Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Elizabeth Mandlik vs Madison Sieg 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 Mandlik vs Sieg analysis and find out who is favored!
Elizabeth Mandlik vs Madison Sieg Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Mandlik 1 - 0 Sieg
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Mandlik has won 44.63% of points on his second serve, while Sieg has won 45.16%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Mandlik, in recent form, has won 53.86% of his opponent's second serve points, while Sieg has won 53.21%. The same stats for first serve returns are 40.28% and 40.04% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Mandlik has saved 46.56% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Sieg has saved 51.38% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Mandlik has won 54.39% of matches played (W/L 31/ 26), with Sieg winning 57.58% (W/L 38/ 28) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Mandlik has their best career surface win % on Grass, winning 67% (W/L 6/ 3), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 14% (W/L 1/ 6). Sieg has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 62% (W/L 8/ 5), and worse career win % on Hard, winning 56% (W/L 47/ 37).
- Player level: In the last year, Mandlik has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 52.17% of matches (W/L 12/ 11), where as Sieg has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 58.46% of matches (W/L 38/ 27). 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 Mandlik winning 1 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Mandlik winning 2 and Sieg winning 0. The last match between Mandlik and Sieg was at the W100 Palm Harbor, 11-04-2022, Q1 round, Clay with Elizabeth Mandlik getting the victory 6-1 6-2.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:9:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Mandlik and Sieg have played a deciding set 0 times, with Mandlik winning 0 times and Sieg 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 Mandlik winning 0, and Sieg 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Mandlik has played against opponents with an average rank of 198.39 while Sieg has played against players with an average rank of 276.52.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Mandlik has won 59% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Sieg has won 64% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Mandlik has converted 50.75% of breakpoint opportunities, and Sieg has converted 52.84% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
138
Rank
97
High
23
Age
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
314
Rank
314
High
20
Age
Plays
L
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
Form
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
57% (146-112)
Career Total W/L
57% (79-60)
27% (3-8)
YTD W/L
46% (11-13)
$308,720
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.
| stats | Elizabeth Mandlik | Madison Sieg |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 0 |
| Games Won | 12 | 3 |
| Aces (Total) | 1 | 2 |
| DFs (Total) | 5 | 2 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:9:0 | 1:9:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 65% (35/54) | 58% (31/53) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 74% (26/35) | 45% (14/31) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 53% (10/19) | 45% (10/22) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 83% (5/6) | 0% (0/6) |
| Return Points W% | 55% (29/53) | 33% (18/54) |
| 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 6-2 |
Stats 
Elizabeth Mandlik
Player
Madison Sieg
65%
(
35 of
54)
1st Serve %
58%
(
31 of
53)
1
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
2
74%
(
26 of
35)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
14 of
31)
53%
(
10 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
10 of
22)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
6)
33%
(
18 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
29 of
53)
65
Total Points Won
42
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Elizabeth Mandlik | Madison Sieg |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 27% (3/8) | 46% (11/13) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 35% (9/17) | 46% (24/28) |
| Games Win/Loss | 46% (109/130) | 47% (228/253) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 0% (0/2) | 29% (2/5) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 33% (3/6) | 53% (8/7) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/0) | 50% (1/1) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.09 | 0.08 |
| Aces Total | 10 | 18 |
| DFs per game | 0.49 | 0.31 |
| DFs Total | 57 | 72 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:36:28 | 1:49:27 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 154.64 | 241.63 |
| 1st Serve % | 56% (428/759) | 67% (1070/1597) |
| 1st Serve W% | 59% (252/428) | 56% (600/1070) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 42% (138/331) | 45% (238/527) |
| BPs Won% Total | 53% (46/86) | 53% (93/176) |
| Return Pts W% | 45% (335/750) | 45% (672/1499) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/1) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 25% (1/3) | 48% (11/12) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 27% (3/11) | 43% (10/23) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 0% (0/3) | 60% (3/5) |
| Deciding Set W% | 25% (1/4) | 40% (2/5) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (2/2) | 91% (11/10) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (2/0) | 9% (11/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 11% (9/1) | 8% (13/1) |
Elizabeth Mandlik Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Anna Bondar
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
57%
(
49 of
86)
1st Serve %
56%
(
49 of
87)
3
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
6
59%
(
29 of
49)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
31 of
49)
62%
(
23 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
17 of
38)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
44%
(
4 of
9)
40%
(
34 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
39 of
87)
91
Total Points Won
82
|
6-4 4-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Emma Navarro
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
61%
(
35 of
57)
1st Serve %
54%
(
27 of
50)
3
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
4
63%
(
22 of
35)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
14 of
27)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
10 of
23)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
40%
(
23 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
26 of
50)
60
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Elizabeth Mandlik
Player
Claire Liu
64%
(
32 of
50)
1st Serve %
60%
(
28 of
47)
3
Aces
0
5
Double Faults
3
59%
(
19 of
32)
1st Serve Won
32%
(
9 of
28)
50%
(
9 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
88%
(
7 of
8)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
44%
(
22 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
68%
(
32 of
47)
60
Total Points Won
37
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Varvara Gracheva
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
70%
(
30 of
43)
1st Serve %
55%
(
24 of
44)
1
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
3
73%
(
22 of
30)
1st Serve Won
38%
(
9 of
24)
54%
(
7 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
7 of
20)
86%
(
6 of
7)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
33%
(
14 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
64%
(
28 of
44)
57
Total Points Won
30
|
6-1 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Elizabeth Mandlik
Player
Jessika Ponchet
70%
(
39 of
56)
1st Serve %
59%
(
33 of
56)
0
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
2
74%
(
29 of
39)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
23 of
33)
41%
(
7 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
6 of
23)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
36%
(
20 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
27 of
56)
63
Total Points Won
49
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Katarina Zavatska
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
63%
(
39 of
62)
1st Serve %
55%
(
33 of
60)
0
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
2
54%
(
21 of
39)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
17 of
33)
70%
(
16 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
12 of
27)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
40%
(
25 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
31 of
60)
68
Total Points Won
54
|
6-2 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Elizabeth Mandlik
Player
Emeline Dartron
63%
(
57 of
90)
1st Serve %
50%
(
40 of
80)
0
Aces
2
6
Double Faults
5
60%
(
34 of
57)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
22 of
40)
45%
(
15 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
17 of
40)
70%
(
7 of
10)
Break Points Won
40%
(
4 of
10)
46%
(
41 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
41 of
80)
90
Total Points Won
80
|
3-6 6-0 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Veronica Miroshnichenko
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
62%
(
68 of
109)
1st Serve %
57%
(
71 of
124)
4
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
8
62%
(
42 of
68)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
38 of
71)
39%
(
16 of
41)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
24 of
53)
33%
(
7 of
21)
Break Points Won
57%
(
8 of
14)
47%
(
51 of
109)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
62 of
124)
120
Total Points Won
113
|
7-5 3-6 7-6(2) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Usue Maitane Arconada
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
59%
(
48 of
81)
1st Serve %
48%
(
38 of
80)
2
Aces
1
5
Double Faults
4
56%
(
27 of
48)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
22 of
38)
45%
(
15 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
16 of
42)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
63%
(
5 of
8)
48%
(
39 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
42 of
80)
84
Total Points Won
77
|
7-5 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Ella Seidel
Player
Elizabeth Mandlik
53%
(
48 of
91)
1st Serve %
58%
(
46 of
79)
5
Aces
2
10
Double Faults
7
60%
(
29 of
48)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
30 of
46)
51%
(
22 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
14 of
33)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
63%
(
5 of
8)
44%
(
40 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
35 of
79)
86
Total Points Won
84
|
6-3 2-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Madison Sieg Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Gergana Topalova
Player
Madison Sieg
62%
(
44 of
71)
1st Serve %
61%
(
41 of
67)
-
Aces
-
1
Double Faults
3
70%
(
31 of
44)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
28 of
41)
41%
(
11 of
27)
2nd Serve Won
12%
(
3 of
26)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
41%
(
29 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
36 of
67)
78
Total Points Won
60
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Madison Sieg
Player
Daria Yesypchuk
72%
(
42 of
58)
1st Serve %
86%
(
44 of
51)
1
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
0
64%
(
27 of
42)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
24 of
44)
63%
(
10 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
36%
(
21 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
23 of
51)
60
Total Points Won
49
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Madison Sieg
Player
Merel Hoedt
68%
(
42 of
62)
1st Serve %
63%
(
40 of
64)
2
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
6
55%
(
23 of
42)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
22 of
40)
55%
(
11 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
7 of
24)
55%
(
6 of
11)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
45%
(
28 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
35 of
64)
69
Total Points Won
57
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Hikaru Sato
Player
Madison Sieg
51%
(
57 of
111)
1st Serve %
79%
(
75 of
95)
4
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
3
61%
(
35 of
57)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
41 of
75)
50%
(
27 of
54)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
8 of
20)
50%
(
7 of
14)
Break Points Won
31%
(
5 of
16)
44%
(
49 of
111)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
46 of
95)
108
Total Points Won
98
|
7-6(6) 4-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Madison Sieg
Player
Jaquelyn Ogunwale
70%
(
30 of
43)
1st Serve %
53%
(
19 of
36)
1
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
3
73%
(
22 of
30)
1st Serve Won
26%
(
5 of
19)
62%
(
8 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
7 of
17)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
13 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
67%
(
24 of
36)
54
Total Points Won
25
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Johanne Svendsen
Player
Madison Sieg
69%
(
46 of
67)
1st Serve %
73%
(
60 of
82)
1
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
3
61%
(
28 of
46)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
29 of
60)
33%
(
7 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
9 of
22)
44%
(
7 of
16)
Break Points Won
100%
(
6 of
6)
48%
(
32 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
44 of
82)
79
Total Points Won
70
|
6-3 1-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Madison Sieg
Player
Elena-Teodora Cadar
67%
(
46 of
69)
1st Serve %
87%
(
75 of
86)
2
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
1
67%
(
31 of
46)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
40 of
75)
43%
(
10 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
5 of
11)
36%
(
5 of
14)
Break Points Won
40%
(
4 of
10)
41%
(
28 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
41 of
86)
82
Total Points Won
73
|
7-6(3) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Solana Sierra
Player
Madison Sieg
73%
(
30 of
41)
1st Serve %
65%
(
28 of
43)
0
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
83%
(
25 of
30)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
16 of
28)
64%
(
7 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
22%
(
9 of
41)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
21 of
43)
53
Total Points Won
31
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Madison Sieg
Player
Ana Candiotto
62%
(
29 of
47)
1st Serve %
70%
(
32 of
46)
-
Aces
-
3
Double Faults
0
79%
(
23 of
29)
1st Serve Won
47%
(
15 of
32)
50%
(
9 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
6 of
14)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
32%
(
15 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
25 of
46)
57
Total Points Won
36
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Carolina Meligeni Alves
Player
Madison Sieg
54%
(
36 of
67)
1st Serve %
51%
(
35 of
69)
1
Aces
1
5
Double Faults
7
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
20 of
35)
61%
(
19 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
14 of
34)
33%
(
4 of
12)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
36%
(
24 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
35 of
69)
78
Total Points Won
58
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Mandlik Vs Sieg 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]
