Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Charles Broom vs Edan Leshem 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 Leshem analysis and find out who is favored!
Charles Broom vs Edan Leshem Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Broom has won 52.71% of points on his second serve, while Leshem has won 38.27%. 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 55.61% of his opponent's second serve points, while Leshem has won 55.56%. The same stats for first serve returns are 31.09% and 34.78% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Broom has saved 65.06% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Leshem has saved 46.88% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Broom has won 60% of matches played (W/L 48/ 32), with Leshem winning 50% (W/L 8/ 8) 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 I.hard, winning 59% (W/L 52/ 36). Leshem has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 62% (W/L 265/ 162), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 38% (W/L 5/ 8).
- Player level: In the last year, Broom has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 68.18% of matches (W/L 30/ 14), where as Leshem has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 60% of matches (W/L 6/ 4). 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 Broom winning 1 times. They have played 4 sets in total, with Broom winning 2 and Leshem winning 2. The last match between Broom and Leshem was at the M25 Nottingham, 14-05-2022, Semifinals, Hard with Edan Leshem getting the victory .
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:32:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Broom and Leshem have played a deciding set 0 times, with Broom winning 0 times and Leshem 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 Leshem 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Broom has played against opponents with an average rank of 212.94 while Leshem has played against players with an average rank of 184.06.
- 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 Leshem has won 25% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Broom has converted 37.12% of breakpoint opportunities, and Leshem has converted 48.28% 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: Broom 1 - 1 Leshem
339
Rank
322
High
26
Age
R
Plays
1
Total1
1
Hard1
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
866
Rank
249
High
27
Age
R
Plays
L
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
Form
W
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
64% (204-117)
Career Total W/L
58% (308-220)
63% (19-11)
YTD W/L
25% (1-3)
$36,000
Career Prize Money
$26,870
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 | Charles Broom | Edan Leshem |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 1 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 2 |
| Games Won | 19 | 20 |
| Aces (Total) | 9 | 4 |
| DFs (Total) | 5 | 6 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:32:0 | 1:32:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 58% (71/122) | 64% (74/115) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 69% (49/71) | 70% (52/74) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 49% (25/51) | 41% (17/41) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 63% (5/8) | 43% (6/14) |
| Return Points W% | 40% (46/115) | 39% (48/122) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 50% (1/2) | 50% (1/2) |
| 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) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (1/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7-5 6-2 |
Stats 
Edan Leshem
Player
Charles Broom
68%
(
44 of
65)
1st Serve %
59%
(
41 of
70)
3
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
2
75%
(
33 of
44)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
25 of
41)
38%
(
8 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
11 of
29)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
37%
(
24 of
65)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
34 of
70)
75
Total Points Won
60
|
||||
| 6-3 6-4 |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Edan Leshem
58%
(
30 of
52)
1st Serve %
60%
(
30 of
50)
7
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
3
80%
(
24 of
30)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
19 of
30)
64%
(
14 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
9 of
20)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
27%
(
14 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
22 of
50)
60
Total Points Won
42
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Charles Broom | Edan Leshem |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 63% (19/11) | 25% (1/3) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 59% (43/30) | 25% (2/6) |
| Games Win/Loss | 52% (367/335) | 45% (33/40) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 71% (12/5) | 25% (1/3) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 54% (7/6) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.55 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 189 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0.23 | 0.28 |
| DFs Total | 79 | 10 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:54:53 | 1:27:23 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 189.3 | 119 |
| 1st Serve % | 64% (1412/2196) | 66% (159/240) |
| 1st Serve W% | 70% (991/1412) | 58% (93/159) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 53% (412/784) | 38% (31/81) |
| BPs Won% Total | 37% (92/250) | 48% (14/29) |
| Return Pts W% | 41% (965/2366) | 42% (93/219) |
| 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 | 45% (5/6) | 33% (1/2) |
| Futures W/L | 74% (14/5) | 0% (0/1) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 63% (19/30) | 25% (1/4) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 64% (7/11) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 62% (8/13) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 82% (17/14) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set W, L | 18% (17/3) | 0% (1/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 38% (13/5) | 0% (3/0) |
Charles Broom Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | 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 | ||
| SF |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Giles Hussey
62%
(
56 of
91)
1st Serve %
61%
(
59 of
97)
3
Aces
4
3
Double Faults
2
61%
(
34 of
56)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
37 of
59)
43%
(
15 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
15 of
38)
38%
(
6 of
16)
Break Points Won
50%
(
6 of
12)
46%
(
42 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
45 of
97)
94
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 2-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Finn Bass
72%
(
33 of
46)
1st Serve %
62%
(
33 of
53)
4
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
3
88%
(
29 of
33)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
20 of
33)
31%
(
4 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
20%
(
4 of
20)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
28%
(
13 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
29 of
53)
62
Total Points Won
37
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
George Houghton
69%
(
43 of
62)
1st Serve %
59%
(
44 of
74)
8
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
3
72%
(
31 of
43)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
26 of
44)
53%
(
10 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
11 of
30)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
34%
(
21 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
37 of
74)
78
Total Points Won
58
|
6-2 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Charles Broom
Player
Masamichi Imamura
76%
(
65 of
86)
1st Serve %
66%
(
67 of
101)
3
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
5
68%
(
44 of
65)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
41 of
67)
48%
(
10 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
11 of
34)
64%
(
7 of
11)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
37%
(
32 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
49 of
101)
103
Total Points Won
84
|
6-7(2) 6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Adam Walton
Player
Charles Broom
73%
(
40 of
55)
1st Serve %
65%
(
41 of
63)
2
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
6
63%
(
25 of
40)
1st Serve Won
46%
(
19 of
41)
33%
(
5 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
7 of
22)
50%
(
7 of
14)
Break Points Won
27%
(
3 of
11)
45%
(
25 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
59%
(
37 of
63)
67
Total Points Won
51
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Edan Leshem Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Drew Van Orderlain
Player
Edan Leshem
74%
(
37 of
50)
1st Serve %
65%
(
33 of
51)
1
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
59%
(
22 of
37)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
16 of
33)
54%
(
7 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
6 of
18)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
42%
(
21 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
29 of
51)
58
Total Points Won
43
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Bruno Kuzuhara
Player
Edan Leshem
72%
(
46 of
64)
1st Serve %
61%
(
36 of
59)
0
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
5
63%
(
29 of
46)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
20 of
36)
50%
(
9 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
6 of
23)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
41%
(
26 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
33 of
59)
71
Total Points Won
52
|
7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Stefan Kozlov
Player
Edan Leshem
63%
(
38 of
60)
1st Serve %
73%
(
63 of
86)
2
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
2
82%
(
31 of
38)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
36 of
63)
45%
(
10 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
32%
(
19 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
42 of
86)
83
Total Points Won
63
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Edan Leshem
Player
Gonzalo Lama
61%
(
27 of
44)
1st Serve %
38%
(
17 of
45)
0
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
78%
(
21 of
27)
1st Serve Won
47%
(
8 of
17)
65%
(
11 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
10 of
28)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
27%
(
12 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
27 of
45)
59
Total Points Won
30
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Yshai Oliel
Player
Edan Leshem
56%
(
28 of
50)
1st Serve %
62%
(
32 of
52)
1
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
3
57%
(
16 of
28)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
50%
(
11 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
6 of
20)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
46%
(
23 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
25 of
52)
52
Total Points Won
50
|
5-7 2-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Edan Leshem
Player
Jordan Hasson
63%
(
35 of
56)
1st Serve %
52%
(
31 of
60)
9
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
0
77%
(
27 of
35)
1st Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
52%
(
11 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
15 of
29)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
32%
(
18 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
32 of
60)
70
Total Points Won
46
|
6-0 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Edan Leshem
Player
Emile Hudd
59%
(
22 of
37)
1st Serve %
64%
(
37 of
58)
5
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
2
91%
(
20 of
22)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
20 of
37)
67%
(
10 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
7 of
21)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
19%
(
7 of
37)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
31 of
58)
61
Total Points Won
34
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Edan Leshem
Player
Martyn Pawelski
63%
(
47 of
75)
1st Serve %
49%
(
41 of
84)
1
Aces
7
5
Double Faults
4
74%
(
35 of
47)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
28 of
41)
39%
(
11 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
17 of
43)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
39%
(
29 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
39 of
84)
85
Total Points Won
74
|
7-6(4) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Martyn Pawelski
Player
Edan Leshem
46%
(
30 of
65)
1st Serve %
41%
(
22 of
54)
5
Aces
3
5
Double Faults
5
70%
(
21 of
30)
1st Serve Won
41%
(
9 of
22)
46%
(
16 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
15 of
32)
86%
(
6 of
7)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
43%
(
28 of
65)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
30 of
54)
67
Total Points Won
52
|
7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Edan Leshem
Player
Ofek Shimanov
64%
(
64 of
100)
1st Serve %
50%
(
53 of
105)
3
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
7
64%
(
41 of
64)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
33 of
53)
44%
(
16 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
20 of
52)
44%
(
7 of
16)
Break Points Won
36%
(
5 of
14)
43%
(
43 of
100)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
52 of
105)
109
Total Points Won
96
|
3-6 6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
view more
Broom Vs Leshem 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]
