Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Daniel Cox vs Shintaro Imai 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 Cox vs Imai analysis and find out who is favored!
Daniel Cox vs Shintaro Imai Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Cox 0 - 0 Imai
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Cox has won 48.84% of points on his second serve, while Imai has won 48.82%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Cox, in recent form, has won 53.55% of his opponent's second serve points, while Imai has won 50.29%. The same stats for first serve returns are 35.21% and 32.54% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Cox has saved 47.83% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Imai has saved 58.13% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Cox has won 57.41% of matches played (W/L 31/ 23), with Imai winning 58.62% (W/L 17/ 12) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Cox has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 67% (W/L 235/ 117), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 46% (W/L 26/ 30). Imai has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 80% (W/L 4/ 1), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 60% (W/L 3/ 2).
- Player level: In the last year, Cox has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 64.71% of matches (W/L 22/ 12), where as Imai has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 57.14% of matches (W/L 12/ 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.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Cox has played against opponents with an average rank of 189.61 while Imai has played against players with an average rank of 323.38.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Cox has won 45% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Imai has won 57% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Cox has converted 38.06% of breakpoint opportunities, and Imai has converted 47.8% 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: Cox 0 - 0 Imai
564
Rank
206
High
33
Age
R
Plays
0
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
570
Rank
290
High
30
Age
R
Plays
W
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
Form
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
61% (436-284)
Career Total W/L
63% (282-164)
67% (12-6)
YTD W/L
60% (12-8)
$37,845
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 | Daniel Cox | Shintaro Imai |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 67% (12/6) | 60% (12/8) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 65% (24/13) | 58% (29/21) |
| Games Win/Loss | 56% (187/149) | 51% (251/240) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 50% (2/2) | 60% (9/6) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 71% (10/4) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 60% (3/2) |
| Aces pg | 0.39 | 0.48 |
| Aces Total | 64 | 115 |
| DFs per game | 0.23 | 0.16 |
| DFs Total | 38 | 39 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:22:14 | 2:1:37 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 81.17 | 288 |
| 1st Serve % | 66% (673/1019) | 63% (988/1574) |
| 1st Serve W% | 73% (488/673) | 71% (700/988) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 49% (169/346) | 50% (291/586) |
| BPs Won% Total | 38% (51/134) | 46% (54/117) |
| Return Pts W% | 42% (455/1087) | 38% (579/1524) |
| 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 | 67% (4/2) | 63% (5/3) |
| Futures W/L | 67% (8/4) | 58% (7/5) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 67% (12/18) | 60% (12/20) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 100% (3/3) | 75% (6/8) |
| Deciding Set W% | 100% (1/1) | 50% (5/10) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (11/11) | 75% (12/9) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (11/0) | 25% (12/3) |
| 1st set L, W | 14% (7/1) | 38% (8/3) |
Daniel Cox Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats 
Emile Hudd
Player
Daniel Cox
64%
(
35 of
55)
1st Serve %
58%
(
26 of
45)
5
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
2
77%
(
27 of
35)
1st Serve Won
77%
(
20 of
26)
65%
(
13 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
5 of
19)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
6)
27%
(
15 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
20 of
45)
60
Total Points Won
40
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Olaf Pieczkowski
74%
(
64 of
87)
1st Serve %
73%
(
74 of
101)
6
Aces
5
4
Double Faults
3
67%
(
43 of
64)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
42 of
74)
35%
(
8 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
31%
(
4 of
13)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
41%
(
36 of
87)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
44 of
101)
95
Total Points Won
93
|
7-6(4) 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Daniel Masur
82%
(
36 of
44)
1st Serve %
70%
(
30 of
43)
10
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
1
83%
(
30 of
36)
1st Serve Won
47%
(
14 of
30)
25%
(
2 of
8)
2nd Serve Won
23%
(
3 of
13)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
27%
(
12 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
26 of
43)
58
Total Points Won
29
|
6-0 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Masur
Player
Daniel Cox
69%
(
38 of
55)
1st Serve %
62%
(
40 of
65)
1
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
2
66%
(
25 of
38)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
27 of
40)
71%
(
12 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
33%
(
18 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
26 of
65)
63
Total Points Won
57
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Henry Searle
Player
Daniel Cox
61%
(
38 of
62)
1st Serve %
72%
(
41 of
57)
8
Aces
6
3
Double Faults
0
79%
(
30 of
38)
1st Serve Won
80%
(
33 of
41)
63%
(
15 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
6 of
16)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
27%
(
17 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
32%
(
18 of
57)
63
Total Points Won
56
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Jerome Kym
64%
(
34 of
53)
1st Serve %
54%
(
31 of
57)
1
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
2
82%
(
28 of
34)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
21 of
31)
53%
(
10 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
11 of
26)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
28%
(
15 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
25 of
57)
63
Total Points Won
47
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Leonardo Rossi
70%
(
31 of
44)
1st Serve %
45%
(
21 of
47)
1
Aces
3
0
Double Faults
4
77%
(
24 of
31)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
13 of
21)
54%
(
7 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
31%
(
8 of
26)
36%
(
5 of
14)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
13 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
26 of
47)
57
Total Points Won
34
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Andrea Guerrieri
61%
(
45 of
74)
1st Serve %
68%
(
69 of
101)
3
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
1
64%
(
29 of
45)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
41 of
69)
59%
(
17 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
25%
(
3 of
12)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
38%
(
28 of
74)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
43 of
101)
89
Total Points Won
86
|
0-6 7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Marvin Moeller
Player
Daniel Cox
66%
(
31 of
47)
1st Serve %
66%
(
35 of
53)
8
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
74%
(
23 of
31)
1st Serve Won
51%
(
18 of
35)
63%
(
10 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
28%
(
5 of
18)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
30%
(
14 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
30 of
53)
63
Total Points Won
37
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Hynek Barton
57%
(
32 of
56)
1st Serve %
71%
(
36 of
51)
1
Aces
6
3
Double Faults
0
75%
(
24 of
32)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
20 of
36)
58%
(
14 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
32%
(
18 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
25 of
51)
63
Total Points Won
44
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Shintaro Imai Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Ji Sung Nam
Player
Shintaro Imai
61%
(
54 of
89)
1st Serve %
62%
(
48 of
77)
4
Aces
3
5
Double Faults
2
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
32 of
48)
49%
(
17 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
14 of
29)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
37%
(
33 of
89)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
31 of
77)
87
Total Points Won
79
|
2-6 6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Blake Mott
Player
Shintaro Imai
72%
(
71 of
98)
1st Serve %
63%
(
61 of
97)
2
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
8
59%
(
42 of
71)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
35 of
61)
56%
(
15 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
9 of
36)
67%
(
8 of
12)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
42%
(
41 of
98)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
53 of
97)
110
Total Points Won
85
|
6-0 6-7(4) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Shintaro Imai
Player
Daniel Little
64%
(
38 of
59)
1st Serve %
62%
(
37 of
60)
7
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
4
82%
(
31 of
38)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
26 of
37)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
9 of
23)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
27%
(
16 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
25 of
60)
68
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Blake Mott
Player
Shintaro Imai
80%
(
73 of
91)
1st Serve %
65%
(
78 of
120)
3
Aces
10
2
Double Faults
2
71%
(
52 of
73)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
54 of
78)
44%
(
8 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
16 of
42)
24%
(
4 of
17)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
34%
(
31 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
50 of
120)
110
Total Points Won
101
|
4-6 7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Shintaro Imai
Player
Martyn Pawelski
63%
(
57 of
90)
1st Serve %
68%
(
61 of
90)
3
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
3
67%
(
38 of
57)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
39 of
61)
48%
(
16 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
14 of
29)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
36%
(
4 of
11)
40%
(
36 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
37 of
90)
91
Total Points Won
89
|
6-4 3-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Sora Fukuda
Player
Shintaro Imai
73%
(
33 of
45)
1st Serve %
59%
(
23 of
39)
3
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
1
82%
(
27 of
33)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
33%
(
4 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
4 of
16)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
31%
(
14 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
59%
(
23 of
39)
54
Total Points Won
30
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Shintaro Imai
Player
Leo Vithoontien
67%
(
33 of
49)
1st Serve %
64%
(
37 of
58)
3
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
1
79%
(
26 of
33)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
23 of
37)
69%
(
11 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
11 of
21)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
24%
(
12 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
24 of
58)
61
Total Points Won
46
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Shintaro Imai
Player
Kokoro Isomura
53%
(
31 of
59)
1st Serve %
49%
(
21 of
43)
7
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
2
77%
(
24 of
31)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
12 of
21)
64%
(
18 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
59%
(
13 of
22)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
29%
(
17 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
18 of
43)
60
Total Points Won
42
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Rio Noguchi
Player
Shintaro Imai
67%
(
66 of
98)
1st Serve %
61%
(
69 of
113)
2
Aces
9
1
Double Faults
2
68%
(
45 of
66)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
47 of
69)
47%
(
15 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
22 of
44)
33%
(
4 of
12)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
39%
(
38 of
98)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
44 of
113)
104
Total Points Won
107
|
3-6 7-6(6) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Shintaro Imai
Player
Makoto Ochi
63%
(
40 of
63)
1st Serve %
64%
(
34 of
53)
10
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
1
78%
(
31 of
40)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
18 of
34)
61%
(
14 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
10 of
19)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
29%
(
18 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
25 of
53)
70
Total Points Won
46
|
7-6(0) 6-1 | H2H | ||
view more
Cox Vs Imai 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]
