Christian Langmo and Darwin Blanch will fight against each other in the 2nd round of the Winston-Salem for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Wednesday at 12:30 pm on COURT 2. In the following lines you can find the head to head analysis and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Darwin Blanch who should win in 2 sets.
Darwin Blanch -> 1.4
Christian Langmo -> 2.77
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
Here where top tennis events are broadcasted or streamed online (ATP, WTA).
At the challenger level, there will be free live streaming on Challenger TV.
Prediction and head to head Christian Langmo vs. Darwin Blanch
There is no head to head record between Christian Langmo and Darwin Blanch since this will be the first time that they will face off in the main tour.
Christian Langmo
28 - 22win/loss
384
318
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 35-31 | 30-28 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 5-2 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 41-31 | 33-23 | 7-6 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 36-31 | 30-23 | 5-6 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 24-24 | 15-16 | 9-8 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 49-25 | 40-19 | 9-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 366, Christian got to the 2nd round after defeating Juan Pablo Ficovich 6-4 3-6 6-3.
In the 1st round, Christian defeated Pablo Ficovich (6-4 3-6 6-3). During the match, Langmo scored 90 points vs Pablo Ficovich’s 80. Christian was very aggressive to blast 42 winners.
Talking about the service games, Langmo recorded 10 aces and he committed only 4 double faults. Overall, Christian Langmo was pretty effective on serve to win 76% (42/55) of his 1st serve and 61% (17/28) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve once. Langmo broke Pablo Ficovich twice after converting 29% of his break points (2/7).
Langmo has a winning win-loss record in the last 9 years having won 57% of his matches (248-184). 22-20 on hard in 2025. Regarding his performance on the same surface of this event, Langmo has an overall206-145 record in the last 9 years on hard.
The American’s best result of the current year was getting to the final in M25 Timaru.
Langmo has an aggregate 27-22 win-loss record in 2025, 22-20 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Salem Challenger
Langmo has never competed in this tournament before.
Darwin Blanch
33 - 16win/loss
288
285
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 40-22 | 31-14 | 2-3 | 7-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 24-19 | 16-10 | 8-9 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 7-7 | 0-2 | 7-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 10-8 | 7-4 | 3-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 370, the American reached the 2nd round after defeating Abedallah Shelbayh 6-3 6-4.
In the 1st round, The American had a good straight sets win against Shelbayh (6-3 6-4). During the match Blanch scored 67 points vs Shelbayh’s 51. Blanch was pretty aggressive to blast 30 winners.
Talking about serving, Blanch fired 7 aces and he committed only 1 double fault for the entire match. Darwin Blanch lost the serve once. Furthermore, Blanch put 67% of his first serves in, winning 81% (30/37) of the points behind his 1st serve and 50% (9/18) on the 2nd serve. Blanch broke Shelbayh 3 times after converting 27% of his break points (3/11).
Blanch’s best result of the season was reaching the final in M15 Villena,M25 Martos and M25 Figueira da Foz.
Blanch has an aggregate 33-15 win-loss record in 2025, 31-12 on hard (See FULL STATS).
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Langmo | Blanch |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 1 |
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 |
| Tot Games | 28 | 19 |
| Pts | 90-80 | 67-51 |
| Total Points | 170 | 118 |
| Winners | 42 | 30 |
| %Winners | 47% | 45% |
Both Langmo and Blanch played 1 match. At the moment, Christian Langmo dropped 1 set while Darwin Blanch hasn’t dropped a set so far. Langmo has played 1 set more than Blanch (3 vs 2). Therefore, Langmo played 9 games more than Blanch. The American scored 42 winners (47% of the total points). On the other side, Darwin fired 30 winners (45%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Langmo | Blanch |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 10 | 7 |
| Avg per match | 10 | 7 |
| 1st in | 55/83 | 37/55 |
| %1st in | 66% | 67% |
| 1st pts | 42/55 | 30/37 |
| %1st pts | 76% | 81% |
| 2nd pts | 17/28 | 9/18 |
| %2nd pts | 61% | 50% |
Langmo fired 10 aces . Blanch recorded 7 aces . Langmo won 76% points behind his first serve. He very solid his second serve to win 61% of the points. On the other side, Blanch won 81% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 50% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Langmo | Blanch |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 2 | 3 |
| Converted | 2/7 | 3/11 |
| % Converted | 29% | 27% |
| Conceded | 4 | 1 |
| Saved | 3 | 0 |
| % Saved | 75% | 0% |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 |
The American broke his opponent twice with a 29% conversion rate. Langmo conceded his serve once and he saved 75% of the break points that he conceded. The American broke his opponent 3 times with a 27% conversion rate. The American conceded his serve once and he saved 0% of the break points that he conceded.
| Langmo | |||
| R1 Pablo Ficovich | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 3-6 6-3 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 28 | 28 | |
| pts | 90-80 | 90-80 | |
| Total points | 170 | 170 | |
| Winners | 42 | 42 | |
| %Winners | 47% | 47% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 10 | 10 | |
| Double Faults | 4 | 4 | |
| 1st in | 55/83 | 55/83 | |
| % 1st in | 66% | 66% | |
| 1st pts | 42/55 | 42/55 | |
| % 1st pts | 76% | 76% | |
| 2nd pts | 17/28 | 17/28 | |
| % 2nd pts | 61% | 61% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 2 | 2 | |
| Converted | 2/7 | 2/7 | |
| Converted % | 29% | 29% | |
| Conceded | 4 | 4 | |
| Saved | 3/4 | 3 | |
| Saved % | 75% | 75% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 | |
| Blanch | |||
| R1 Shelbayh | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-3 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 19 | 19 | |
| pts | 67-51 | 67-51 | |
| Total points | 118 | 118 | |
| Winners | 30 | 30 | |
| %Winners | 45% | 45% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 7 | 7 | |
| Double Faults | 1 | 1 | |
| 1st in | 37/55 | 37/55 | |
| % 1st in | 67% | 67% | |
| 1st pts | 30/37 | 30/37 | |
| % 1st pts | 81% | 81% | |
| 2nd pts | 9/18 | 9/18 | |
| % 2nd pts | 50% | 50% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 3 | 3 | |
| Converted | 3/11 | 3/11 | |
| Converted % | 27% | 27% | |
| Conceded | 1 | 1 | |
| Saved | 0/1 | 0 | |
| Saved % | 0% | 0% | |
| Times Broken | 1 | 1 | |
Tennis Scores in Salem Challenger
- Murphy CassoneCassone – Cooper WilliamsWilliams (6-1 6-2) – See score progression
- Aidan KimKim – Ryuki MatsudaMatsuda (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Alfredo PerezPerez – Edward WinterWinter (6-2 4-6 7-66) – See score progression
- Philip SekulicSekulic – Daniel MilavskyMilavsky (7-62 6-4) – See score progression
- Alex RybakovRybakov – Thai KwiatkowskiKwiatkowski (7-63 6-4) – See score progression
- Jack Pinnington JonesPinnington Jones – Moerani BouzigeBouzige (6-1 6-4) – See score progression
- Rafael JodarJodar – Gavin GoodeGoode (7-5 6-1) – See score progression
- Darwin BlanchBlanch – Abedallah ShelbayhShelbayh (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Quinn VandecasteeleVandecasteele – James Kent TrotterKent Trotter (6-2 6-4) – See score progression
- Christian LangmoLangmo – Juan Pablo FicovichPablo Ficovich (6-4 3-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Antoine GhibaudoGhibaudo – Garrett JohnsJohns (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Luca PowPow – Patrick MaloneyMaloney (6-2 6-3) – See score progression
- Martin DammDamm – Emon Van Loben SelsVan Loben Sels (6-3 6-78 6-3) – See score progression
- Mitchell KruegerKrueger – Tyler ZinkZink (6-1 6-2) – See score progression
- Trevor SvajdaSvajda – Andre IlaganIlagan (2-6 6-1 6-2) – See score progression
- Blaise BicknellBicknell – Johannus MondayMonday (6-4 5-7 7-5) – See score progression
- Darwin BlanchBlanch – Abedallah ShelbayhShelbayh (6-3 6-4) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Alex RybakovRybakov – (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Alfredo PerezPerez – Mitchell KruegerKrueger (0-1) – H2H and prediction
- Christian LangmoLangmo – (0-0) – H2H and prediction