
24
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Toby Samuel
62%
(
69 of
111)
1st Serve %
54%
(
61 of
112)
25
Aces
10
6
Double Faults
6
87%
(
60 of
69)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
46 of
61)
45%
(
19 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
57%
(
29 of
51)
20%
(
1 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
29%
(
32 of
111)
Rtn Points Won
33%
(
37 of
112)
116
Total Points Won
107
|
6-7(4) 7-6(3) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Ajeet Rai
59%
(
42 of
71)
1st Serve %
64%
(
54 of
85)
16
Aces
8
1
Double Faults
3
76%
(
32 of
42)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
35 of
54)
66%
(
19 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
18%
(
2 of
11)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
28%
(
20 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
32 of
85)
83
Total Points Won
73
|
7-6(4) 7-5 | H2H | ||
view more
Dane Sweeny Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Hyeon Chung
Player
Dane Sweeny
65%
(
37 of
57)
1st Serve %
60%
(
47 of
78)
2
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
7
68%
(
25 of
37)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
27 of
47)
45%
(
9 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
10 of
31)
33%
(
5 of
15)
Break Points Won
20%
(
2 of
10)
40%
(
23 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
41 of
78)
75
Total Points Won
60
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Patrick Kypson
Player
Dane Sweeny
61%
(
40 of
66)
1st Serve %
66%
(
38 of
58)
5
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
2
83%
(
33 of
40)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
26 of
38)
54%
(
14 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
10 of
20)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
29%
(
19 of
66)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
22 of
58)
69
Total Points Won
55
|
6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Fabrizio Andaloro
Player
Dane Sweeny
63%
(
45 of
72)
1st Serve %
62%
(
53 of
85)
4
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
4
76%
(
34 of
45)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
32 of
53)
44%
(
12 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
36%
(
26 of
72)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
32 of
85)
78
Total Points Won
79
|
7-6(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Kaichi Uchida
Player
Dane Sweeny
48%
(
55 of
115)
1st Serve %
67%
(
62 of
92)
9
Aces
6
7
Double Faults
5
69%
(
38 of
55)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
47 of
62)
52%
(
31 of
60)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
11 of
30)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
40%
(
46 of
115)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
34 of
92)
103
Total Points Won
104
|
6-3 4-6 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Dane Sweeny
Player
Masamichi Imamura
68%
(
65 of
95)
1st Serve %
65%
(
62 of
95)
2
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
3
60%
(
39 of
65)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
32 of
62)
50%
(
15 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
18 of
33)
50%
(
7 of
14)
Break Points Won
100%
(
5 of
5)
43%
(
41 of
95)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
45 of
95)
99
Total Points Won
91
|
4-6 6-2 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Martin Damm
Player
Dane Sweeny
64%
(
25 of
39)
1st Serve %
60%
(
29 of
48)
6
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
3
96%
(
24 of
25)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
15 of
29)
57%
(
8 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
18%
(
7 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
26 of
48)
58
Total Points Won
29
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-1 6-0 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Henry Searle
Player
Dane Sweeny
63%
(
35 of
56)
1st Serve %
68%
(
41 of
60)
7
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
2
71%
(
25 of
35)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
22 of
41)
38%
(
8 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
5 of
19)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
41%
(
23 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
33 of
60)
66
Total Points Won
50
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 58% (160/118) | Win/Loss | 54% (180/151) |
| 56% (366/283) | Sets Win/Loss | 52% (403/374) |
| 52% (3407/3138) | Games Win/Loss | 51% (3747/3587) |
| 64% (86/48) | Hard Win/Loss | 57% (147/109) |
| 49% (42/43) | Clay Win/Loss | 44% (17/22) |
| 54% (32/27) | Indoor Hard W/L | 37% (7/12) |
| 0% (0/0) | Grass Win/Loss | 53% (9/8) |
| 0.81 | Aces Per Game | 0.2 |
| 2589 | Aces Total | 719 |
| 0.34 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.29 |
| 1077 | Total Double Faults | 1042 |
| 1:42:9 | Average Match Time | 1:38:56 |
| 431.73 | Average Opponent Rank | 418.85 |
| 59% (11751/19832) | 1st Serve % | 63% (13680/21791) |
| 76% (8913/11751) | 1st Serve Win % | 65% (8947/13680) |
| 49% (3995/8081) | 2nd Serve Win % | 51% (4099/8111) |
| 39% (619/1575) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 43% (950/2213) |
| 36% (6915/19321) | Return Points Win % | 40% (8659/21395) |
| 20% (1/4) | Slam W/L | 47% (7/8) |
| 33% (2/4) | Masters W/L | 60% (3/2) |
| 33% (1/2) | Main Tour W/L | 43% (3/4) |
| 48% (46/50) | Challenger W/L | 41% (49/71) |
| 65% (110/58) | Futures W/L | 64% (118/66) |
| 57% (155/272) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 54% (177/327) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 67% (2/3) |
| 54% (78/145) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 47% (41/87) |
| 47% (47/99) | Deciding Set Win % | 62% (69/112) |
| 80% (170/136) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 88% (156/137) |
| 20% (170/34) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 12% (156/19) |
| 19% (108/21) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 25% (175/43) |
Damm vs. Sweeny Prediction Form Trend:
Other Predictions
Today's Tennis Prediction News :
- Loading news...
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]
