Match Result

The match between Daria Kasatkina and Lauren Davis at the USA: Charleston WTA on clay, played on April 2nd, 2025 has concluded. Please provide the match score to complete this section.

(Example: Kasatkina won 6-4, 6-2 or Davis won 3-6, 7-5, 6-4 etc.)

Betting Analysis

To provide betting analysis, I need the match score and pre-match odds.

Example Assuming Kasatkina was the favorite and won:

Assuming Kasatkina was the favorite (e.g., odds of 1.40), her victory would have been the expected outcome. A bet on Kasatkina to win would have paid out at those odds. If the total games played exceeded 20.5 and someone bet over 20.5, then the outcome would have been a payout, if the score was, for example 7-5 7-6.

Example Assuming Kasatkina was the favorite and there was an upset (Davis Won):

If Davis won (e.g. odds of 3.00). A bet on Davis to win would have been a high paying outcome.

Player Performance Analysis

Note: This table is populated based on hypothetical data as the actual match data is not currently available. Replace the placeholder values with the actual statistics.

Statistic Daria Kasatkina Lauren Davis
Aces 3 1
Double Faults 2 4
1st Serve Percentage 65% 58%
1st Serve Points Won 70% 62%
2nd Serve Points Won 52% 45%
Break Points Saved 6/8 (75%) 2/5 (40%)
1st Return Points Won 38% 30%
2nd Return Points Won 55% 48%
Break Points Converted 3/5 (60%) 2/8 (25%)
Service Points Won 65% 54%
Return Points Won 42% 35%
Total Points Won 95 80
Match Points Saved N/A N/A
Games Won 12 10
Service Games Won 70% 60%
Return Games Won 60% 40%
Total Games Won 12 10

Key Considerations

Based on the hypothetical data, and assuming Kasatkina won in straight sets:

  • Serving Performance: Kasatkina held serve more effectively, indicated by a higher 1st serve percentage and a greater percentage of service points won. Davis struggled to protect her serve, likely contributing to her loss.
  • Return Game: Kasatkina's return game was more effective, particularly on 2nd serves. This created more opportunities for break points. Davis return game was not good.
  • Break Point Efficiency: Kasatkina capitalized on her break point opportunities more efficiently than Davis, showcasing better mental fortitude in key moments. Davis failed to capitalize on break points, leading to a loss of momentum.
  • Clay Court Advantage: Both players have experience on clay. However, Kasatkina may have been better suited to the slow clay conditions, potentially benefiting her defensive style and allowing her to grind out points. Without specific style analysis, this is an assumption.
  • Strategic Adjustments: Further analysis would be needed to identify specific strategic adjustments. If one player began targeting the other's weaker backhand or changed their serve placement, it would provide additional insight.

Overall: Kasatkina's superior serving and return game, combined with greater efficiency in converting break points, were crucial factors in her victory.