Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Daniel Michalski vs Botic Van De Zandschulp 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 Michalski vs Zandschulp analysis and find out who is favored!
Daniel Michalski vs Botic Van De Zandschulp Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Michalski has won 50.5% of points on his second serve, while Zandschulp has won 50.07%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Michalski, in recent form, has won 52.53% of his opponent's second serve points, while Zandschulp has won 49.8%. The same stats for first serve returns are 35.29% and 28.46% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Michalski has saved 57.01% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Zandschulp has saved 61.7% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Michalski has won 57.81% of matches played (W/L 37/ 27), with Zandschulp winning 43.75% (W/L 21/ 27) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Michalski has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 66% (W/L 180/ 93), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 45% (W/L 5/ 6). Zandschulp has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 66% (W/L 87/ 45), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 48% (W/L 10/ 11).
- Player level: In the last year, Michalski has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 42.86% of matches (W/L 15/ 20), where as Zandschulp has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 39.13% of matches (W/L 9/ 14). 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 Michalski winning 0 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Michalski winning 0 and Zandschulp winning 2. The last match between Michalski and Zandschulp was at the Poznan Challenger, 27-07-2021, First, Clay with Botic Van De Zandschulp getting the victory .
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:14:2.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Michalski and Zandschulp have played a deciding set 0 times, with Michalski winning 0 times and Zandschulp 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 Michalski winning 0, and Zandschulp 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Michalski has played against opponents with an average rank of 237.75 while Zandschulp has played against players with an average rank of 167.33.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Michalski has won 42% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Zandschulp has won 71% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Michalski has converted 44.55% of breakpoint opportunities, and Zandschulp has converted 34.36% 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: Michalski 0 - 1 Zandschulp
335
Rank
243
High
24
Age
R
Plays
0
Total1
0
Hard0
0
Clay1
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
115
Rank
22
High
28
Age
R
Plays
L
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
Form
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
L
W
L
62% (213-129)
Career Total W/L
63% (327-193)
52% (13-12)
YTD W/L
37% (7-12)
$0
Career Prize Money
$2,840,375
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.
Michalski VS Zandschulp H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| stats | Daniel Michalski | Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 0 | 1 |
| Sets Won | 0 | 2 |
| Games Won | 5 | 12 |
| Aces (Total) | 0 | 5 |
| DFs (Total) | 4 | 2 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:14:2 | 1:14:2 |
| 1st Serve % | 41% (23/56) | 58% (25/43) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 52% (12/23) | 72% (18/25) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 33% (11/33) | 67% (12/18) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 50% (2/4) | 55% (6/11) |
| Return Points W% | 30% (13/43) | 59% (33/56) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 0% (0/1) | 100% (1/1) |
| 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 | 0% (0/0) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (1/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Michalski VS Zandschulp H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-2 6-3 |
Stats 
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Daniel Michalski
58%
(
25 of
43)
1st Serve %
41%
(
23 of
56)
5
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
4
72%
(
18 of
25)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
67%
(
12 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
11 of
33)
55%
(
6 of
11)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
30%
(
13 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
59%
(
33 of
56)
63
Total Points Won
36
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Daniel Michalski | Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 52% (13/12) | 37% (7/12) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 52% (29/27) | 36% (15/27) |
| Games Win/Loss | 50% (268/272) | 45% (191/231) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 14% (1/6) | 36% (4/7) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 67% (10/5) | 40% (2/3) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 67% (2/1) | 33% (1/2) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.14 | 0.44 |
| Aces Total | 36 | 89 |
| DFs per game | 0.2 | 0.28 |
| DFs Total | 52 | 57 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:54:48 | 1:46:30 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 317.72 | 182.95 |
| 1st Serve % | 62% (1104/1793) | 63% (848/1344) |
| 1st Serve W% | 63% (700/1104) | 68% (573/848) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 52% (355/689) | 47% (234/496) |
| BPs Won% Total | 45% (74/164) | 34% (39/114) |
| Return Pts W% | 41% (713/1752) | 37% (486/1321) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/1) |
| Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) | 25% (1/3) |
| Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) | 50% (1/1) |
| Main Tour W/L | 0% (0/0) | 42% (5/7) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 44% (8/10) | 0% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 71% (5/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 52% (13/25) | 41% (7/17) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/1) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 70% (7/10) | 50% (5/10) |
| Deciding Set W% | 50% (3/6) | 75% (3/4) |
| 1st set W, W | 93% (14/13) | 86% (7/6) |
| 1st set W, L | 7% (14/1) | 14% (7/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (11/0) | 8% (12/1) |
Daniel Michalski Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
David Pichler
Player
Daniel Michalski
68%
(
55 of
81)
1st Serve %
51%
(
25 of
49)
2
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
4
64%
(
35 of
55)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
17 of
25)
58%
(
15 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
9 of
24)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
11%
(
1 of
9)
38%
(
31 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
23 of
49)
73
Total Points Won
57
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Daniel Michalski
Player
Branko Djuric
48%
(
31 of
64)
1st Serve %
56%
(
37 of
66)
1
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
2
71%
(
22 of
31)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
24 of
37)
73%
(
24 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
14 of
29)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
28%
(
18 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
28 of
66)
74
Total Points Won
56
|
6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Marcello Serafini
Player
Daniel Michalski
64%
(
54 of
84)
1st Serve %
73%
(
63 of
86)
0
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
61%
(
33 of
54)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
37 of
63)
50%
(
15 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
43%
(
36 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
37 of
86)
85
Total Points Won
85
|
6-3 1-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daniel Michalski
Player
Luigi Sorrentino
75%
(
33 of
44)
1st Serve %
52%
(
25 of
48)
0
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
6
73%
(
24 of
33)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
15 of
25)
55%
(
6 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
6 of
23)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
32%
(
14 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
27 of
48)
57
Total Points Won
35
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Michalski
Player
Dax Donders
50%
(
31 of
62)
1st Serve %
56%
(
28 of
50)
1
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
1
65%
(
20 of
31)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
14 of
28)
71%
(
22 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
59%
(
13 of
22)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
32%
(
20 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
23 of
50)
65
Total Points Won
47
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Tommaso Compagnucci
Player
Daniel Michalski
61%
(
52 of
85)
1st Serve %
52%
(
48 of
92)
0
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
5
63%
(
33 of
52)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
33 of
48)
45%
(
15 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
21 of
44)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
80%
(
4 of
5)
44%
(
37 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
38 of
92)
86
Total Points Won
91
|
6-4 3-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Daniel Michalski
Player
Michele Ribecai
61%
(
43 of
71)
1st Serve %
64%
(
47 of
73)
1
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
60%
(
26 of
43)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
29 of
47)
61%
(
17 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
10 of
26)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
39%
(
28 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
34 of
73)
77
Total Points Won
67
|
6-4 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daniel Michalski
Player
Luca Parenti
49%
(
27 of
55)
1st Serve %
59%
(
32 of
54)
4
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
74%
(
20 of
27)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
19 of
32)
75%
(
21 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
59%
(
13 of
22)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
25%
(
14 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
22 of
54)
63
Total Points Won
46
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Michalski
Player
Pietro Marino
57%
(
65 of
115)
1st Serve %
56%
(
68 of
121)
2
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
3
58%
(
38 of
65)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
39 of
68)
44%
(
22 of
50)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
24 of
53)
41%
(
7 of
17)
Break Points Won
57%
(
8 of
14)
48%
(
55 of
115)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
58 of
121)
118
Total Points Won
118
|
7-6(4) 3-6 7-6(2) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Zsombor Piros
Player
Daniel Michalski
56%
(
37 of
66)
1st Serve %
59%
(
44 of
75)
2
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
1
68%
(
25 of
37)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
28 of
44)
66%
(
19 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
25%
(
3 of
12)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
33%
(
22 of
66)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
34 of
75)
78
Total Points Won
63
|
7-6(0) 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Botic Van De Zandschulp Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Jan-Lennard Struff
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
56%
(
42 of
75)
1st Serve %
70%
(
74 of
105)
7
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
4
71%
(
30 of
42)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
46 of
74)
61%
(
20 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
15%
(
2 of
13)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
33%
(
25 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
46 of
105)
96
Total Points Won
84
|
7-6(0) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Ivan Gakhov
52%
(
48 of
93)
1st Serve %
52%
(
57 of
110)
2
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
4
60%
(
29 of
48)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
33 of
57)
47%
(
21 of
45)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
22 of
53)
29%
(
6 of
21)
Break Points Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
46%
(
43 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
55 of
110)
105
Total Points Won
98
|
6-4 2-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 4-1 ret. | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Casper Ruud
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
75%
(
41 of
55)
1st Serve %
57%
(
31 of
54)
3
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
5
73%
(
30 of
41)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
33%
(
18 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
28 of
54)
65
Total Points Won
44
|
6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Federico Coria
64%
(
65 of
102)
1st Serve %
64%
(
52 of
81)
1
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
0
65%
(
42 of
65)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
25 of
52)
46%
(
17 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
16 of
29)
43%
(
6 of
14)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
42%
(
43 of
102)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
40 of
81)
99
Total Points Won
84
|
6-4 4-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ugo Humbert
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
70%
(
44 of
63)
1st Serve %
65%
(
35 of
54)
3
Aces
7
4
Double Faults
2
84%
(
37 of
44)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
23 of
35)
32%
(
6 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
32%
(
20 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
23 of
54)
66
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Rinky Hijikata
73%
(
61 of
84)
1st Serve %
54%
(
36 of
67)
8
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
3
69%
(
42 of
61)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
26 of
36)
61%
(
14 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
65%
(
20 of
31)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
33%
(
28 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
31%
(
21 of
67)
77
Total Points Won
74
|
7-5 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Denis Shapovalov
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
57%
(
29 of
51)
1st Serve %
56%
(
32 of
57)
8
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
6
79%
(
23 of
29)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
59%
(
13 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
28%
(
7 of
25)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
29%
(
15 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
29 of
57)
65
Total Points Won
43
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Sebastian Korda
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
66%
(
25 of
38)
1st Serve %
58%
(
18 of
31)
10
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
3
88%
(
22 of
25)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
9 of
18)
46%
(
6 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
8%
(
1 of
13)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
26%
(
10 of
38)
Rtn Points Won
68%
(
21 of
31)
49
Total Points Won
20
|
6-1 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Adrian Mannarino
63%
(
42 of
67)
1st Serve %
59%
(
41 of
69)
5
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
1
81%
(
34 of
42)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
30 of
41)
52%
(
13 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
12 of
28)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
30%
(
20 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
27 of
69)
74
Total Points Won
62
|
7-6(3) 7-5 | H2H | ||
view more
Michalski Vs Zandschulp Prediction H2H Images To Share
Potential H2H Matches This Week For Botic Van De Zandschulp
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 support@matchstat.com
