Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Charles Broom vs Andres Martin 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 Broom vs Martin analysis and find out who is favored!
Charles Broom vs Andres Martin Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Broom 1 - 0 Martin
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Broom has won 52.02% of points on their second serve, while Martin has won 55.65%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Broom, in recent form, has won 56.1% of their opponent's second serve points, while Martin has won 55.91%. The same stats for first serve returns are 31.13% and 29.09% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Broom has saved 64.23% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Martin has saved 69.23% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Broom has won 60.24% of matches played (W/L 50/ 33), with Martin winning 57.5% (W/L 23/ 17) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Broom has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 67% (W/L 44/ 22), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 57% (W/L 17/ 13). Martin has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 62% (W/L 31/ 19), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 33% (W/L 1/ 2).
- Player level: In the last year, Broom has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 68.89% of matches (W/L 31/ 14), where as Martin has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 65% of matches (W/L 13/ 7). 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 1 times before with Broom winning 1 times and Martin being victorious 0 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Broom winning 2 and Martin winning 0. The last match between Broom and Martin was at the M25 Edmonton, 03-11-2023, Quarterfinals, I.hard with Charles Broom getting the victory 6-1 6-3.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:7:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Broom and Martin have played a deciding set 0 times, with Broom winning 0 times and Martin 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 Broom winning 0, and Martin 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Broom has played against opponents with an average rank of 220.45 while Martin has played against players with an average rank of 225.57.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Broom has won 58% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Martin has won 60% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Broom has converted 37.01% of breakpoint opportunities, and Martin has converted 35.14% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
284
Rank
284
High
26
Age
R
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
1
Indoor0
0
Grass0
529
Rank
508
High
22
Age
Plays
L
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
Form
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
W
L
63% (206-120)
Career Total W/L
60% (39-26)
60% (21-14)
YTD W/L
75% (3-1)
$36,000
Career Prize Money
$12,435
1
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 | Charles Broom | Andres Martin |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 0 |
| Games Won | 12 | 4 |
| Aces (Total) | 3 | 2 |
| DFs (Total) | 0 | 1 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:7:0 | 1:7:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 50% (20/40) | 65% (32/49) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 75% (15/20) | 53% (17/32) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 85% (17/20) | 35% (6/17) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 45% (5/11) | 100% (1/1) |
| Return Points W% | 53% (26/49) | 20% (8/40) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set Win% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-1 6-3 |
Stats 
Charles Broom
Player
Andres Martin
50%
(
20 of
40)
1st Serve %
65%
(
32 of
49)
3
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
1
75%
(
15 of
20)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
85%
(
17 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
6 of
17)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
20%
(
8 of
40)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
26 of
49)
58
Total Points Won
31
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Charles Broom | Andres Martin |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 60% (21/14) | 75% (3/1) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 57% (48/36) | 67% (6/3) |
| Games Win/Loss | 52% (415/385) | 56% (51/40) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 67% (14/7) | 75% (3/1) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 54% (7/6) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.54 | 0.48 |
| Aces Total | 213 | 21 |
| DFs per game | 0.22 | 0.18 |
| DFs Total | 87 | 8 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:51:16 | 1:52:46 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 204.71 | 90.25 |
| 1st Serve % | 64% (1599/2491) | 59% (175/299) |
| 1st Serve W% | 70% (1125/1599) | 72% (126/175) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 52% (464/892) | 56% (69/124) |
| BPs Won% Total | 37% (104/281) | 35% (13/37) |
| Return Pts W% | 41% (1092/2693) | 41% (119/292) |
| 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 | 43% (6/8) | 75% (3/1) |
| Futures W/L | 71% (15/6) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 60% (21/35) | 75% (3/4) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 64% (7/11) | 50% (1/2) |
| Deciding Set W% | 57% (8/14) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set W, W | 84% (19/16) | 100% (3/3) |
| 1st set W, L | 16% (19/3) | 0% (3/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 31% (16/5) | 0% (1/0) |
Charles Broom Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Paul Jubb
Player
Charles Broom
53%
(
35 of
66)
1st Serve %
61%
(
37 of
61)
2
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
2
77%
(
27 of
35)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
23 of
37)
52%
(
16 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
9 of
24)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
35%
(
23 of
66)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
29 of
61)
72
Total Points Won
55
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daniil Glinka
Player
Charles Broom
61%
(
31 of
51)
1st Serve %
60%
(
26 of
43)
5
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
3
94%
(
29 of
31)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
16 of
26)
45%
(
9 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
59%
(
10 of
17)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
25%
(
13 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
17 of
43)
55
Total Points Won
39
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Roberto Cid Subervi
67%
(
39 of
58)
1st Serve %
60%
(
34 of
57)
11
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
1
82%
(
32 of
39)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
23 of
34)
47%
(
9 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
29%
(
17 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
26 of
57)
67
Total Points Won
48
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Blake Mott
Player
Charles Broom
60%
(
49 of
82)
1st Serve %
60%
(
52 of
86)
2
Aces
5
6
Double Faults
2
73%
(
36 of
49)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
37 of
52)
45%
(
15 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
16 of
34)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
38%
(
31 of
82)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
33 of
86)
84
Total Points Won
84
|
6-3 1-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| F |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Henry Searle
70%
(
33 of
47)
1st Serve %
62%
(
44 of
71)
4
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
1
79%
(
26 of
33)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
24 of
44)
57%
(
8 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
13 of
27)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
28%
(
13 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
34 of
71)
68
Total Points Won
50
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Blake Mott
73%
(
38 of
52)
1st Serve %
73%
(
43 of
59)
4
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
3
66%
(
25 of
38)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
23 of
43)
57%
(
8 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
31%
(
5 of
16)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
37%
(
19 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
31 of
59)
64
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Robert Strombachs
60%
(
39 of
65)
1st Serve %
77%
(
48 of
62)
3
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
1
79%
(
31 of
39)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
31 of
48)
46%
(
12 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
5 of
14)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
34%
(
22 of
65)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
26 of
62)
69
Total Points Won
58
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Alexis Canter
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve %
61%
(
36 of
59)
5
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
2
72%
(
28 of
39)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
20 of
36)
67%
(
10 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
10 of
23)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
30%
(
16 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
29 of
59)
67
Total Points Won
46
|
6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Alex Knaff
59%
(
53 of
90)
1st Serve %
60%
(
52 of
87)
4
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
2
60%
(
32 of
53)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
34 of
52)
65%
(
24 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
19 of
35)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
38%
(
34 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
34 of
87)
90
Total Points Won
87
|
3-6 6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| F |
Stats
Paul Jubb
Player
Charles Broom
73%
(
66 of
90)
1st Serve %
69%
(
63 of
91)
5
Aces
8
1
Double Faults
0
68%
(
45 of
66)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
42 of
63)
38%
(
9 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
11 of
28)
29%
(
4 of
14)
Break Points Won
20%
(
2 of
10)
40%
(
36 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
38 of
91)
92
Total Points Won
89
|
3-6 6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Andres Martin Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Trevor Svajda
Player
Andres Martin
50%
(
45 of
90)
1st Serve %
65%
(
58 of
89)
3
Aces
4
4
Double Faults
2
71%
(
32 of
45)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
35 of
58)
51%
(
23 of
45)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
16 of
31)
23%
(
3 of
13)
Break Points Won
13%
(
2 of
15)
39%
(
35 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
38 of
89)
93
Total Points Won
86
|
6-4 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Andres Martin
Player
Yu Hsiou Hsu
47%
(
29 of
62)
1st Serve %
60%
(
40 of
67)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
1
79%
(
23 of
29)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
28 of
40)
67%
(
22 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
10 of
27)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
27%
(
17 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
29 of
67)
74
Total Points Won
55
|
7-6(1) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Andres Martin
Player
Bruno Kuzuhara
63%
(
60 of
95)
1st Serve %
69%
(
47 of
68)
11
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
3
78%
(
47 of
60)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
35 of
47)
43%
(
15 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
35%
(
33 of
95)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
25 of
68)
87
Total Points Won
76
|
6-1 4-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Andres Martin
Player
Osgar O'Hoisin
53%
(
28 of
53)
1st Serve %
49%
(
33 of
67)
4
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
6
75%
(
21 of
28)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
22 of
33)
64%
(
16 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
15 of
34)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
30%
(
16 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
30 of
67)
67
Total Points Won
53
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Hiroki Moriya
Player
Andres Martin
58%
(
28 of
48)
1st Serve %
65%
(
40 of
62)
2
Aces
4
3
Double Faults
2
75%
(
21 of
28)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
26 of
40)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
7 of
22)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
31%
(
15 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
29 of
62)
62
Total Points Won
48
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Andres Martin
Player
Masamichi Imamura
61%
(
46 of
75)
1st Serve %
65%
(
51 of
79)
5
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
3
83%
(
38 of
46)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
33 of
51)
48%
(
14 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
15 of
28)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
31%
(
23 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
31 of
79)
83
Total Points Won
71
|
6-4 7-6(2) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Li Tu
Player
Andres Martin
70%
(
62 of
89)
1st Serve %
68%
(
63 of
93)
0
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
3
71%
(
44 of
62)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
43 of
63)
52%
(
14 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
18 of
30)
22%
(
2 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
35%
(
31 of
89)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
32 of
93)
90
Total Points Won
92
|
2-6 6-4 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Andres Martin
Player
Naoki Nakagawa
65%
(
50 of
77)
1st Serve %
64%
(
58 of
90)
10
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
76%
(
38 of
50)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
35 of
58)
44%
(
12 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
72%
(
23 of
32)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
35%
(
27 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
32 of
90)
82
Total Points Won
85
|
7-6(5) 1-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Geoffrey Blancaneaux
Player
Andres Martin
65%
(
50 of
77)
1st Serve %
79%
(
56 of
71)
1
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
1
64%
(
32 of
50)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
38 of
56)
74%
(
20 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
14)
32%
(
25 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
28 of
71)
80
Total Points Won
68
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Liam Draxl
Player
Andres Martin
68%
(
73 of
108)
1st Serve %
60%
(
81 of
136)
5
Aces
10
3
Double Faults
9
75%
(
55 of
73)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
57 of
81)
40%
(
14 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
23 of
55)
25%
(
4 of
16)
Break Points Won
44%
(
4 of
9)
36%
(
39 of
108)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
56 of
136)
125
Total Points Won
119
|
7-6(5) 5-7 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Broom Vs Martin 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]
