By Wojtek Kolan - April 12, 2025
Form
L W L W L W W L L W
Form
L W W W W L L L L WBased on the implied probability from the match winner, Tien has a 50% chance to get the victory.
IMPORTANT: Subscribe to the Matchstat.com tennis picks club to compare implied and actual predictions to discover profitable bets in order to make successful bets.
| Prediction | Chance To Win |
|---|---|
| Learner Tien | 50 % |
| Botic Van De Zandschulp | 56.25 % |
|
Above is calculated from odds. Login now to reveal our expert predictions. |
| Zandschulp | Stats | Tien |
|---|---|---|
| 44% (8-10) | YTD Win/Loss | 63% (12-7) |
| 0 | Head-to-Head | 0 |
| 88 | Ranking | 69 |
| 22 | Highest Rank | 66 |
| 29 | Age | 19 |
| R | Plays | - |
| 7 | Titles | 10 |
| 62% (361-224) | Career Total W/L | 74% (117-42) |
| $3,420,360 | Career Prize Money | $431,935 |
| 0 | YTD Titles | 0 |
| 0 | Hard H2H | 0 |
| 0 | Clay H2H | 0 |
| 0 | Indoor H2H | 0 |
| 0 | Grass H2H | 0 |
13 Apr 2025 / Q3
Learner Tien implied favourite from odds → 50%
No H2H Matches Available
BMW Open - Munich
Clay| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Total Matches | 1 |
| 1:09:42 | Last Match | 1:42:09 |
| 1:09:42 | Total Time | 1:42:09 |
| 0.38 | Aces Per Game | 0.23 |
| 3 | Aces Total | 3 |
| 0.25 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.31 |
| 2 | Total Double Faults | 4 |
| 56% (25/45) | 1st Serve % | 54% (40/74) |
| 84% (21/25) | 1st Serve Win % | 75% (30/40) |
| 65% (13/20) | 2nd Serve Win % | 50% (17/34) |
| 80% (4/5) | Total Break Points Won % | 75% (6/8) |
| 100% (1/1) | Total Break Points Saved | 43% (3/7) |
| 100% (8/8) | Service Hold (%) | 69% (9/13) |
| 50% (4/8) | Opponent Hold % | 54% (7/13) |
| 48% (22/46) | Return Points Win % | 45% (34/76) |
| 62% (56/91) | Total Points Won | 54% (81/150) |
| 0% (0/0) | Tiebreak Win % | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | Deciding Set Win % | 100% (1/1) |
| 0.00 | Tiebreaks Per Match | 0.00 |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 100% (1/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
When analyzing recent second serve performance, Zandschulp has managed to secure 43.33% of points, slightly outperforming Tien's 41.2%. This statistic is crucial for match prediction accuracy, suggesting a narrow edge for Zandschulp. Furthermore, examining return game performance, Tien has the lead, winning 48.13% of second serve return points, compared to Zandschulp's 46.53%. In first serve returns, however, the players are closely matched, with Zandschulp at 27.4% and Tien at 27.04%.
Under pressure, Tien has demonstrated greater resilience by saving 54.26% of breakpoints, compared to Zandschulp's 50.47%. This metric is valuable for in-game betting predictions. Over the past year, Tien boasts an impressive match win rate of 79.78% (with a record of 71 wins and 18 losses), whereas Zandschulp has secured victory in 52.24% of his competitions (35 wins and 32 losses), offering a broader perspective on their head-to-head prediction.
Regarding surface preferences, Zandschulp excels on indoor hard courts with a 63% win record (93 wins to 54 losses), but struggles on grass, with only 46% (11 wins to 13 losses). Tien, in contrast, performs best on hard courts, winning 76% of his matches (92 wins to 29 losses), and finds clay challenging, with a 44% win rate (4 wins to 5 losses).
Considering player level and match experience over the last 12 months, Zandschulp has competed mostly on the Main tour, achieving a win rate of 46.15% (12 wins, 14 losses). Conversely, Tien has dominated in Challenger and ITF tournaments, securing victories in 81.58% of his matches (31 wins, 7 losses). The level of competition is crucial, with Zandschulp facing opponents with an average ranking of 156, whereas Tien's opponents averaged a rank of 270.96.
If the match proceeds to a deciding set, Tien is favored, having won 81% of such sets over the past 12 months, compared to Zandschulp's 43%. Additionally, Tien has shown superior breakpoint conversion, turning 35.19% of these opportunities, whereas Zandschulp stands at 30.37%, which is critical for live betting predictions.
Assessing all statistical aspects, Tien emerges as the stronger contender based on his superior match win rate, tensile pressure handling, and performance in deciding sets. Given these elements, Tien is predicted to have the upper hand in this upcoming match.
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats 
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Max Hans Rehberg
56%
(
25 of
45)
1st Serve %
52%
(
24 of
46)
3
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
6
84%
(
21 of
25)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
17 of
24)
65%
(
13 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
7 of
22)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
24%
(
11 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
22 of
46)
56
Total Points Won
35
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Richard Gasquet
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
64%
(
63 of
98)
1st Serve %
59%
(
55 of
93)
2
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
5
65%
(
41 of
63)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
36 of
55)
51%
(
18 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
15 of
38)
40%
(
6 of
15)
Break Points Won
40%
(
4 of
10)
40%
(
39 of
98)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
42 of
93)
101
Total Points Won
90
|
4-6 7-5 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R3 |
Stats
Francisco Cerundolo
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
54%
(
38 of
71)
1st Serve %
65%
(
37 of
57)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
66%
(
25 of
38)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
24 of
37)
61%
(
20 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
9 of
20)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
37%
(
26 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
24 of
57)
69
Total Points Won
59
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Novak Djokovic
71%
(
58 of
82)
1st Serve %
67%
(
49 of
73)
4
Aces
0
4
Double Faults
3
60%
(
35 of
58)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
31 of
49)
71%
(
17 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
7 of
24)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
37%
(
30 of
82)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
35 of
73)
87
Total Points Won
68
|
6-2 3-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Nick Kyrgios
59%
(
35 of
59)
1st Serve %
58%
(
34 of
59)
2
Aces
6
3
Double Faults
2
71%
(
25 of
35)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
23 of
34)
54%
(
13 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
9 of
25)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
36%
(
21 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
27 of
59)
65
Total Points Won
53
|
7-6(7) 3-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Matteo Gigante
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
68%
(
40 of
59)
1st Serve %
39%
(
21 of
54)
5
Aces
3
5
Double Faults
1
75%
(
30 of
40)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
11 of
21)
32%
(
6 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
14 of
33)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
39%
(
23 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
29 of
54)
65
Total Points Won
48
|
7-5 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Lukas Klein
51%
(
63 of
124)
1st Serve %
56%
(
71 of
127)
7
Aces
2
7
Double Faults
8
67%
(
42 of
63)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
39 of
71)
44%
(
27 of
61)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
25 of
56)
37%
(
7 of
19)
Break Points Won
25%
(
5 of
20)
44%
(
55 of
124)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
63 of
127)
132
Total Points Won
119
|
5-7 6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Christopher O'Connell
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
61%
(
53 of
87)
1st Serve %
51%
(
35 of
68)
2
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
3
62%
(
33 of
53)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
24 of
35)
50%
(
17 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
11 of
33)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
43%
(
37 of
87)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
33 of
68)
83
Total Points Won
72
|
7-6(5) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Andrea Vavassori
73%
(
36 of
49)
1st Serve %
50%
(
24 of
48)
2
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
4
75%
(
27 of
36)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
14 of
24)
62%
(
8 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
29%
(
14 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
24 of
48)
59
Total Points Won
38
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Alex De Minaur
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
49%
(
34 of
70)
1st Serve %
48%
(
36 of
75)
4
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
4
74%
(
25 of
34)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
23 of
36)
67%
(
24 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
51%
(
20 of
39)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
30%
(
21 of
70)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
32 of
75)
81
Total Points Won
64
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Henri Squire
54%
(
40 of
74)
1st Serve %
66%
(
50 of
76)
3
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
7
75%
(
30 of
40)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
35 of
50)
50%
(
17 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
7 of
26)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
36%
(
27 of
74)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
34 of
76)
81
Total Points Won
69
|
7-5 2-6 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Alex Michelsen
Player
Learner Tien
67%
(
30 of
45)
1st Serve %
65%
(
37 of
57)
7
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
2
87%
(
26 of
30)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
25 of
37)
53%
(
8 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
6 of
20)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
24%
(
11 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
26 of
57)
60
Total Points Won
42
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Joao Fonseca
Player
Learner Tien
64%
(
63 of
99)
1st Serve %
62%
(
67 of
108)
10
Aces
10
3
Double Faults
3
71%
(
45 of
63)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
47 of
67)
64%
(
23 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
22 of
41)
25%
(
3 of
12)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
31%
(
31 of
99)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
39 of
108)
107
Total Points Won
100
|
6-7(1) 6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Mariano Navone
Player
Learner Tien
66%
(
42 of
64)
1st Serve %
56%
(
49 of
87)
4
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
7
74%
(
31 of
42)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
30 of
49)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
20 of
38)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
33%
(
21 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
37 of
87)
80
Total Points Won
71
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Tomas Machac
Player
Learner Tien
57%
(
32 of
56)
1st Serve %
61%
(
51 of
83)
1
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
3
69%
(
22 of
32)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
28 of
51)
50%
(
12 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
12 of
32)
43%
(
6 of
14)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
39%
(
22 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
43 of
83)
77
Total Points Won
62
|
6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Alexander Zverev
69%
(
40 of
58)
1st Serve %
75%
(
44 of
59)
4
Aces
6
0
Double Faults
0
70%
(
28 of
40)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
30 of
44)
61%
(
11 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
33%
(
19 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
24 of
59)
63
Total Points Won
54
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Cameron Norrie
70%
(
43 of
61)
1st Serve %
70%
(
54 of
77)
2
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
1
67%
(
29 of
43)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
30 of
54)
44%
(
8 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
39%
(
24 of
61)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
39 of
77)
76
Total Points Won
62
|
7-6(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Dusan Lajovic
61%
(
46 of
76)
1st Serve %
76%
(
71 of
93)
1
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
1
65%
(
30 of
46)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
41 of
71)
47%
(
14 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
9 of
22)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
80%
(
4 of
5)
42%
(
32 of
76)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
43 of
93)
87
Total Points Won
82
|
7-5 7-6(7) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Federico Agustin Gomez
62%
(
36 of
58)
1st Serve %
56%
(
24 of
43)
3
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
5
81%
(
29 of
36)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
14 of
24)
45%
(
10 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
33%
(
19 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
23 of
43)
62
Total Points Won
39
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Matteo Arnaldi
Player
Learner Tien
65%
(
77 of
119)
1st Serve %
72%
(
78 of
109)
24
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
4
78%
(
60 of
77)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
52 of
78)
40%
(
17 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
29%
(
4 of
14)
35%
(
42 of
119)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
39 of
109)
116
Total Points Won
112
|
7-6(4) 4-6 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
view more
When the match starts we will have live scores and stats on this page. For live streaming at TV channels of this match, see our ATP and WTA worldwide viewing pages. Free trial live streaming of Zandschulp Vs Tien is now available here.
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 62% (168/102) | Win/Loss | 44% (4/5) |
| 60% (380/249) | Sets Win/Loss | 45% (9/11) |
| 54% (3109/2632) | Games Win/Loss | 50% (91/92) |
| 0.28 | Aces Per Game | 0.14 |
| 776 | Aces Total | 13 |
| 0.31 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.23 |
| 863 | Total Double Faults | 21 |
| 1:22:50 | Average Match Time | 1:29:2 |
| 425.92 | Average Opponent Rank | 484.22 |
| 61% (9318/15268) | 1st Serve % | 65% (365/565) |
| 69% (6394/9318) | 1st Serve Win % | 64% (234/365) |
| 48% (2862/5950) | 2nd Serve Win % | 47% (94/200) |
| 45% (836/1851) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 52% (30/58) |
| 44% (6950/15933) | Return Points Win % | 41% (227/560) |
| 63% (163/258) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 44% (4/9) |
| 43% (3/7) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 0% (0/0) |
| 54% (33/61) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 33% (1/3) |
| 52% (44/84) | Deciding Set Win % | 50% (1/2) |
| 90% (162/146) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 100% (4/4) |
| 10% (162/16) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (4/0) |
| 21% (107/23) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (5/0) |
See recent tennis photos of Zandschulp and Tien
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]
View Draw
