Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Andrew Watson 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 Zandschulp vs Watson analysis and find out who is favored!
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Andrew Watson Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Zandschulp 0 - 0 Watson
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Zandschulp has won 46.27% of points on their second serve, while Watson has won 0%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Zandschulp, in recent form, has won 49.29% of their opponent's second serve points, while Watson has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 31.02% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Zandschulp has saved 58.67% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Watson has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Zandschulp has won 46.43% of matches played (W/L 26/ 30), with Watson winning 0% (W/L 0/ 0) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Zandschulp has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 66% (W/L 87/ 45), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 45% (W/L 10/ 12). Watson has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 73% (W/L 45/ 17), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 58% (W/L 11/ 8).
- Player level: In the last year, Zandschulp has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 37.5% of matches (W/L 9/ 15), where as Watson has played most of their matches on the , winning 0% of matches (W/L / ). When comparing stats between players to predict the favorite, it is of course all relative to the event level they have been playing at.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Zandschulp has played against opponents with an average rank of 172.84 while Watson has played against players with an average rank of .
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Zandschulp has won 61% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Watson has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Zandschulp has converted 38.74% of breakpoint opportunities, and Watson has converted 0% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
- If you are interested in models that predict tennis matches, this article is a good start (Warning: Stats geeks only)
99
Rank
22
High
28
Age
R
Plays
0
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
Ret.
Rank
535
High
27
Age
R
Plays
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
Form
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
63% (332-199)
Career Total W/L
67% (121-60)
40% (12-18)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$2,900,825
Career Prize Money
$0
0
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.
The Best Odds For Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Andrew Watson For Any Market:
We highly recommend you open accounts with at least 3 Bookmakers as depending on the match, odds can vary a lot between them, and always getting the best odds available will improve your profitability a lot in the long run. We recommend these Sportsbooks for you so sign up now! Check the current best odds by clicking the Sportsbook links below:
Sportsbooks & Bookies Promo Codes For Zandschulp VS Watson
Sportsbook
Offer
Zandschulp VS Watson H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| w/o | |||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Andrew Watson |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 40% (12/18) | 0% (0/0) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 41% (28/41) | 0% (0/0) |
| Games Win/Loss | 47% (314/360) | 0% (0/0) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 36% (4/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 47% (7/8) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.4 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 130 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0.3 | 0 |
| DFs Total | 98 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:47:50 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 181.13 | 0 |
| 1st Serve % | 62% (1326/2130) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st Serve W% | 68% (906/1326) | 0% (0/0) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 46% (372/804) | 0% (0/0) |
| BPs Won% Total | 39% (74/191) | 0% (0/0) |
| Return Pts W% | 38% (817/2138) | 0% (0/0) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 50% (5/5) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 50% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 38% (5/8) | 0% (0/0) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 44% (12/27) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 50% (7/14) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 50% (4/8) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 92% (12/11) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 8% (12/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 6% (18/1) | 0% (0/0) |
Botic Van De Zandschulp Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats 
Mackenzie Mcdonald
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
67%
(
57 of
85)
1st Serve %
55%
(
51 of
92)
2
Aces
6
5
Double Faults
8
63%
(
36 of
57)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
37 of
51)
46%
(
13 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
12 of
41)
35%
(
6 of
17)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
42%
(
36 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
43 of
92)
92
Total Points Won
85
|
6-4 4-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Fabio Fognini
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
59%
(
50 of
85)
1st Serve %
54%
(
41 of
76)
1
Aces
4
5
Double Faults
3
74%
(
37 of
50)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
24 of
41)
51%
(
18 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
10 of
35)
57%
(
8 of
14)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
35%
(
30 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
42 of
76)
97
Total Points Won
64
|
6-1 6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Arthur Fils
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
47%
(
36 of
77)
1st Serve %
64%
(
48 of
75)
2
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
7
58%
(
21 of
36)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
29 of
48)
61%
(
25 of
41)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
8 of
27)
58%
(
7 of
12)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
40%
(
31 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
38 of
75)
84
Total Points Won
68
|
6-2 4-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Quentin Halys
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve %
60%
(
30 of
50)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
4
83%
(
20 of
24)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
50%
(
6 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
6 of
20)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
28%
(
10 of
36)
Rtn Points Won
64%
(
32 of
50)
58
Total Points Won
28
|
6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Felix Auger Aliassime
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
61%
(
54 of
88)
1st Serve %
47%
(
28 of
59)
3
Aces
3
6
Double Faults
5
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
17 of
28)
41%
(
14 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
16 of
31)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
40%
(
35 of
88)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
26 of
59)
79
Total Points Won
68
|
6-1 7-6(6) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Nicolas Moreno De Alboran
66%
(
87 of
132)
1st Serve %
59%
(
71 of
121)
4
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
1
71%
(
62 of
87)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
50 of
71)
58%
(
26 of
45)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
30 of
50)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
33%
(
44 of
132)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
41 of
121)
129
Total Points Won
124
|
7-5 6-7(5) 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Facundo Bagnis
68%
(
39 of
57)
1st Serve %
66%
(
35 of
53)
1
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
3
64%
(
25 of
39)
1st Serve Won
46%
(
16 of
35)
67%
(
12 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
9 of
18)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
35%
(
20 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
28 of
53)
65
Total Points Won
45
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Zachary Svajda
63%
(
38 of
60)
1st Serve %
53%
(
27 of
51)
5
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
74%
(
28 of
38)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
13 of
24)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
33%
(
20 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
23 of
51)
63
Total Points Won
48
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Arthur Rinderknech
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
57%
(
57 of
100)
1st Serve %
58%
(
57 of
99)
8
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
5
77%
(
44 of
57)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
43 of
57)
63%
(
27 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
22 of
42)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
29%
(
29 of
100)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
34 of
99)
105
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 6-7(7) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ugo Humbert
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
69%
(
41 of
59)
1st Serve %
63%
(
33 of
52)
1
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
4
73%
(
30 of
41)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
20 of
33)
39%
(
7 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
37%
(
22 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
24 of
52)
61
Total Points Won
50
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Andrew Watson Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Strong Kirchheimer
Player
Andrew Watson
72%
(
33 of
46)
1st Serve %
63%
(
33 of
52)
3
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
2
73%
(
24 of
33)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
16 of
33)
69%
(
9 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
28%
(
13 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
29 of
52)
62
Total Points Won
36
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Adrian Andreev
Player
Andrew Watson
75%
(
42 of
56)
1st Serve %
60%
(
29 of
48)
1
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
2
69%
(
29 of
42)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
22 of
29)
71%
(
10 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
30%
(
17 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
19 of
48)
58
Total Points Won
46
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Andrew Watson
Player
Zane Khan
60%
(
31 of
52)
1st Serve %
41%
(
15 of
37)
12
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
1
81%
(
25 of
31)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
10 of
15)
62%
(
13 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
12 of
22)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
27%
(
14 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
15 of
37)
53
Total Points Won
36
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 | 6-2 4-6 6-1 | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-2 6-3 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Liam Draxl
Player
Andrew Watson
61%
(
36 of
59)
1st Serve %
63%
(
41 of
65)
2
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
5
81%
(
29 of
36)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
25 of
41)
65%
(
15 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
12 of
24)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
25%
(
15 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
28 of
65)
72
Total Points Won
52
|
6-2 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Andrew Watson
Player
Grey Hamilton
57%
(
20 of
35)
1st Serve %
43%
(
20 of
46)
2
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
7
80%
(
16 of
20)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
14 of
20)
80%
(
12 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
23%
(
6 of
26)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
20%
(
7 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
26 of
46)
54
Total Points Won
27
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Anton Matusevich
Player
Andrew Watson
56%
(
48 of
85)
1st Serve %
67%
(
64 of
96)
6
Aces
7
4
Double Faults
6
69%
(
33 of
48)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
45 of
64)
68%
(
25 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
16 of
32)
22%
(
2 of
9)
Break Points Won
22%
(
2 of
9)
32%
(
27 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
35 of
96)
93
Total Points Won
88
|
6-4 2-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Ryan Peniston
Player
Andrew Watson
63%
(
56 of
89)
1st Serve %
63%
(
64 of
101)
5
Aces
5
5
Double Faults
10
86%
(
48 of
56)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
45 of
64)
27%
(
9 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
17 of
37)
25%
(
2 of
8)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
36%
(
32 of
89)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
39 of
101)
96
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 2-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Andrew Watson
Player
Jack Findel-Hawkins
60%
(
51 of
85)
1st Serve %
49%
(
44 of
89)
6
Aces
11
10
Double Faults
5
82%
(
42 of
51)
1st Serve Won
80%
(
35 of
44)
50%
(
17 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
49%
(
22 of
45)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
31%
(
26 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
32 of
89)
91
Total Points Won
83
|
4-6 6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Zandschulp Vs Watson Prediction H2H Images To Share
More tennis photos of Zandschulp are available here and Watson photos here.
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]
