B. Nakashima
To Win
S. Ofner
To Win
Brandon Nakashima vs Botic Van De Zandschulp Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
W L W W L W W L L L
Form
W W L L W L W L W LHead-To-Head: Nakashima 0 - 1 Zandschulp
They have played 2 sets in total, with Nakashima winning 0 and Zandschulp winning 2. The last match between Nakashima and Zandschulp was at the BMW Open - Munich, 27-04-2022, First, Clay with Botic Van De Zandschulp getting the victory 7-6(3) 6-3.
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Brandon Nakashima | 0 |
| Botic Van De Zandschulp | 1 |
BMW Open - Munich(27-04-2022)
| Nakashima | Stats | Zandschulp |
|---|---|---|
| 52% (12-11) | YTD Win/Loss | 43% (10-13) |
| 0 | Head-to-Head | 1 |
| 32 | Ranking | 88 |
| 31 | Highest Rank | 22 |
| 23 | Age | 29 |
| R | Plays | R |
| 8 | Titles | 7 |
| 61% (238-151) | Career Total W/L | 62% (363-227) |
| $3,035,300 | Career Prize Money | $3,456,920 |
| 0 | Clay H2H | 1 |
Upcoming Match
25 Apr 2025 / Second
ODDS
Upcoming Match
24 Apr 2025 / First
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Shnaider VS Volynets PREDICTION Clay
Mutua Madrid Open - Madrid wta
25 Apr 2025 / Second
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
Zandschulp VS Struff PREDICTION Clay
Mutua Madrid Open - Madrid atp
23 Apr 2025 / First
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
Nakashima VS Zandschulp H2H Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7-6(3) 6-3 |
Stats 
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Brandon Nakashima
61%
(
40 of
66)
1st Serve %
62%
(
40 of
65)
6
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
1
70%
(
28 of
40)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
22 of
40)
54%
(
14 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
13 of
25)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
36%
(
24 of
66)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
30 of
65)
72
Total Points Won
59
|
||||
Nakashima VS Zandschulp H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 0 | H2H Matches | 1 |
| 0 | Sets Won | 2 |
| 9 | Games Won | 13 |
| 1 | Aces (Total) | 6 |
| 1 | Total Double Faults | 2 |
| 1:33:44 | Average Match Time | 1:33:44 |
| 62% (40/65) | 1st Serve % | 61% (40/66) |
| 55% (22/40) | 1st Serve Win % | 70% (28/40) |
| 52% (13/25) | 2nd Serve Win % | 54% (14/26) |
| 60% (3/5) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 67% (4/6) |
| 36% (24/66) | Return Points Win % | 46% (30/65) |
| 0% (0/1) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 100% (1/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/1) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 100% (1/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 100% (1/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (1/0) |
| 0% (1/0) | 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.
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 | ||
| 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 | ||
| 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 | ||
| 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
Botic Van De Zandschulp Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Juan Manuel Cerundolo
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
63%
(
72 of
115)
1st Serve %
69%
(
84 of
122)
6
Aces
9
5
Double Faults
1
65%
(
47 of
72)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
61 of
84)
56%
(
24 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
34%
(
13 of
38)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
56%
(
5 of
9)
38%
(
44 of
115)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
48 of
122)
119
Total Points Won
118
|
7-6(3) 5-7 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Moise Kouame
59%
(
32 of
54)
1st Serve %
45%
(
24 of
53)
2
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
6
84%
(
27 of
32)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
13 of
24)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
15 of
29)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
28%
(
15 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
25 of
53)
64
Total Points Won
43
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ben Shelton
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
68%
(
40 of
59)
1st Serve %
59%
(
40 of
68)
3
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
5
83%
(
33 of
40)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
27 of
40)
58%
(
11 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
14 of
28)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
25%
(
15 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
27 of
68)
71
Total Points Won
56
|
7-6(1) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Roberto Bautista Agut
72%
(
60 of
83)
1st Serve %
66%
(
64 of
97)
11
Aces
0
4
Double Faults
1
77%
(
46 of
60)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
42 of
64)
43%
(
10 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
19 of
33)
18%
(
2 of
11)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
33%
(
27 of
83)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
36 of
97)
92
Total Points Won
88
|
6-4 3-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
58%
(
29 of
50)
1st Serve %
48%
(
26 of
54)
1
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
4
76%
(
22 of
29)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
16 of
26)
48%
(
10 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
8 of
28)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
36%
(
18 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
30 of
54)
62
Total Points Won
42
|
6-2 6-2 | 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 | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 61% (238/151) | Win/Loss | 62% (363/227) |
| 59% (569/389) | Sets Win/Loss | 58% (827/591) |
| 53% (5025/4409) | Games Win/Loss | 53% (7112/6286) |
| 61% (118/76) | Hard Win/Loss | 58% (68/49) |
| 51% (31/30) | Clay Win/Loss | 62% (170/105) |
| 69% (65/29) | Indoor Hard W/L | 66% (114/60) |
| 60% (24/16) | Grass Win/Loss | 46% (11/13) |
| 0.57 | Aces Per Game | 0.44 |
| 2613 | Aces Total | 2883 |
| 0.14 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.33 |
| 667 | Total Double Faults | 2137 |
| 1:44:53 | Average Match Time | 1:35:39 |
| 264.3 | Average Opponent Rank | 384.85 |
| 64% (17964/28288) | 1st Serve % | 62% (24045/39045) |
| 75% (13387/17964) | 1st Serve Win % | 71% (17182/24045) |
| 54% (5589/10324) | 2nd Serve Win % | 48% (7226/15003) |
| 38% (939/2479) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 43% (1778/4121) |
| 37% (10915/29442) | Return Points Win % | 41% (16358/40230) |
| 49% (19/20) | Slam W/L | 62% (32/20) |
| 48% (27/29) | Masters W/L | 50% (26/26) |
| 100% (3/0) | Cups W/L | 63% (12/7) |
| 59% (80/56) | Main Tour W/L | 50% (66/65) |
| 0% (0/0) | Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 70% (92/40) | Challenger W/L | 63% (72/42) |
| 74% (17/6) | Futures W/L | 70% (155/67) |
| 61% (212/346) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 62% (336/539) |
| 57% (23/40) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 53% (20/38) |
| 55% (118/215) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 55% (100/183) |
| 50% (61/122) | Deciding Set Win % | 57% (112/195) |
| 86% (240/206) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 89% (342/303) |
| 14% (240/34) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 11% (342/38) |
| 20% (148/30) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 24% (246/59) |
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]
