J. Fearnley
To Win
T. Boogaard
To Win
Biagio Gramaticopolo vs Thijs Boogaard Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
L W L W W W L W W L
Form
W L L L L W LHead-to-head: Gramaticopolo 0 - 1 Boogaard
They have played 3 sets in total, with Gramaticopolo winning 1 and Boogaard winning 2. The last match between Gramaticopolo and Boogaard was at the M15 Sharm ElSheikh, 19-02-2025, First, Hard with Thijs Boogaard getting the victory 5-7 6-4 6-0.
M15 Sharm ElSheikh(19-02-2025)
5
7
6
4
6
0
58% (7-5)
YTD Win/Loss
25% (1-3)
0
Head-to-Head
1
N/A
Ranking
N/A
Highest Rank
22
Age
16
-
Plays
-
0
Titles
0
49% (55-58)
Career Total W/L
29% (2-5)
$0
Career Prize Money
$0
0
YTD Titles
0
0
Hard H2H
1
0
Clay H2H
0
0
Indoor H2H
0
0
Grass H2H
0
Upcoming Match
- / Q1 round
ODDS
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Rakhimova VS Blinkova PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami wta
18 Mar 2025 / First
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
Kvitova VS Kenin PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami wta
18 Mar 2025 / First
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
Gramaticopolo VS Boogaard H2H Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5-7 6-4 6-0 |
Stats 
Thijs Boogaard
Player
Biagio Gramaticopolo
69%
(
58 of
84)
1st Serve %
48%
(
28 of
58)
2
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
2
69%
(
40 of
58)
1st Serve Won
82%
(
23 of
28)
50%
(
13 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
63%
(
19 of
30)
50%
(
1 of
2)
Break Points Won
11%
(
1 of
9)
37%
(
31 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
28%
(
16 of
58)
69
Total Points Won
73
|
||||
Gramaticopolo VS Boogaard H2H Stats
Stats
0
H2H Matches
1
1
Sets Won
2
11
Games Won
17
4
Aces (Total)
2
2
Total Double Faults
2
1:42:40
Average Match Time
1:42:40
48% (28/58)
1st Serve %
69% (58/84)
82% (23/28)
1st Serve Win %
69% (40/58)
63% (19/30)
2nd Serve Win %
50% (13/26)
11% (1/9)
Break Points Won % (Total)
50% (1/2)
37% (31/84)
Return Points Win %
28% (16/58)
0% (0/1)
Best of 3 Sets Win %
100% (1/1)
0% (0/0)
Best of 5 Sets Win %
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Tiebreaks Win % (Total)
0% (0/0)
0% (0/1)
Deciding Set Win %
100% (1/1)
0% (1/0)
1st Set Won, Won Match
0% (0/0)
100% (1/1)
1st Set Won, Lost Match
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
1st Set Lost, Won Match
100% (1/1)
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Biagio Gramaticopolo vs Thijs Boogaard Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Biagio Gramaticopolo 0 - 1 Thijs Boogaard
- Recent Form Analysis on Second Serve Performance: Over the past six months, Gramaticopolo has demonstrated exceptional proficiency on their second serve, triumphing in 57.33% of points, whereas Boogaard has achieved a comparatively modest success rate of 31.37%. The statistical correlation between this aspect and the precision of match predictions is strikingly apparent.
- Remarkable Return Game Statistics: Recent return game data illustrates that Gramaticopolo has brilliantly seized victory by conquering 52.94% of their opponent's second serve points, while Boogaard has achieved a respectable but lesser percentage of 34.78%. In regard to first serve returns, Gramaticopolo dominates with an impressive 25.93% success rate, while Boogaard trails behind with a mere 13.33%. These figures undeniably contribute significantly to forecasting the favored contender in this upcoming head-to-head confrontation.
- In-Depth Analysis Under Pressure: When under pressure, Gramaticopolo has demonstrated great resilience by saving 44.44% of breakpoints in recent matches, whereas Boogaard has displayed a slightly superior performance, saving 50% of breakpoints. This statistic proves indispensable in making accurate predictions for in-game betting.
- Comprehensive Performance Overview: Throughout the past year, Gramaticopolo has prevailed in 56.25% of matches played (9 wins, 7 losses), contrasting significantly with Boogaard's negligible success of 0% (0 wins, 2 losses). These statistics provide a holistic prediction overview for the head-to-head clash between the two competitors.
- Unveiling the Best Surface: Gramaticopolo thrives on hard surfaces, claiming victory in an impressive 53% of matches (17 wins, 15 losses). However, their performance falters on indoor hard courts, witnessing a win rate of a mere 25% (1 win, 3 losses). Conversely, Boogaard excels on clay courts, showcasing a 50% career win rate (1 win, 1 loss), but encounters significant challenges on hard courts, failing to secure a single triumph (0% win rate, 0 wins, 1 loss).
- Player Level Assessment: Over the past year, Gramaticopolo has predominantly competed in Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments with a prize of $10K, emerging victorious in 56.25% of matches played (9 wins, 7 losses). In contrast, Boogaard has primarily participated in similar tournaments, achieving a mere 0% success rate (0 wins, 1 loss). When comparing these statistics to predict the favored contender, it is essential to acknowledge the contextual relevance of the event level at which they have competed.
- Analysis of Opponent Quality: Within the preceding 12 months, Gramaticopolo has confronted adversaries with an average ranking of 197.19, showcasing their encounter with formidable opponents. Conversely, Boogaard has faced players with an average rank of 248.5, implying they have not encountered opponents of similar caliber.
- Deciding Set Performance vs. All Players: For live predictions and betting enthusiasts, it is worth noting that Gramaticopolo has emerged triumphant in 100% of deciding sets played over the past year. In contrast, Boogaard has not been able to clinch victory in any matches on the professional tour that have entered a deciding set.
- Current Event Head-to-Head Statistics: While historical player performance is undoubtedly valuable in predicting tennis matches, it is also imperative to consider current event statistics to assess the players' present form. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the section below (if available) for their performance in the ongoing event. Additionally, certain players exhibit superior capabilities in specific tournaments, and this aspect should not be overlooked when determining the likely outcome.
- Break Point Conversion Rate: Recent analysis indicates that in capitalizing on crucial opportunities, Gramaticopolo has capitalized on a noteworthy 57.14% of breakpoint chances, while Boogaard has failed to convert any opportunity, recording a disappointing 0% success rate in breaking their opponent's serve. This statistic is invaluable when seeking live in-game betting tips during moments of high tension.
- If you hold an avid interest in models that effectively forecast tennis matches, this article serves as an excellent point of departure (Note: Recommended for statistics enthusiasts only).
Biagio Gramaticopolo Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Jarno Jans
Player
Biagio Gramaticopolo
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve %
48%
(
25 of
52)
6
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
4
100%
(
24 of
24)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
15 of
25)
67%
(
8 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
10 of
27)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
11%
(
4 of
36)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
27 of
52)
59
Total Points Won
29
|
6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 6-1 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 7-5 6-3 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Thijs Boogaard
Player
Biagio Gramaticopolo
69%
(
58 of
84)
1st Serve %
48%
(
28 of
58)
2
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
2
69%
(
40 of
58)
1st Serve Won
82%
(
23 of
28)
50%
(
13 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
63%
(
19 of
30)
50%
(
1 of
2)
Break Points Won
11%
(
1 of
9)
37%
(
31 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
28%
(
16 of
58)
69
Total Points Won
73
|
5-7 6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Biagio Gramaticopolo
Player
Saveliy Ivanov
54%
(
31 of
57)
1st Serve %
51%
(
37 of
72)
12
Aces
12
2
Double Faults
4
90%
(
28 of
31)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
28 of
37)
62%
(
16 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
19 of
35)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
23%
(
13 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
25 of
72)
69
Total Points Won
60
|
7-6(4) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 7-6(5) 7-6(7) | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-2 6-0 | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-1 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 7-5 6-0 | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-3 7-6(5) | H2H | |||
view more
Thijs Boogaard Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Erik Arutiunian
Player
Thijs Boogaard
67%
(
43 of
64)
1st Serve %
57%
(
47 of
83)
8
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
2
77%
(
33 of
43)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
35 of
47)
62%
(
13 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
15 of
36)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
28%
(
18 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
33 of
83)
79
Total Points Won
68
|
6-4 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Thijs Boogaard
Player
Biagio Gramaticopolo
69%
(
58 of
84)
1st Serve %
48%
(
28 of
58)
2
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
2
69%
(
40 of
58)
1st Serve Won
82%
(
23 of
28)
50%
(
13 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
63%
(
19 of
30)
50%
(
1 of
2)
Break Points Won
11%
(
1 of
9)
37%
(
31 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
28%
(
16 of
58)
69
Total Points Won
73
|
5-7 6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Saba Purtseladze
Player
Thijs Boogaard
60%
(
37 of
62)
1st Serve %
66%
(
49 of
74)
19
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
3
84%
(
31 of
37)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
37 of
49)
72%
(
18 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
11 of
25)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
21%
(
13 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
26 of
74)
75
Total Points Won
61
|
6-2 7-6(6) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Mattia Bellucci
Player
Thijs Boogaard
52%
(
23 of
44)
1st Serve %
49%
(
25 of
51)
5
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
3
91%
(
21 of
23)
1st Serve Won
80%
(
20 of
25)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
19%
(
5 of
26)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
25%
(
11 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
26 of
51)
59
Total Points Won
36
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Hugo Gaston
Player
Thijs Boogaard
61%
(
31 of
51)
1st Serve %
51%
(
34 of
67)
5
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
4
81%
(
25 of
31)
1st Serve Won
79%
(
27 of
34)
65%
(
13 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
11 of
33)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
25%
(
13 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
29 of
67)
67
Total Points Won
51
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 | 6-2 3-6 6-3 | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-3 7-5 | H2H | |||
| R2 | 7-6(5) 7-6(5) | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-1 3-6 7-5 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Sander Jong
Player
Thijs Boogaard
52%
(
12 of
23)
1st Serve %
65%
(
17 of
26)
2
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
75%
(
9 of
12)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
9 of
17)
45%
(
5 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
4 of
9)
33%
(
1 of
3)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
39%
(
9 of
23)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
13 of
26)
27
Total Points Won
22
|
4-3 ret. | H2H | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
Stats
49% (55/58)
Win/Loss
29% (2/5)
50% (126/126)
Sets Win/Loss
27% (4/11)
50% (1188/1212)
Games Win/Loss
46% (63/75)
53% (19/17)
Hard Win/Loss
33% (1/2)
48% (33/36)
Clay Win/Loss
50% (1/1)
38% (3/5)
Indoor Hard W/L
0% (0/2)
0% (0/0)
Grass Win/Loss
0% (0/0)
0.15
Aces Per Game
0.28
172
Aces Total
19
0.18
Double Faults Per Game
0.29
208
Total Double Faults
20
1st Match
Average Match Time
1:23:44
267.22
Average Opponent Rank
285.57
57% (2431/4302)
1st Serve %
60% (274/460)
66% (1609/2431)
1st Serve Win %
75% (206/274)
47% (875/1872)
2nd Serve Win %
41% (76/186)
43% (151/354)
Break Points Won % (Total)
44% (7/16)
37% (1531/4159)
Return Points Win %
30% (116/388)
0% (0/0)
Slam W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Masters W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Cups W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Main Tour W/L
0% (0/2)
0% (0/0)
Tour Finals W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Challenger W/L
0% (0/0)
49% (55/58)
Futures W/L
40% (2/3)
49% (55/112)
Best of 3 Sets Win %
33% (2/6)
0% (0/0)
Best of 5 Sets Win %
0% (0/0)
60% (15/25)
Tiebreaks Win % (Total)
0% (0/1)
41% (11/27)
Deciding Set Win %
100% (2/2)
86% (57/49)
1st Set Won, Won Match
100% (1/1)
14% (57/8)
1st Set Won, Lost Match
0% (1/0)
11% (56/6)
1st Set Lost, Won Match
17% (6/1)
See recent tennis photos of Gramaticopolo and Boogaard
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]
