Cem Ilkel vs Abdulmajeed Bukhari Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
W W W W L W W W W W
Form
L L W L W L W L L LHead-to-head: Ilkel 1 - 0 Bukhari
They have played 2 sets in total, with Ilkel winning 2 and Bukhari winning 0. The last match between Ilkel and Bukhari was at the M25 Doha, 19-01-2025, Q1 round, Hard with Cem Ilkel getting the victory 6-0 6-0.
M25 Doha(19-01-2025)
6
0
6
0
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Siegemund VS Konjuh PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami wta
16 Mar 2025 / Q1 round
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
Birrell VS Sasnovich PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami wta
16 Mar 2025 / Q1 round
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-0 6-0 |
Stats 
Cem Ilkel
Player
Abdulmajeed Bukhari
57%
(
17 of
30)
1st Serve %
70%
(
28 of
40)
3
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
2
88%
(
15 of
17)
1st Serve Won
39%
(
11 of
28)
77%
(
10 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
8%
(
1 of
12)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
17%
(
5 of
30)
Rtn Points Won
70%
(
28 of
40)
53
Total Points Won
17
|
||||
Stats
1
H2H Matches
0
2
Sets Won
0
12
Games Won
0
3
Aces (Total)
0
0
Total Double Faults
2
0:50:2
Average Match Time
0:50:2
57% (17/30)
1st Serve %
70% (28/40)
88% (15/17)
1st Serve Win %
39% (11/28)
77% (10/13)
2nd Serve Win %
8% (1/12)
60% (6/10)
Break Points Won % (Total)
0% (0/0)
70% (28/40)
Return Points Win %
17% (5/30)
100% (1/1)
Best of 3 Sets Win %
0% (0/1)
0% (0/0)
Best of 5 Sets Win %
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Tiebreaks Win % (Total)
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Deciding Set Win %
0% (0/0)
100% (1/1)
1st Set Won, Won Match
0% (0/0)
0% (1/0)
1st Set Won, Lost Match
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
1st Set Lost, Won Match
0% (1/0)
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Cem Ilkel Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Pepijn Bastiaansen
64%
(
43 of
67)
1st Serve %
66%
(
35 of
53)
4
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
1
67%
(
29 of
43)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
22 of
35)
58%
(
14 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
8 of
18)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
36%
(
24 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
23 of
53)
66
Total Points Won
54
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Matyas Fuele
57%
(
27 of
47)
1st Serve %
49%
(
23 of
47)
10
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
2
81%
(
22 of
27)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
11 of
23)
55%
(
11 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
30%
(
14 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
26 of
47)
59
Total Points Won
35
|
6-0 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Tuncay Duran
70%
(
30 of
43)
1st Serve %
62%
(
32 of
52)
7
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
3
83%
(
25 of
30)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
16 of
32)
38%
(
5 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
8 of
20)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
30%
(
13 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
28 of
52)
58
Total Points Won
37
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Thando Longwe-Smit
70%
(
30 of
43)
1st Serve %
57%
(
26 of
46)
3
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
1
90%
(
27 of
30)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
14 of
26)
69%
(
9 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
11 of
20)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
16%
(
7 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
21 of
46)
57
Total Points Won
32
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Mikal Statham
71%
(
30 of
42)
1st Serve %
83%
(
43 of
52)
6
Aces
3
0
Double Faults
0
83%
(
25 of
30)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
25 of
43)
83%
(
10 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
4 of
9)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
17%
(
7 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
23 of
52)
58
Total Points Won
36
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| F | 7-6(5) 6-4 | H2H | |||
| SF |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Attila Boros
58%
(
29 of
50)
1st Serve %
63%
(
32 of
51)
6
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
0
83%
(
24 of
29)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
18 of
32)
76%
(
16 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
74%
(
14 of
19)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
20%
(
10 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
19 of
51)
59
Total Points Won
42
|
6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Tuncay Duran
56%
(
34 of
61)
1st Serve %
63%
(
50 of
79)
5
Aces
7
2
Double Faults
5
88%
(
30 of
34)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
32 of
50)
70%
(
19 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
62%
(
18 of
29)
33%
(
1 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
20%
(
12 of
61)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
29 of
79)
78
Total Points Won
62
|
6-4 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Romain Faucon
47%
(
26 of
55)
1st Serve %
50%
(
33 of
66)
2
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
4
88%
(
23 of
26)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
22 of
33)
62%
(
18 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
15 of
33)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
25%
(
14 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
29 of
66)
70
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Izan Almazan Valiente
66%
(
23 of
35)
1st Serve %
54%
(
14 of
26)
7
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
2
78%
(
18 of
23)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
7 of
14)
67%
(
8 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
26%
(
9 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
62%
(
16 of
26)
42
Total Points Won
19
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
view more
Abdulmajeed Bukhari Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Cem Ilkel
Player
Abdulmajeed Bukhari
57%
(
17 of
30)
1st Serve %
70%
(
28 of
40)
3
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
2
88%
(
15 of
17)
1st Serve Won
39%
(
11 of
28)
77%
(
10 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
8%
(
1 of
12)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
17%
(
5 of
30)
Rtn Points Won
70%
(
28 of
40)
53
Total Points Won
17
|
6-0 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Paul Valsecchi
Player
Abdulmajeed Bukhari
53%
(
31 of
58)
1st Serve %
70%
(
40 of
57)
0
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
68%
(
21 of
31)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
23 of
40)
63%
(
17 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
24%
(
4 of
17)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
34%
(
20 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
30 of
57)
68
Total Points Won
47
|
6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Michael Bassem Sobhy
Player
Abdulmajeed Bukhari
74%
(
31 of
42)
1st Serve %
68%
(
32 of
47)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
1
74%
(
23 of
31)
1st Serve Won
41%
(
13 of
32)
55%
(
6 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
31%
(
13 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
62%
(
29 of
47)
58
Total Points Won
31
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-2 6-1 | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-1 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 7-6(4) ret. | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-0 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 2-6 6-4 10-8 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-0 6-4 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-1 6-4 | H2H | |||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
Stats
57% (429/330)
Win/Loss
26% (5/14)
55% (960/794)
Sets Win/Loss
23% (9/30)
52% (8605/8084)
Games Win/Loss
38% (129/212)
62% (279/174)
Hard Win/Loss
28% (5/13)
45% (57/71)
Clay Win/Loss
0% (0/1)
55% (92/76)
Indoor Hard W/L
0% (0/0)
10% (1/9)
Grass Win/Loss
0% (0/0)
0.34
Aces Per Game
0.01
2792
Aces Total
2
0.17
Double Faults Per Game
0.06
1369
Total Double Faults
10
1:14:21
Average Match Time
1st Match
525.36
Average Opponent Rank
168.16
58% (23448/40172)
1st Serve %
70% (209/298)
70% (16497/23448)
1st Serve Win %
52% (108/209)
51% (8518/16724)
2nd Serve Win %
35% (31/89)
40% (1589/3933)
Break Points Won % (Total)
28% (5/18)
39% (15817/40636)
Return Points Win %
31% (91/298)
32% (7/15)
Slam W/L
0% (0/0)
67% (2/1)
Masters W/L
0% (0/0)
32% (7/15)
Cups W/L
0% (0/0)
18% (5/23)
Main Tour W/L
0% (0/0)
0% (0/0)
Tour Finals W/L
0% (0/0)
52% (175/159)
Challenger W/L
0% (0/0)
67% (233/117)
Futures W/L
26% (5/14)
56% (418/741)
Best of 3 Sets Win %
22% (4/18)
40% (4/10)
Best of 5 Sets Win %
0% (0/0)
54% (144/269)
Tiebreaks Win % (Total)
33% (1/3)
55% (125/226)
Deciding Set Win %
100% (2/2)
85% (418/356)
1st Set Won, Won Match
100% (3/3)
14% (418/60)
1st Set Won, Lost Match
0% (3/0)
21% (340/71)
1st Set Lost, Won Match
13% (16/2)
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]
