Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Anouk Koevermans vs Sarah Van Emst 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 Koevermans vs Emst analysis and find out who is favored!
Anouk Koevermans vs Sarah Van Emst Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Koevermans 1 - 0 Emst
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Koevermans has won 40.42% of points on their second serve, while Emst has won 46.13%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Koevermans, in recent form, has won 57.18% of their opponent's second serve points, while Emst has won 60.17%. The same stats for first serve returns are 47.29% and 43.87% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Koevermans has saved 52.53% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Emst has saved 50.65% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Koevermans has won 64.38% of matches played (W/L 47/ 26), with Emst winning 63.04% (W/L 29/ 17) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Koevermans has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 63% (W/L 34/ 20), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 0% (W/L 0/ 1). Emst has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 73% (W/L 19/ 7), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 43% (W/L 10/ 13).
- Player level: In the last year, Koevermans has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 66.67% of matches (W/L 46/ 23), where as Emst has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 66.67% of matches (W/L 26/ 13). 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 Koevermans winning 1 times and Emst being victorious 0 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Koevermans winning 2 and Emst winning 0. The last match between Koevermans and Emst was at the W60 Amstelveen, 12-07-2023, First, Clay with Anouk Koevermans getting the victory 6-3 6-0.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 0:59:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Koevermans and Emst have played a deciding set 0 times, with Koevermans winning 0 times and Emst 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 0 tiebreaks against each other with Koevermans winning 0, and Emst 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Koevermans has played against opponents with an average rank of 272.25 while Emst has played against players with an average rank of 125.57.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Koevermans has won 63% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Emst has won 71% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Koevermans has converted 46% of breakpoint opportunities, and Emst has converted 48.51% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
333
Rank
333
High
20
Age
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
857
Rank
855
High
19
Age
Plays
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
Form
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
60% (110-72)
Career Total W/L
59% (29-20)
64% (21-12)
YTD W/L
68% (15-7)
$0
Career Prize Money
$0
1
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.
Koevermans VS Emst H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| stats | Anouk Koevermans | Sarah Van Emst |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 0 |
| Games Won | 12 | 3 |
| Aces (Total) | 0 | 0 |
| DFs (Total) | 0 | 7 |
| Avg Match Time | 0:59:0 | 0:59:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 77% (27/35) | 52% (28/54) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 74% (20/27) | 50% (14/28) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 63% (5/8) | 35% (9/26) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 60% (6/10) | 50% (1/2) |
| Return Points W% | 57% (31/54) | 29% (10/35) |
| 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) | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 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) |
Koevermans VS Emst H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-3 6-0 |
Stats 
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Sarah Van Emst
77%
(
27 of
35)
1st Serve %
52%
(
28 of
54)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
7
74%
(
20 of
27)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
14 of
28)
63%
(
5 of
8)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
9 of
26)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
29%
(
10 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
31 of
54)
56
Total Points Won
33
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Anouk Koevermans | Sarah Van Emst |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 64% (21/12) | 68% (15/7) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 58% (49/36) | 61% (31/20) |
| Games Win/Loss | 53% (429/376) | 58% (272/197) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 67% (4/2) | 77% (10/3) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 64% (14/8) | 56% (5/4) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 60% (3/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.1 | 0.09 |
| Aces Total | 41 | 20 |
| DFs per game | 0.49 | 0.36 |
| DFs Total | 194 | 84 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:45:51 | 1:35:54 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 312.97 | 85.64 |
| 1st Serve % | 61% (1356/2212) | 55% (699/1268) |
| 1st Serve W% | 59% (804/1356) | 64% (447/699) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 40% (346/856) | 47% (268/569) |
| BPs Won% Total | 46% (161/350) | 48% (92/191) |
| Return Pts W% | 51% (1130/2235) | 49% (667/1361) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 67% (20/10) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 68% (15/7) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 64% (21/33) | 67% (14/21) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 63% (5/8) | 0% (0/3) |
| Deciding Set W% | 63% (12/19) | 75% (6/8) |
| 1st set W, W | 80% (20/16) | 90% (10/9) |
| 1st set W, L | 20% (20/4) | 10% (10/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 38% (13/5) | 42% (12/5) |
Anouk Koevermans Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Victoria Jimenez Kasintseva
75%
(
81 of
108)
1st Serve %
78%
(
89 of
114)
0
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
4
52%
(
42 of
81)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
50 of
89)
48%
(
13 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
11 of
25)
44%
(
7 of
16)
Break Points Won
44%
(
7 of
16)
49%
(
53 of
108)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
53 of
114)
108
Total Points Won
114
|
1-6 6-4 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Gina Feistel
69%
(
91 of
132)
1st Serve %
71%
(
69 of
97)
-
Aces
-
4
Double Faults
1
51%
(
46 of
91)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
31 of
69)
44%
(
18 of
41)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
15 of
28)
57%
(
8 of
14)
Break Points Won
50%
(
9 of
18)
52%
(
68 of
132)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
51 of
97)
115
Total Points Won
114
|
7-6(8) 3-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Victoria Mboko
66%
(
61 of
93)
1st Serve %
66%
(
40 of
61)
1
Aces
0
9
Double Faults
6
64%
(
39 of
61)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
18 of
40)
34%
(
11 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
10 of
21)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
46%
(
43 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
33 of
61)
83
Total Points Won
71
|
6-3 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| R3 | 3-6 6-0 6-0 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Guiomar Zuleta De Reales
66%
(
41 of
62)
1st Serve %
70%
(
64 of
91)
-
Aces
-
4
Double Faults
3
66%
(
27 of
41)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
35 of
64)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
9 of
27)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
37%
(
23 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
47 of
91)
86
Total Points Won
67
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Iva Primorac
67%
(
70 of
105)
1st Serve %
69%
(
75 of
109)
1
Aces
1
6
Double Faults
6
61%
(
43 of
70)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
36 of
75)
31%
(
11 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
17 of
34)
64%
(
9 of
14)
Break Points Won
58%
(
7 of
12)
49%
(
51 of
105)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
56 of
109)
110
Total Points Won
104
|
6-3 6-7(2) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Ayla Aksu
Player
Anouk Koevermans
71%
(
89 of
126)
1st Serve %
62%
(
93 of
151)
2
Aces
5
7
Double Faults
14
53%
(
47 of
89)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
52 of
93)
38%
(
14 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
19 of
58)
50%
(
10 of
20)
Break Points Won
45%
(
9 of
20)
52%
(
65 of
126)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
80 of
151)
141
Total Points Won
136
|
6-7(6) 7-6(2) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Anamari Znuderl
60%
(
25 of
42)
1st Serve %
49%
(
17 of
35)
-
Aces
-
3
Double Faults
4
64%
(
16 of
25)
1st Serve Won
18%
(
3 of
17)
65%
(
11 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
6 of
18)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
36%
(
15 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
74%
(
26 of
35)
53
Total Points Won
24
|
6-0 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tena Lukas
Player
Anouk Koevermans
62%
(
31 of
50)
1st Serve %
75%
(
36 of
48)
0
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
6
45%
(
14 of
31)
1st Serve Won
31%
(
11 of
36)
53%
(
10 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
17%
(
2 of
12)
62%
(
8 of
13)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
52%
(
26 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
73%
(
35 of
48)
59
Total Points Won
39
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Anouk Koevermans
Player
Varvara Lepchenko
66%
(
69 of
104)
1st Serve %
71%
(
61 of
86)
1
Aces
3
9
Double Faults
4
70%
(
48 of
69)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
42 of
61)
37%
(
13 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
9 of
25)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
27%
(
3 of
11)
41%
(
43 of
104)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
35 of
86)
96
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 3-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Sarah Van Emst Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Maria Garcia Cid
Player
Sarah Van Emst
80%
(
73 of
91)
1st Serve %
43%
(
30 of
69)
-
Aces
-
5
Double Faults
5
62%
(
45 of
73)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
21 of
30)
39%
(
7 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
15 of
39)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
30%
(
3 of
10)
43%
(
39 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
33 of
69)
85
Total Points Won
75
|
7-6(3) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Sarah Van Emst
Player
Marina Benito
57%
(
33 of
58)
1st Serve %
69%
(
36 of
52)
1
Aces
0
7
Double Faults
6
70%
(
23 of
33)
1st Serve Won
47%
(
17 of
36)
44%
(
11 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
31%
(
5 of
16)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
41%
(
24 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
58%
(
30 of
52)
64
Total Points Won
46
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Joelle Steur
Player
Sarah Van Emst
85%
(
79 of
93)
1st Serve %
48%
(
55 of
114)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
10
53%
(
42 of
79)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
33 of
55)
43%
(
6 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
24 of
59)
47%
(
8 of
17)
Break Points Won
58%
(
7 of
12)
48%
(
45 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
57 of
114)
105
Total Points Won
102
|
3-6 7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Sarah Van Emst
Player
Marina Markina
43%
(
15 of
35)
1st Serve %
49%
(
19 of
39)
-
Aces
-
3
Double Faults
3
87%
(
13 of
15)
1st Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
5 of
20)
86%
(
6 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
29%
(
10 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
69%
(
27 of
39)
52
Total Points Won
22
|
6-0 6-1 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Ariana Geerlings
Player
Sarah Van Emst
63%
(
46 of
73)
1st Serve %
48%
(
29 of
60)
0
Aces
4
6
Double Faults
6
65%
(
30 of
46)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
20 of
29)
44%
(
12 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
10 of
31)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
30%
(
3 of
10)
42%
(
31 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
30 of
60)
72
Total Points Won
61
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Sarah Van Emst
Player
Paula Arias Manjon
56%
(
35 of
63)
1st Serve %
66%
(
52 of
79)
-
Aces
-
6
Double Faults
2
80%
(
28 of
35)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
33 of
52)
46%
(
13 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
10 of
27)
21%
(
3 of
14)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
35%
(
22 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
36 of
79)
77
Total Points Won
65
|
6-7(2) 5-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Sarah Van Emst
Player
Martina Genis Salas
63%
(
46 of
73)
1st Serve %
69%
(
57 of
83)
2
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
12
65%
(
30 of
46)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
32 of
57)
59%
(
16 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
23%
(
6 of
26)
54%
(
7 of
13)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
37%
(
27 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
45 of
83)
91
Total Points Won
65
|
4-6 6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Sarah Van Emst
Player
Marina Markina
48%
(
21 of
44)
1st Serve %
66%
(
29 of
44)
-
Aces
-
7
Double Faults
3
71%
(
15 of
21)
1st Serve Won
38%
(
11 of
29)
57%
(
13 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
36%
(
16 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
64%
(
28 of
44)
56
Total Points Won
32
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Ariana Geerlings
Player
Sarah Van Emst
82%
(
51 of
62)
1st Serve %
57%
(
38 of
67)
1
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
5
65%
(
33 of
51)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
21 of
38)
64%
(
7 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
12 of
29)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
35%
(
22 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
34 of
67)
74
Total Points Won
55
|
6-2 7-5 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Sandra Samir
Player
Sarah Van Emst
56%
(
45 of
81)
1st Serve %
45%
(
32 of
71)
0
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
7
69%
(
31 of
45)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
20 of
32)
47%
(
17 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
17 of
39)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
41%
(
33 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
34 of
71)
82
Total Points Won
70
|
7-6(4) 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Koevermans Vs Emst Prediction H2H Images To Share
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]
