Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Jules Okala 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 Okala analysis and find out who is favored!
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Jules Okala Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Zandschulp has won 47.91% of points on his second serve, while Okala 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 48.8% of his opponent's second serve points, while Okala has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 28.62% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Zandschulp has saved 60.59% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Okala has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Zandschulp has won 44% of matches played (W/L 22/ 28), with Okala 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 48% (W/L 10/ 11). Okala has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 67% (W/L 139/ 70), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 37% (W/L 15/ 26).
- Player level: In the last year, Zandschulp has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 39.13% of matches (W/L 9/ 14), where as Okala 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.
- Direct H2H matches: They have played 2 times before with Zandschulp winning 1 times. They have played 5 sets in total, with Zandschulp winning 3 and Okala winning 2. The last match between Zandschulp and Okala was at the M25 Angers, 26-04-2019, Quarterfinals, Clay with Botic Van De Zandschulp getting the victory .
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:30:30.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Zandschulp and Okala have played a deciding set 2 times, with Zandschulp winning 2 times and Okala 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 Zandschulp winning 0, and Okala 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Zandschulp has played against opponents with an average rank of 165.34 while Okala 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 67% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Okala has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Zandschulp has converted 35.56% of breakpoint opportunities, and Okala 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.
Head-to-head: Zandschulp 2 - 0 Okala
115
Rank
22
High
28
Age
R
Plays
2
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
1
Indoor0
0
Grass0
751
Rank
338
High
26
Age
R
Plays
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
Form
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
63% (328-195)
Career Total W/L
61% (199-129)
36% (8-14)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$2,870,600
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.
Zandschulp VS Okala H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Jules Okala |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 3 | 2 |
| Games Won | 21 | 14 |
| Aces (Total) | 12 | 3 |
| DFs (Total) | 5 | 5 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:30:30 | 1:30:30 |
| 1st Serve % | 61% (72/119) | 59% (69/116) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 71% (51/72) | 49% (34/69) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 40% (19/47) | 51% (24/47) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 44% (8/18) | 36% (4/11) |
| Return Points W% | 50% (58/116) | 41% (49/119) |
| 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% | 100% (2/2) | 0% (0/2) |
| 1st set W, W | 0% (1/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 100% (1/1) | 0% (1/0) |
Zandschulp VS Okala H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-6 6-2 6-4 |
Stats 
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Jules Okala
59%
(
51 of
86)
1st Serve %
58%
(
45 of
78)
7
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
4
63%
(
32 of
51)
1st Serve Won
49%
(
22 of
45)
49%
(
17 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
17 of
33)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
44%
(
4 of
9)
43%
(
37 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
39 of
78)
88
Total Points Won
76
|
||||
| 6-1 0-1 ret. |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Jules Okala
64%
(
21 of
33)
1st Serve %
63%
(
24 of
38)
5
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
1
90%
(
19 of
21)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
12 of
24)
17%
(
2 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
7 of
14)
33%
(
2 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
36%
(
12 of
33)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
19 of
38)
40
Total Points Won
31
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Jules Okala |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 36% (8/14) | 0% (0/0) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 37% (18/31) | 0% (0/0) |
| Games Win/Loss | 46% (223/267) | 0% (0/0) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 36% (4/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 38% (3/5) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.44 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 104 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0.28 | 0 |
| DFs Total | 67 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:45:44 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 169.5 | 0 |
| 1st Serve % | 63% (970/1543) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st Serve W% | 68% (664/970) | 0% (0/0) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 47% (270/573) | 0% (0/0) |
| BPs Won% Total | 36% (45/126) | 0% (0/0) |
| Return Pts W% | 37% (561/1528) | 0% (0/0) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 33% (2/4) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 50% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 42% (5/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 40% (8/20) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 55% (6/11) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 60% (3/5) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 88% (8/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 13% (8/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 7% (14/1) | 0% (0/0) |
Botic Van De Zandschulp Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | 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 | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Christopher Eubanks
67%
(
32 of
48)
1st Serve %
67%
(
32 of
48)
5
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
4
88%
(
28 of
32)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
38%
(
6 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
7 of
16)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
29%
(
14 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
24 of
48)
58
Total Points Won
38
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Jan-Lennard Struff
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
56%
(
42 of
75)
1st Serve %
70%
(
74 of
105)
7
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
4
71%
(
30 of
42)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
46 of
74)
61%
(
20 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
15%
(
2 of
13)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
33%
(
25 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
46 of
105)
96
Total Points Won
84
|
7-6(0) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Ivan Gakhov
52%
(
48 of
93)
1st Serve %
52%
(
57 of
110)
2
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
4
60%
(
29 of
48)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
33 of
57)
47%
(
21 of
45)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
22 of
53)
29%
(
6 of
21)
Break Points Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
46%
(
43 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
55 of
110)
105
Total Points Won
98
|
6-4 2-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 4-1 ret. | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Casper Ruud
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
75%
(
41 of
55)
1st Serve %
57%
(
31 of
54)
3
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
5
73%
(
30 of
41)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
33%
(
18 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
28 of
54)
65
Total Points Won
44
|
6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Federico Coria
64%
(
65 of
102)
1st Serve %
64%
(
52 of
81)
1
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
0
65%
(
42 of
65)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
25 of
52)
46%
(
17 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
16 of
29)
43%
(
6 of
14)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
42%
(
43 of
102)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
40 of
81)
99
Total Points Won
84
|
6-4 4-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ugo Humbert
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
70%
(
44 of
63)
1st Serve %
65%
(
35 of
54)
3
Aces
7
4
Double Faults
2
84%
(
37 of
44)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
23 of
35)
32%
(
6 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
32%
(
20 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
23 of
54)
66
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Rinky Hijikata
73%
(
61 of
84)
1st Serve %
54%
(
36 of
67)
8
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
3
69%
(
42 of
61)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
26 of
36)
61%
(
14 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
65%
(
20 of
31)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
33%
(
28 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
31%
(
21 of
67)
77
Total Points Won
74
|
7-5 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
view more
Jules Okala Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Rinky Hijikata
Player
Jules Okala
54%
(
25 of
46)
1st Serve %
55%
(
24 of
44)
8
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
3
92%
(
23 of
25)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
15 of
24)
52%
(
11 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
12 of
20)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
26%
(
12 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
17 of
44)
51
Total Points Won
39
|
6-3 4-2 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Keegan Smith
Player
Jules Okala
78%
(
38 of
49)
1st Serve %
73%
(
41 of
56)
6
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
3
87%
(
33 of
38)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
25 of
41)
55%
(
6 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
9 of
15)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
20%
(
10 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
22 of
56)
61
Total Points Won
44
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cristian Rodriguez
Player
Jules Okala
55%
(
40 of
73)
1st Serve %
56%
(
41 of
73)
11
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
7
78%
(
31 of
40)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
26 of
41)
48%
(
16 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
28%
(
9 of
32)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
36%
(
26 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
38 of
73)
85
Total Points Won
61
|
3-6 6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Pietro Rondoni
Player
Jules Okala
63%
(
40 of
64)
1st Serve %
57%
(
48 of
84)
4
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
9
73%
(
29 of
40)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
35 of
48)
71%
(
17 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
15 of
36)
15%
(
2 of
13)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
28%
(
18 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
34 of
84)
80
Total Points Won
68
|
7-6(1) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Baptiste Crepatte
Player
Jules Okala
59%
(
45 of
76)
1st Serve %
60%
(
58 of
97)
13
Aces
9
0
Double Faults
2
73%
(
33 of
45)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
38 of
58)
48%
(
15 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
16 of
39)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
67%
(
4 of
6)
37%
(
28 of
76)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
43 of
97)
91
Total Points Won
82
|
5-7 7-6(3) 3-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Matteo Martineau
Player
Jules Okala
72%
(
23 of
32)
1st Serve %
55%
(
17 of
31)
3
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
4
57%
(
13 of
23)
1st Serve Won
41%
(
7 of
17)
67%
(
6 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
4 of
14)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
41%
(
13 of
32)
Rtn Points Won
65%
(
20 of
31)
39
Total Points Won
24
|
6-3 2-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Jules Okala
Player
Karlis Ozolins
60%
(
58 of
97)
1st Serve %
65%
(
49 of
75)
14
Aces
7
6
Double Faults
8
76%
(
44 of
58)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
29 of
49)
31%
(
12 of
39)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
11 of
26)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
29%
(
4 of
14)
42%
(
41 of
97)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
35 of
75)
91
Total Points Won
81
|
3-6 6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Antoine Bellier
Player
Jules Okala
63%
(
40 of
64)
1st Serve %
53%
(
39 of
73)
8
Aces
7
0
Double Faults
4
80%
(
32 of
40)
1st Serve Won
85%
(
33 of
39)
71%
(
17 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
12 of
34)
18%
(
2 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
23%
(
15 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
28 of
73)
77
Total Points Won
60
|
7-6(5) 6-1 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Jules Okala
Player
Alberto Barroso Campos
58%
(
58 of
100)
1st Serve %
68%
(
69 of
102)
15
Aces
5
4
Double Faults
3
74%
(
43 of
58)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
45 of
69)
55%
(
23 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
15 of
33)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
34%
(
34 of
100)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
42 of
102)
108
Total Points Won
94
|
6-3 6-7(6) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Jules Okala
Player
Marc Othman Ktiri
60%
(
51 of
85)
1st Serve %
63%
(
58 of
92)
-
Aces
-
2
Double Faults
1
78%
(
40 of
51)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
39 of
58)
50%
(
17 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
16 of
34)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
33%
(
28 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
37 of
92)
94
Total Points Won
83
|
6-4 5-7 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Zandschulp Vs Okala 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]
