Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Samuel Bensoussan 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 Bensoussan analysis and find out who is favored!
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Samuel Bensoussan Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Zandschulp has won 49.66% of points on his second serve, while Bensoussan 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 50.19% of his opponent's second serve points, while Bensoussan has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 28.92% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Zandschulp has saved 61.29% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Bensoussan has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Zandschulp has won 45.1% of matches played (W/L 23/ 28), with Bensoussan 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). Bensoussan has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 59% (W/L 243/ 166), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 40% (W/L 2/ 3).
- Player level: In the last year, Zandschulp has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 42.31% of matches (W/L 11/ 15), where as Bensoussan 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 1 times before with Zandschulp winning 1 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Zandschulp winning 2 and Bensoussan winning 0. The last match between Zandschulp and Bensoussan was at the France F4 (Lille), 27-02-2017, First, I.hard 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 1:46:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Zandschulp and Bensoussan have played a deciding set 0 times, with Zandschulp winning 0 times and Bensoussan 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 1 tiebreaks against each other with Zandschulp winning 1, and Bensoussan 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Zandschulp has played against opponents with an average rank of 152.33 while Bensoussan 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 64% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Bensoussan has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Zandschulp has converted 36.69% of breakpoint opportunities, and Bensoussan 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 1 - 0 Bensoussan
89
Rank
22
High
28
Age
R
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
1
Indoor0
0
Grass0
Ret.
Rank
405
High
32
Age
R
Plays
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
Form
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
63% (326-193)
Career Total W/L
59% (248-172)
33% (6-12)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$2,830,210
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 Bensoussan H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Samuel Bensoussan |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 0 |
| Games Won | 13 | 7 |
| Aces (Total) | 5 | 2 |
| DFs (Total) | 7 | 1 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:46:0 | 1:46:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 64% (49/76) | 61% (39/64) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 61% (30/49) | 59% (23/39) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 56% (15/27) | 48% (12/25) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 71% (5/7) | 60% (3/5) |
| Return Points W% | 45% (29/64) | 41% (31/76) |
| 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) | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| 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) |
Zandschulp VS Bensoussan H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7-6(6) 6-1 |
Stats 
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Samuel Bensoussan
64%
(
49 of
76)
1st Serve %
61%
(
39 of
64)
5
Aces
2
7
Double Faults
1
61%
(
30 of
49)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
23 of
39)
56%
(
15 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
41%
(
31 of
76)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
29 of
64)
74
Total Points Won
66
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Samuel Bensoussan |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 33% (6/12) | 0% (0/0) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 33% (13/26) | 0% (0/0) |
| Games Win/Loss | 45% (177/218) | 0% (0/0) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 36% (4/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 25% (1/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.46 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 87 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0.27 | 0 |
| DFs Total | 52 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:43:24 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 166.83 | 0 |
| 1st Serve % | 64% (800/1251) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st Serve W% | 68% (544/800) | 0% (0/0) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 47% (213/451) | 0% (0/0) |
| BPs Won% Total | 35% (33/93) | 0% (0/0) |
| Return Pts W% | 36% (431/1211) | 0% (0/0) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 25% (1/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 50% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 36% (4/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 38% (6/16) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 50% (5/10) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 67% (2/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 83% (6/5) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 17% (6/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 8% (12/1) | 0% (0/0) |
Botic Van De Zandschulp Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | 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 | ||
| 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 | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Denis Shapovalov
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
57%
(
29 of
51)
1st Serve %
56%
(
32 of
57)
8
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
6
79%
(
23 of
29)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
59%
(
13 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
28%
(
7 of
25)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
29%
(
15 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
29 of
57)
65
Total Points Won
43
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Sebastian Korda
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
66%
(
25 of
38)
1st Serve %
58%
(
18 of
31)
10
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
3
88%
(
22 of
25)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
9 of
18)
46%
(
6 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
8%
(
1 of
13)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
26%
(
10 of
38)
Rtn Points Won
68%
(
21 of
31)
49
Total Points Won
20
|
6-1 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Adrian Mannarino
63%
(
42 of
67)
1st Serve %
59%
(
41 of
69)
5
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
1
81%
(
34 of
42)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
30 of
41)
52%
(
13 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
12 of
28)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
30%
(
20 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
27 of
69)
74
Total Points Won
62
|
7-6(3) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Gael Monfils
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
67%
(
54 of
81)
1st Serve %
68%
(
45 of
66)
2
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
4
70%
(
38 of
54)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
28 of
45)
48%
(
13 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
11 of
21)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
37%
(
30 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
27 of
66)
78
Total Points Won
69
|
6-1 7-6(9) | H2H | ||
view more
Samuel Bensoussan Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Johan Nikles
Player
Samuel Bensoussan
77%
(
24 of
31)
1st Serve %
67%
(
29 of
43)
-
Aces
-
1
Double Faults
0
79%
(
19 of
24)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
13 of
29)
43%
(
3 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
5 of
14)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
29%
(
9 of
31)
Rtn Points Won
58%
(
25 of
43)
47
Total Points Won
27
|
6-1 3-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Samuel Bensoussan
Player
Aleksandr Bulitski
82%
(
42 of
51)
1st Serve %
64%
(
37 of
58)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
1
64%
(
27 of
42)
1st Serve Won
41%
(
15 of
37)
56%
(
5 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
62%
(
13 of
21)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
37%
(
19 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
30 of
58)
62
Total Points Won
47
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Flavio Cobolli
Player
Samuel Bensoussan
44%
(
45 of
103)
1st Serve %
78%
(
82 of
105)
-
Aces
-
4
Double Faults
2
51%
(
23 of
45)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
48 of
82)
48%
(
28 of
58)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
50%
(
7 of
14)
50%
(
52 of
103)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
49 of
105)
100
Total Points Won
108
|
1-6 6-4 7-6(6) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Samuel Bensoussan
Player
Wilson Leite
78%
(
62 of
80)
1st Serve %
56%
(
42 of
75)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
1
52%
(
32 of
62)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
17 of
42)
50%
(
9 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
13 of
33)
57%
(
8 of
14)
Break Points Won
38%
(
5 of
13)
49%
(
39 of
80)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
45 of
75)
86
Total Points Won
69
|
6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Samuel Bensoussan
Player
Luciano Darderi
70%
(
65 of
93)
1st Serve %
49%
(
35 of
71)
-
Aces
-
2
Double Faults
2
62%
(
40 of
65)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
14 of
35)
46%
(
13 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
16 of
36)
58%
(
7 of
12)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
43%
(
40 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
58%
(
41 of
71)
94
Total Points Won
70
|
6-0 4-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Samuel Bensoussan
Player
Laurent Lokoli
65%
(
13 of
20)
1st Serve %
62%
(
21 of
34)
0
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
2
69%
(
9 of
13)
1st Serve Won
81%
(
17 of
21)
57%
(
4 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
33%
(
1 of
3)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
35%
(
7 of
20)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
13 of
33)
26
Total Points Won
27
|
4-4 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Andrey Chepelev
Player
Samuel Bensoussan
63%
(
51 of
81)
1st Serve %
70%
(
63 of
90)
0
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
1
61%
(
31 of
51)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
35 of
63)
37%
(
11 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
67%
(
6 of
9)
48%
(
39 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
40 of
90)
82
Total Points Won
89
|
1-6 6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Miljan Zekic
Player
Samuel Bensoussan
60%
(
24 of
40)
1st Serve %
48%
(
20 of
42)
7
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
1
92%
(
22 of
24)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
12 of
20)
56%
(
9 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
6 of
22)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
23%
(
9 of
40)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
24 of
42)
55
Total Points Won
27
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Samuel Bensoussan
Player
Pawel Juszczak
60%
(
18 of
30)
1st Serve %
28%
(
8 of
29)
1
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
6
78%
(
14 of
18)
1st Serve Won
25%
(
2 of
8)
67%
(
8 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
6 of
21)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
27%
(
8 of
30)
Rtn Points Won
72%
(
21 of
29)
43
Total Points Won
16
|
6-0 3-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Jelle Sels
Player
Samuel Bensoussan
45%
(
29 of
64)
1st Serve %
68%
(
48 of
71)
1
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
1
66%
(
19 of
29)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
24 of
48)
54%
(
19 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
67%
(
4 of
6)
41%
(
26 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
35 of
71)
73
Total Points Won
62
|
1-6 6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
view more
Zandschulp Vs Bensoussan 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 support@matchstat.com
