Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Cedric Stanke vs Mikail Alimli 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 Stanke vs Alimli analysis and find out who is favored!
Cedric Stanke vs Mikail Alimli Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Stanke 0 - 0 Alimli
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Stanke has won 48.65% of points on his second serve, while Alimli has won 49.04%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Stanke, in recent form, has won 56.52% of his opponent's second serve points, while Alimli has won 53.38%. The same stats for first serve returns are 34.57% and 31.52% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Stanke has saved 57.14% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Alimli has saved 55.42% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Stanke has won 53.7% of matches played (W/L 29/ 25), with Alimli winning 53.85% (W/L 21/ 18) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Stanke has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 60% (W/L 27/ 18), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 39% (W/L 31/ 48). Alimli has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 51% (W/L 26/ 25), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 37% (W/L 21/ 36).
- Player level: In the last year, Stanke has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 53.7% of matches (W/L 29/ 25), where as Alimli has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 54.05% of matches (W/L 20/ 17). When comparing stats between players to predict the favorite, it is of course all relative to the event level they have been playing at.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Stanke has played against opponents with an average rank of 39.69 while Alimli has played against players with an average rank of 89.44.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Stanke has won 61% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Alimli has won 50% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Stanke has converted 40.54% of breakpoint opportunities, and Alimli has converted 36.79% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
N/A
Rank
High
25
Age
Plays
0
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
N/A
Rank
High
20
Age
Plays
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
Form
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
46% (59-68)
Career Total W/L
45% (56-69)
56% (9-7)
YTD W/L
56% (10-8)
$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.
No H2H Matches Available
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Cedric Stanke | Mikail Alimli |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 56% (9/7) | 56% (10/8) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 53% (20/18) | 55% (21/17) |
| Games Win/Loss | 51% (194/186) | 52% (181/170) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 58% (7/5) | 0% (0/1) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 50% (2/2) | 57% (4/3) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/0) | 60% (6/4) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.11 | 0.45 |
| Aces Total | 21 | 76 |
| DFs per game | 0.11 | 0.22 |
| DFs Total | 20 | 38 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:6:37 | 1:21:30 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 85.31 | 66 |
| 1st Serve % | 67% (453/675) | 52% (513/984) |
| 1st Serve W% | 64% (290/453) | 72% (368/513) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 49% (108/222) | 49% (231/471) |
| BPs Won% Total | 41% (30/74) | 37% (39/106) |
| Return Pts W% | 42% (302/713) | 41% (387/951) |
| 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% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 56% (9/7) | 56% (10/8) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 56% (9/16) | 59% (10/17) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 67% (2/3) | 67% (2/3) |
| Deciding Set W% | 67% (4/6) | 67% (2/3) |
| 1st set W, W | 88% (8/7) | 90% (10/9) |
| 1st set W, L | 13% (8/1) | 10% (10/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 25% (8/2) | 13% (8/1) |
Cedric Stanke Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats 
Mathys Domenc
Player
Cedric Stanke
66%
(
42 of
64)
1st Serve %
65%
(
35 of
54)
1
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
1
69%
(
29 of
42)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
19 of
35)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
10 of
19)
100%
(
4 of
4)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
36%
(
23 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
25 of
54)
66
Total Points Won
52
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Edoardo Lavagno
Player
Cedric Stanke
56%
(
22 of
39)
1st Serve %
69%
(
31 of
45)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
77%
(
17 of
22)
1st Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
59%
(
10 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
14%
(
2 of
14)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
31%
(
12 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
67%
(
30 of
45)
57
Total Points Won
27
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cedric Stanke
Player
Albert Saar
72%
(
54 of
75)
1st Serve %
48%
(
31 of
64)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
3
56%
(
30 of
54)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
15 of
31)
62%
(
13 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
14 of
33)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
43%
(
32 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
35 of
64)
78
Total Points Won
61
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cedric Stanke
Player
Jonathan Stenberg
64%
(
25 of
39)
1st Serve %
57%
(
40 of
70)
3
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
4
60%
(
15 of
25)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
20 of
40)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
27%
(
8 of
30)
54%
(
7 of
13)
Break Points Won
100%
(
3 of
3)
44%
(
17 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
42 of
70)
64
Total Points Won
45
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Grigoriy Lomakin
Player
Cedric Stanke
79%
(
74 of
94)
1st Serve %
66%
(
59 of
89)
6
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
72%
(
53 of
74)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
40 of
59)
50%
(
10 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
57%
(
17 of
30)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
33%
(
31 of
94)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
32 of
89)
95
Total Points Won
88
|
6-4 6-7(7) 10-7 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-3 1-6 10-5 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 4-6 7-6(8) 10-8 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Martyn Pawelski
Player
Cedric Stanke
66%
(
42 of
64)
1st Serve %
73%
(
59 of
81)
10
Aces
7
5
Double Faults
5
79%
(
33 of
42)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
40 of
59)
59%
(
13 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
9 of
22)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
28%
(
18 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
32 of
81)
78
Total Points Won
67
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cedric Stanke
Player
Nour Fathalla
63%
(
53 of
84)
1st Serve %
61%
(
43 of
71)
3
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
4
66%
(
35 of
53)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
28 of
43)
61%
(
19 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
7 of
28)
55%
(
6 of
11)
Break Points Won
15%
(
2 of
13)
36%
(
30 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
36 of
71)
90
Total Points Won
65
|
6-1 4-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cedric Stanke
Player
Vladimir Uzhylovsky
71%
(
47 of
66)
1st Serve %
70%
(
67 of
96)
2
Aces
3
0
Double Faults
1
74%
(
35 of
47)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
43 of
67)
42%
(
8 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
13 of
29)
22%
(
2 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
35%
(
23 of
66)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
40 of
96)
83
Total Points Won
79
|
3-6 7-5 10-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Mikail Alimli Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Jeiden Saidizand
Player
Mikail Alimli
53%
(
29 of
55)
1st Serve %
61%
(
38 of
62)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
72%
(
21 of
29)
1st Serve Won
47%
(
18 of
38)
54%
(
14 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
11 of
24)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
36%
(
20 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
33 of
62)
68
Total Points Won
49
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-1 6-4 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Lucas Catarina
Player
Mikail Alimli
57%
(
31 of
54)
1st Serve %
53%
(
27 of
51)
0
Aces
1
5
Double Faults
2
77%
(
24 of
31)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
17 of
27)
61%
(
14 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
30%
(
16 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
24 of
51)
62
Total Points Won
43
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Mikail Alimli
Player
Filip Gustafsson
64%
(
39 of
61)
1st Serve %
64%
(
28 of
44)
1
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
4
64%
(
25 of
39)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
17 of
28)
68%
(
15 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
19%
(
3 of
16)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
34%
(
21 of
61)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
24 of
44)
64
Total Points Won
41
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Constantin Bittoun Kouzmine
Player
Mikail Alimli
61%
(
33 of
54)
1st Serve %
47%
(
25 of
53)
0
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
3
73%
(
24 of
33)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
16 of
25)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
10 of
28)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
33%
(
18 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
27 of
53)
63
Total Points Won
44
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Mikail Alimli
Player
Leo Lagarrigue
58%
(
47 of
81)
1st Serve %
51%
(
29 of
57)
9
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
5
74%
(
35 of
47)
1st Serve Won
79%
(
23 of
29)
56%
(
19 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
13 of
28)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
33%
(
27 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
21 of
57)
75
Total Points Won
63
|
7-6(2) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Mikail Alimli
Player
Antoni Fabre
54%
(
29 of
54)
1st Serve %
63%
(
37 of
59)
3
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
0
72%
(
21 of
29)
1st Serve Won
51%
(
19 of
37)
64%
(
16 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
11 of
22)
29%
(
4 of
14)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
31%
(
17 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
29 of
59)
66
Total Points Won
47
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniil Glinka
Player
Mikail Alimli
60%
(
30 of
50)
1st Serve %
49%
(
34 of
70)
6
Aces
6
0
Double Faults
2
87%
(
26 of
30)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
25 of
34)
70%
(
14 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
14 of
36)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
20%
(
10 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
31 of
70)
71
Total Points Won
49
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Mikail Alimli
Player
Sven Corbinais
50%
(
27 of
54)
1st Serve %
56%
(
29 of
52)
9
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
4
85%
(
23 of
27)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
17 of
29)
41%
(
11 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
7 of
23)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
37%
(
20 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
28 of
52)
62
Total Points Won
44
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Mikail Alimli
Player
Leo Cohen Bacrie
46%
(
32 of
70)
1st Serve %
64%
(
54 of
85)
4
Aces
6
3
Double Faults
10
66%
(
21 of
32)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
34 of
54)
47%
(
18 of
38)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
14 of
31)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
44%
(
31 of
70)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
37 of
85)
76
Total Points Won
79
|
3-6 7-5 11-9 | H2H | ||
view more
Stanke Vs Alimli 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 [email protected]
