Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Cannon Kingsley vs Tyler Zink 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 Kingsley vs Zink analysis and find out who is favored!
Cannon Kingsley vs Tyler Zink Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Kingsley has won 53.82% of points on his second serve, while Zink has won 44%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Kingsley, in recent form, has won 53.77% of his opponent's second serve points, while Zink has won 50%. The same stats for first serve returns are 24.11% and 31.71% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Kingsley has saved 59.02% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Zink has saved 50% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Kingsley has won 57.45% of matches played (W/L 27/ 20), with Zink winning 28.57% (W/L 4/ 10) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Kingsley has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 65% (W/L 22/ 12), and worse career win % on Hard, winning 56% (W/L 40/ 31). Zink has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 49% (W/L 24/ 25), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 33% (W/L 2/ 4).
- Player level: In the last year, Kingsley has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 51.85% of matches (W/L 14/ 13), where as Zink has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 25% of matches (W/L 3/ 9). 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 Kingsley winning 2 times. They have played 6 sets in total, with Kingsley winning 4 and Zink winning 2. The last match between Kingsley and Zink was at the M25 Champaign, 19-07-2023, First, Hard with Cannon Kingsley getting the victory .
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 2:5:30.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Kingsley and Zink have played a deciding set 2 times, with Kingsley winning 2 times and Zink 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 Kingsley winning 0, and Zink 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Kingsley has played against opponents with an average rank of 209.83 while Zink has played against players with an average rank of 269.57.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Kingsley has won 53% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Zink has won 40% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Kingsley has converted 41.43% of breakpoint opportunities, and Zink has converted 16.67% 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: Kingsley 2 - 0 Zink
414
Rank
404
High
22
Age
R
Plays
2
Total0
1
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
874
Rank
781
High
23
Age
Plays
W
L
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
Form
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
W
L
L
60% (99-67)
Career Total W/L
44% (33-42)
57% (4-3)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$0
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.
| stats | Cannon Kingsley | Tyler Zink |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 2 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 4 | 2 |
| Games Won | 28 | 24 |
| Aces (Total) | 15 | 12 |
| DFs (Total) | 7 | 7 |
| Avg Match Time | 2:5:30 | 2:5:30 |
| 1st Serve % | 65% (104/159) | 53% (87/164) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 72% (75/104) | 71% (62/87) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 49% (27/55) | 45% (35/77) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 57% (8/14) | 35% (6/17) |
| Return Points W% | 41% (67/164) | 36% (57/159) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 100% (2/2) | 0% (0/2) |
| 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 | 100% (1/1) | 0% (1/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 100% (1/1) | 0% (1/0) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-0 2-6 7-5 |
Stats 
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Tyler Zink
73%
(
53 of
73)
1st Serve %
61%
(
54 of
89)
10
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
2
74%
(
39 of
53)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
34 of
54)
40%
(
8 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
15 of
35)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
36%
(
26 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
40 of
89)
87
Total Points Won
75
|
||||
| 1-6 6-4 6-3 |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Tyler Zink
59%
(
51 of
86)
1st Serve %
44%
(
33 of
75)
5
Aces
7
6
Double Faults
5
71%
(
36 of
51)
1st Serve Won
85%
(
28 of
33)
54%
(
19 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
20 of
42)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
36%
(
31 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
27 of
75)
82
Total Points Won
79
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Cannon Kingsley | Tyler Zink |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 57% (4/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 55% (11/9) | 0% (0/0) |
| Games Win/Loss | 53% (107/96) | 0% (0/0) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 57% (4/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.69 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 68 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0.1 | 0 |
| DFs Total | 10 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 2:15:50 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 44 | 0 |
| 1st Serve % | 70% (435/624) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st Serve W% | 73% (317/435) | 0% (0/0) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 56% (106/189) | 0% (0/0) |
| BPs Won% Total | 47% (21/45) | 0% (0/0) |
| Return Pts W% | 37% (241/648) | 0% (0/0) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 0% (0/0) | 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 | 67% (4/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 57% (4/7) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 33% (1/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 50% (3/6) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 60% (5/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 40% (5/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 50% (2/1) | 0% (0/0) |
Cannon Kingsley Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Karue Sell
Player
Cannon Kingsley
65%
(
53 of
81)
1st Serve %
76%
(
58 of
76)
6
Aces
13
1
Double Faults
0
75%
(
40 of
53)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
40 of
58)
64%
(
18 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
72%
(
13 of
18)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
28%
(
23 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
30%
(
23 of
76)
81
Total Points Won
76
|
4-6 6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Nathan Mao
67%
(
35 of
52)
1st Serve %
67%
(
39 of
58)
5
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
1
77%
(
27 of
35)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
27 of
39)
59%
(
10 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
21%
(
4 of
19)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
29%
(
15 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
27 of
58)
64
Total Points Won
46
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Martyn Pawelski
Player
Cannon Kingsley
61%
(
57 of
94)
1st Serve %
75%
(
65 of
87)
10
Aces
16
2
Double Faults
0
81%
(
46 of
57)
1st Serve Won
80%
(
52 of
65)
49%
(
18 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
11 of
22)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
32%
(
30 of
94)
Rtn Points Won
28%
(
24 of
87)
88
Total Points Won
93
|
3-6 6-3 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Henry Searle
69%
(
64 of
93)
1st Serve %
63%
(
64 of
101)
9
Aces
10
0
Double Faults
1
75%
(
48 of
64)
1st Serve Won
77%
(
49 of
64)
62%
(
18 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
49%
(
18 of
37)
33%
(
2 of
6)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
29%
(
27 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
34 of
101)
100
Total Points Won
94
|
7-5 4-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Jonas Forejtek
74%
(
78 of
106)
1st Serve %
63%
(
69 of
109)
10
Aces
8
-
Double Faults
-
78%
(
61 of
78)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
51 of
69)
68%
(
19 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
24 of
40)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
25%
(
26 of
106)
Rtn Points Won
31%
(
34 of
109)
114
Total Points Won
101
|
6-4 6-7(7) 7-6(2) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Gianmarco Ferrari
71%
(
73 of
103)
1st Serve %
67%
(
71 of
106)
8
Aces
8
2
Double Faults
6
68%
(
50 of
73)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
50 of
71)
53%
(
16 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
9 of
35)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
36%
(
37 of
103)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
47 of
106)
113
Total Points Won
96
|
4-6 7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Daniil Glinka
Player
Cannon Kingsley
48%
(
48 of
99)
1st Serve %
58%
(
62 of
107)
7
Aces
7
4
Double Faults
7
75%
(
36 of
48)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
39 of
62)
33%
(
17 of
51)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
19 of
45)
46%
(
6 of
13)
Break Points Won
38%
(
5 of
13)
46%
(
46 of
99)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
49 of
107)
102
Total Points Won
104
|
6-3 2-6 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
James Duckworth
Player
Cannon Kingsley
61%
(
62 of
101)
1st Serve %
66%
(
89 of
135)
13
Aces
13
1
Double Faults
2
87%
(
54 of
62)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
65 of
89)
64%
(
25 of
39)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
24 of
46)
22%
(
2 of
9)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
22%
(
22 of
101)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
46 of
135)
125
Total Points Won
111
|
7-5 6-7(2) 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Sebastian Fanselow
Player
Cannon Kingsley
60%
(
28 of
47)
1st Serve %
60%
(
37 of
62)
7
Aces
10
0
Double Faults
4
89%
(
25 of
28)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
25 of
37)
63%
(
12 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
11 of
25)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
21%
(
10 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
26 of
62)
63
Total Points Won
46
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Gabi Adrian Boitan
72%
(
56 of
78)
1st Serve %
64%
(
47 of
74)
6
Aces
9
3
Double Faults
5
73%
(
41 of
56)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
29 of
47)
50%
(
11 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
14 of
27)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
33%
(
26 of
78)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
31 of
74)
83
Total Points Won
69
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Tyler Zink Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Tyler Zink
65%
(
41 of
63)
1st Serve %
50%
(
25 of
50)
1
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
1
68%
(
28 of
41)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
16 of
25)
50%
(
11 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
11 of
25)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
38%
(
24 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
23 of
50)
62
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Keegan Smith
Player
Tyler Zink
66%
(
58 of
88)
1st Serve %
54%
(
57 of
106)
8
Aces
6
5
Double Faults
6
83%
(
48 of
58)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
39 of
57)
63%
(
19 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
27 of
49)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
24%
(
21 of
88)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
40 of
106)
107
Total Points Won
87
|
6-7(2) 6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Tyler Zink
Player
Ramkumar Ramanathan
64%
(
51 of
80)
1st Serve %
62%
(
55 of
89)
19
Aces
9
3
Double Faults
4
80%
(
41 of
51)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
36 of
55)
55%
(
16 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
16 of
34)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
29%
(
23 of
80)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
37 of
89)
94
Total Points Won
75
|
5-7 6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
William Grant
Player
Tyler Zink
51%
(
39 of
77)
1st Serve %
58%
(
37 of
64)
3
Aces
8
5
Double Faults
2
69%
(
27 of
39)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
26 of
37)
55%
(
21 of
38)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
12 of
27)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
38%
(
29 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
26 of
64)
74
Total Points Won
67
|
7-6(4) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cannon Kingsley
Player
Tyler Zink
73%
(
53 of
73)
1st Serve %
61%
(
54 of
89)
10
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
2
74%
(
39 of
53)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
34 of
54)
40%
(
8 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
15 of
35)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
36%
(
26 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
40 of
89)
87
Total Points Won
75
|
6-0 2-6 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Alfredo Perez
Player
Tyler Zink
56%
(
27 of
48)
1st Serve %
47%
(
20 of
43)
6
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
2
81%
(
22 of
27)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
14 of
20)
71%
(
15 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
11 of
23)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
23%
(
11 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
18 of
43)
55
Total Points Won
36
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Goncalo Oliveira
Player
Tyler Zink
62%
(
46 of
74)
1st Serve %
46%
(
38 of
82)
1
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
2
70%
(
32 of
46)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
26 of
38)
61%
(
17 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
23 of
44)
27%
(
3 of
11)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
34%
(
25 of
74)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
33 of
82)
82
Total Points Won
74
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tyler Zink
Player
Brandon Walkin
64%
(
18 of
28)
1st Serve %
63%
(
25 of
40)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
1
72%
(
13 of
18)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
60%
(
6 of
10)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
9 of
15)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
32%
(
9 of
28)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
19 of
40)
38
Total Points Won
30
|
6-4 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tyler Zink
Player
Szymon Kielan
59%
(
30 of
51)
1st Serve %
61%
(
37 of
61)
2
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
4
73%
(
22 of
30)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
22 of
37)
71%
(
15 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
8 of
24)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
27%
(
14 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
31 of
61)
68
Total Points Won
44
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 | 6-4 6-3 | H2H | |||
view more
Kingsley Vs Zink 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
