Prediction of Brandon Nakashima [32nd] vs Tommy Paul [12th] Head-to-Head At The 1970
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
W L W W L W L W L L
Form
L W W W L W L W W LHead To Head: Nakashima 4 - 1 Paul
They have played 12 sets in total, with Nakashima winning 8 and Paul winning 4. The last match between Nakashima and Paul was at the Erste Bank Open - Vienna, 23-10-2024, First, I.hard with Brandon Nakashima getting the victory 6-4 6-4.
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Brandon Nakashima | 4 |
| Tommy Paul | 1 |
| Nakashima | Stats | Paul |
|---|---|---|
| 52% (12-11) | YTD Win/Loss | 71% (15-6) |
| 4 | Head-to-Head | 1 |
| 32 | Ranking | 12 |
| 31 | Highest Rank | 9 |
| 23 | Age | 27 |
| R | Plays | R |
| 8 | Titles | 14 |
| 61% (238-151) | Career Total W/L | 64% (444-248) |
| $3,035,300 | Career Prize Money | $8,418,625 |
| 0 | YTD Titles | 0 |
| 1 | Hard H2H | 1 |
| 1 | Clay H2H | 0 |
| 1 | Indoor H2H | 0 |
| 1 | Grass H2H | 0 |
Recent Performance Stats (Last 6 Months)
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 6-4 |
Stats 
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Tommy Paul
77%
(
44 of
57)
1st Serve %
55%
(
47 of
85)
5
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
0
75%
(
33 of
44)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
33 of
47)
62%
(
8 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
18 of
38)
18%
(
2 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
28%
(
16 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
34 of
85)
75
Total Points Won
67
|
||||
| 6-2 6-7(5) 6-1 |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Tommy Paul
70%
(
60 of
86)
1st Serve %
59%
(
59 of
100)
9
Aces
4
0
Double Faults
0
72%
(
43 of
60)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
39 of
59)
73%
(
19 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
18 of
41)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
28%
(
24 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
43 of
100)
105
Total Points Won
81
|
||||
| 6-3 7-6(4) |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Tommy Paul
72%
(
58 of
81)
1st Serve %
66%
(
41 of
62)
6
Aces
7
0
Double Faults
3
72%
(
42 of
58)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
28 of
41)
52%
(
12 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
25%
(
2 of
8)
33%
(
27 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
26 of
62)
80
Total Points Won
63
|
||||
| 6-7(4) 7-6(5) 7-6(2) |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Tommy Paul
65%
(
82 of
126)
1st Serve %
59%
(
85 of
144)
8
Aces
14
2
Double Faults
4
79%
(
65 of
82)
1st Serve Won
78%
(
66 of
85)
57%
(
25 of
44)
2nd Serve Won
51%
(
30 of
59)
17%
(
1 of
6)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
29%
(
36 of
126)
Rtn Points Won
33%
(
48 of
144)
138
Total Points Won
132
|
||||
| 7-6(0) 6-4 |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Brandon Nakashima
65%
(
41 of
63)
1st Serve %
54%
(
54 of
100)
9
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
5
73%
(
30 of
41)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
31 of
54)
64%
(
14 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
21 of
46)
31%
(
4 of
13)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
30%
(
19 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
48 of
100)
92
Total Points Won
71
|
||||
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 4 | H2H Matches | 1 |
| 8 | Sets Won | 4 |
| 73 | Games Won | 59 |
| 32 | Aces (Total) | 36 |
| 7 | Total Double Faults | 9 |
| 2:6:3 | Average Match Time | 2:6:3 |
| 66% (298/450) | 1st Serve % | 60% (273/454) |
| 72% (214/298) | 1st Serve Win % | 72% (196/273) |
| 56% (85/152) | 2nd Serve Win % | 49% (88/181) |
| 34% (14/41) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 24% (7/29) |
| 37% (170/454) | Return Points Win % | 34% (151/450) |
| 80% (4/5) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 20% (1/5) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 0% (0/0) |
| 50% (3/6) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 50% (3/6) |
| 100% (2/2) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/2) |
| 100% (3/3) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 50% (2/1) |
| 0% (3/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 50% (2/1) |
| 50% (2/1) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (3/0) |
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Brandon Nakashima vs Tommy Paul Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Nakashima 4 - 1 Paul
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Nakashima has won 48.24% of points on their second serve, while Paul has won 43.42%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Nakashima, in recent form, has won 39.91% of their opponent's second serve points, while Paul has won 45.86%. The same stats for first serve returns are 22.24% and 25.77% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Nakashima has saved 60% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Paul has saved 55.43% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Nakashima has won 58.54% of matches played (W/L 48/ 34), with Paul winning 70.77% (W/L 46/ 19) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Nakashima has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 70% (W/L 65/ 28), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 51% (W/L 31/ 30). Paul has their best career surface win % on Grass, winning 67% (W/L 32/ 16), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 63% (W/L 64/ 38).
- Player level: In the last year, Nakashima has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 50% of matches (W/L 18/ 18), where as Paul has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 76% of matches (W/L 19/ 6). 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 5 times before with Nakashima winning 4 times and Paul being victorious 1 times. They have played 12 sets in total, with Nakashima winning 8 and Paul winning 4. The last match between Nakashima and Paul was at the Erste Bank Open - Vienna, 23-10-2024, First, I.hard with Brandon Nakashima getting the victory 6-4 6-4.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 2:6:3.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Nakashima and Paul have played a deciding set 2 times, with Nakashima winning 2 times and Paul 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 6 tiebreaks against each other with Nakashima winning 3, and Paul 3.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Nakashima has played against opponents with an average rank of 177.13 while Paul has played against players with an average rank of 106.28.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Nakashima has won 60% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Paul has won 60% in all matches played on tour.
- Current event H2H stats: Past player performance is very useful in predicting tennis matches, but once an event is under way we should also look at current event stats for in form player indication, so check the section below (if they have played a match in the current event). Some players also perform better at certain events and this should be taken into account when picking the outcome.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Nakashima has converted 37.18% of breakpoint opportunities, and Paul has converted 34.53% 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)
Brandon Nakashima Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Pedro Martinez Portero
Player
Brandon Nakashima
68%
(
79 of
117)
1st Serve %
63%
(
72 of
114)
2
Aces
11
2
Double Faults
1
67%
(
53 of
79)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
48 of
72)
50%
(
19 of
38)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
22 of
42)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
38%
(
45 of
117)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
44 of
114)
116
Total Points Won
115
|
7-5 5-7 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Roberto Bautista Agut
Player
Brandon Nakashima
72%
(
42 of
58)
1st Serve %
66%
(
35 of
53)
3
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
0
74%
(
31 of
42)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
19 of
35)
50%
(
8 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
7 of
18)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
33%
(
19 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
27 of
53)
66
Total Points Won
45
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Frances Tiafoe
Player
Brandon Nakashima
60%
(
36 of
60)
1st Serve %
65%
(
53 of
81)
4
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
1
69%
(
25 of
36)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
33 of
53)
54%
(
13 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
9 of
28)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
80%
(
4 of
5)
37%
(
22 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
39 of
81)
77
Total Points Won
64
|
6-4 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Christopher Eubanks
57%
(
30 of
53)
1st Serve %
75%
(
49 of
65)
7
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
3
77%
(
23 of
30)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
35 of
49)
74%
(
17 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
8 of
16)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
25%
(
13 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
22 of
65)
62
Total Points Won
56
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Mackenzie Mcdonald
65%
(
32 of
49)
1st Serve %
67%
(
41 of
61)
7
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
1
81%
(
26 of
32)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
26 of
41)
82%
(
14 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
9 of
20)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
18%
(
9 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
26 of
61)
66
Total Points Won
44
|
6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R4 |
Stats
Grigor Dimitrov
Player
Brandon Nakashima
70%
(
40 of
57)
1st Serve %
67%
(
36 of
54)
12
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
1
83%
(
33 of
40)
1st Serve Won
92%
(
33 of
36)
65%
(
11 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
7 of
18)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
23%
(
13 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
26%
(
14 of
54)
58
Total Points Won
53
|
6-4 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R3 |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
David Goffin
67%
(
63 of
94)
1st Serve %
56%
(
56 of
100)
13
Aces
7
2
Double Faults
5
84%
(
53 of
63)
1st Serve Won
77%
(
43 of
56)
48%
(
15 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
18 of
44)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
28%
(
26 of
94)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
39 of
100)
107
Total Points Won
87
|
6-3 6-7(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Roberto Carballes Baena
68%
(
69 of
101)
1st Serve %
56%
(
48 of
86)
14
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
1
75%
(
52 of
69)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
35 of
48)
44%
(
14 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
18 of
38)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
35%
(
35 of
101)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
33 of
86)
99
Total Points Won
88
|
6-4 4-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R4 |
Stats
Ben Shelton
Player
Brandon Nakashima
66%
(
40 of
61)
1st Serve %
48%
(
30 of
62)
6
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
1
73%
(
29 of
40)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
18 of
30)
67%
(
14 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
30%
(
18 of
61)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
27 of
62)
70
Total Points Won
53
|
7-6(6) 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R3 |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Matteo Arnaldi
60%
(
27 of
45)
1st Serve %
57%
(
32 of
56)
4
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
5
89%
(
24 of
27)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
23 of
32)
72%
(
13 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
9 of
24)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
18%
(
8 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
24 of
56)
61
Total Points Won
40
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Tommy Paul Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SF |
Stats
Jenson Brooksby
Player
Tommy Paul
68%
(
74 of
109)
1st Serve %
56%
(
62 of
111)
0
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
5
62%
(
46 of
74)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
42 of
62)
51%
(
18 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
27 of
49)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
45%
(
5 of
11)
41%
(
45 of
109)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
42 of
111)
106
Total Points Won
114
|
7-6(5) 3-6 7-6(6) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Colton Smith
47%
(
24 of
51)
1st Serve %
62%
(
44 of
71)
3
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
2
92%
(
22 of
24)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
27 of
44)
70%
(
19 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
13 of
27)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
20%
(
10 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
31 of
71)
72
Total Points Won
50
|
6-1 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Cristian Garin
56%
(
54 of
96)
1st Serve %
65%
(
74 of
113)
7
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
3
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
50 of
74)
43%
(
18 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
16 of
39)
29%
(
4 of
14)
Break Points Won
33%
(
4 of
12)
41%
(
39 of
96)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
47 of
113)
104
Total Points Won
105
|
2-6 6-2 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| R3 |
Stats
Francisco Cerundolo
Player
Tommy Paul
75%
(
44 of
59)
1st Serve %
59%
(
36 of
61)
1
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
3
64%
(
28 of
44)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
22 of
36)
67%
(
10 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
9 of
25)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
3 of
3)
36%
(
21 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
30 of
61)
68
Total Points Won
52
|
6-2 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Alexander Bublik
58%
(
58 of
100)
1st Serve %
59%
(
66 of
112)
17
Aces
19
2
Double Faults
10
79%
(
46 of
58)
1st Serve Won
79%
(
52 of
66)
64%
(
27 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
22 of
46)
17%
(
2 of
12)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
27%
(
27 of
100)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
38 of
112)
111
Total Points Won
101
|
5-7 7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R4 |
Stats
Daniil Medvedev
Player
Tommy Paul
61%
(
31 of
51)
1st Serve %
67%
(
37 of
55)
8
Aces
4
4
Double Faults
4
71%
(
22 of
31)
1st Serve Won
51%
(
19 of
37)
45%
(
9 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
28%
(
5 of
18)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
39%
(
20 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
31 of
55)
62
Total Points Won
44
|
6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R3 |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Cameron Norrie
52%
(
30 of
58)
1st Serve %
50%
(
35 of
70)
6
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
7
70%
(
21 of
30)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
21 of
35)
50%
(
14 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
13 of
35)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
100%
(
3 of
3)
40%
(
23 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
36 of
70)
71
Total Points Won
57
|
6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Tristan Boyer
54%
(
22 of
41)
1st Serve %
57%
(
34 of
60)
4
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
3
73%
(
16 of
22)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
21 of
34)
74%
(
14 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
7 of
26)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
27%
(
11 of
41)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
32 of
60)
62
Total Points Won
39
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 | w/o | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Tommy Paul
Player
Gabriel Diallo
54%
(
31 of
57)
1st Serve %
55%
(
26 of
47)
0
Aces
4
3
Double Faults
2
68%
(
21 of
31)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
15 of
26)
65%
(
17 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
10 of
21)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
33%
(
19 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
22 of
47)
60
Total Points Won
44
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Where To Watch Nakashima vs Paul?
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 Nakashima Vs Paul is now available here.
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 61% (238/151) | Win/Loss | 64% (444/248) |
| 59% (569/389) | Sets Win/Loss | 60% (1029/685) |
| 53% (5025/4409) | Games Win/Loss | 53% (8810/7684) |
| 0.57 | Aces Per Game | 0.36 |
| 2613 | Aces Total | 2900 |
| 0.14 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.18 |
| 667 | Total Double Faults | 1473 |
| 1:44:53 | Average Match Time | 1:30:1 |
| 178.99 | Average Opponent Rank | 167.56 |
| 64% (17964/28288) | 1st Serve % | 60% (27216/45336) |
| 75% (13387/17964) | 1st Serve Win % | 71% (19332/27216) |
| 54% (5589/10324) | 2nd Serve Win % | 53% (9523/18121) |
| 38% (939/2479) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 42% (1865/4415) |
| 37% (10915/29442) | Return Points Win % | 39% (17898/45531) |
| 61% (212/346) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 64% (397/619) |
| 57% (23/40) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 63% (40/64) |
| 55% (118/215) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 53% (142/268) |
| 50% (61/122) | Deciding Set Win % | 61% (146/241) |
| 86% (240/206) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 88% (410/360) |
| 14% (240/34) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 12% (410/49) |
| 20% (148/30) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 29% (282/82) |
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]
