Cannon Kingsley vs Thijmen Loof Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
Wojtek Kolan
Published on 07 Sep at 09:31 AM UTC
HEAD TO HEAD
C. Kingsley vs T. Loof

USA
1
Win
Played
0
Win

NED
1
Win
Played
0
Win
Head-to-head: Kingsley 1 - 0 Loof
They have played 2 sets in total, with Cannon Kingsley winning 2 and Thijmen Loof winning 0. The last match between Cannon Kingsley and Thijmen Loof was at the Rennes Challenger, 07-09-2025, Round: Q1, Surface: I.hard, with Cannon Kingsley getting the victory 6-1 7-6(5).
| Players | Head To Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Kingsley | 1 |
| Loof | 0 |
Last 1 H2H Matches:
(Q1) Rennes Challenger(09-07-25)
C. Kingsley vs T. Loof H2H Profile
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| $0 | Career Prize Money | $0 |
| 58.00% (145-105) | Career Total W/L | 41.22% (61-87) |
| 1 | Indoor | 0 |
| 1 | Titles | 0 |
| 1 | Total H2H Matches | 0 |
| 0% (0-0) | YTD Win/Loss | 0% (0-0) |
C. Kingsley vs T. Loof Match Preview:
- Second serve performance shows Loof leads with 49.18% points won, compared to Kingsley's 42.67%. Could this advantage influence the outcome?
- Regarding return games, Kingsley slightly outperforms Loof on second serve returns with 43.78% to Loof’s 42.25%. What about first serve returns? Kingsley again excels, winning 27.21% compared to Loof’s 20.75%.
- Under pressure, Loof has proven more resilient, saving 61.54% of breakpoints, contrasted with Kingsley’s 44.93%.
- Performance over the last year heavily favors Kingsley with a 53.33% win rate, outshining Loof’s 13.33%.
- On clay surfaces where both excel, Kingsley holds a stronger career win percentage of 62%, while Loof has managed 44%.
- In lower-tier tournaments, Kingsley has a significantly higher win percentage at 60.71%, compared to Loof’s 12.5%.
- Examining opponent quality, both players have faced similar-ranked opponents recently, with Loof's opponents averaging a rank of 420.27 and Kingsley’s at 423.58.
- If the match reaches a deciding set, Kingsley again holds an edge with a 40% success rate, versus 33% for Loof.
- Effectiveness at converting break points is in Kingsley’s favor, converting 33.73% compared to Loof's 22.22%.
Editorial Prediction (September 7, 2025, UTC):
As the match approaches, we observe several significant statistical patterns that suggest Kingsley might have the upper hand. While Loof has slightly better performance on second serves, Kingsley’s performance on both first and second serve returns indicates a well-rounded return game.
Under pressure situations, Loof’s ability to save break points might help keep the match competitive, but Kingsley’s overall form and superior breakpoint conversion suggests a higher probability of advancing.
Kingsley also demonstrates greater consistency in recent performance, with a higher win rate over the past year and effectiveness on the preferred clay surface.
Considering these factors, Kingsley appears more likely to secure a victory in this encounter. The cumulative edge in recent form, return game, and tournament-level performance highlights Kingsley as the probable winner.
Cannon Kingsley vs Thijmen Loof Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88.
C. Kingsley vs T. Loof H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches Won | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 0 |
| 13 | Games Won | 7 |
| 6 | Aces (Total) | 4 |
| 1 | Total Double Faults | 1 |
| 1:22:15 | Average Match Time | 1:22:15 |
| 65% (36/55) | 1st Serve % | 68% (49/72) |
| 86% (31/36) | 1st Serve Win % | 67% (33/49) |
| 58% (11/19) | 2nd Serve Win % | 35% (8/23) |
| 30% (3/10) | Break Pts Won % | 100% (1/1) |
| 43% (31/72) | Return Points Win % | 24% (13/55) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best‑of‑3 Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/1) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/1) |
Recent Performance Stats
C. Kingsley Recent Matches Played
T. Loof Recent Matches Played

C. Kingsley vs T. Loof Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 58.00% (145/105) | YTD Win/Loss | 41.22% (61/87) |
| 56.62% (325/249) | Sets Win/Loss | 44.14% (143/181) |
| 53.71% (2933/2528) | Games Win/Loss | 49.06% (1586/1647) |
| 54.46% (61/51) | Hard Win/Loss | 43.55% (27/35) |
| 61.82% (34/21) | Clay Win/Loss | 44.00% (33/42) |
| 60.24% (50/33) | Indoor Hard W/L | 11.11% (1/8) |
| 0% (0/0) | Grass Win/Loss | 0.00% (0/2) |
| 0.54 | Aces Per Game | 0.16 |
| 1442 | Aces Total | 248 |
| 0.17 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.1 |
| 455 | Total Double Faults | 157 |
| 1:32:27 | Average Match Time | 1st Match |
| 428.07 | Average Opponent Rank | 248.51 |
| 62% (9657/15552) | 1st Serve % | 63% (2973/4685) |
| 72% (6943/9657) | 1st Serve Win % | 67% (2000/2973) |
| 52% (3056/5894) | 2nd Serve Win % | 46% (794/1712) |
| 41% (604/1477) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 40% (136/336) |
| 39% (6071/15603) | Return Points Win % | 35% (1539/4415) |
| 0.00% (0/1) | Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 0.00% (0/2) | Main Tour W/L | 0.00% (0/1) |
| 50.00% (49/49) | Challenger W/L | 11.11% (1/8) |
| 64.43% (96/53) | Futures W/L | 43.48% (60/78) |
| 58% (143/247) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 43% (60/141) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 44% (32/72) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 38% (16/42) |
| 52% (40/77) | Deciding Set Win % | 36% (12/33) |
| 87% (142/124) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 89% (61/54) |
| 13% (142/18) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 11% (61/7) |
| 19% (108/21) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 8% (87/7) |