Emily Seibold vs Danique Havermans Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison

• What can we glean from second serve performances? Havermans has a slightly lower second serve point win rate at 36.11%, compared to Seibold's 36.31%.
• In terms of return games, Havermans leads significantly by winning 57.89% of their opponent's second serve points, whereas Seibold falls behind with 48.25%.
• For first serve returns, Seibold has an advantage, winning 30.71% compared to Havermans’ 25.81%.
• How do both players perform under pressure? Havermans has shown a robust ability to save breakpoints, successfully defending 60% compared to Seibold’s 45.45%.
• In the past year, Seibold shows a better overall performance with a win rate of 57.89%, surpassing Havermans who sits at 47.37%.
• Regarding surface preference, Seibold excels on hard courts with a win percentage of 58%, while Havermans is more successful on indoor hard courts with a 54% win rate.
• Seibold is accustomed to tougher competition, having played in higher-level tournaments, but Havermans has faced opponents with a higher average ranking.
• Who handles deciding sets better? Seibold has a favorable record, winning 44% of deciding sets, whereas Havermans has not won any in the last year.
• Break point conversion rates reveal Havermans edges slightly ahead, converting 50% of opportunities compared to Seibold’s 47.11%.

Editorial Prediction (June 25, 2025, UTC):

As we examine the performances over the past year, Seibold displays a slight edge overall, backed by a higher match win percentage and more robust performance on hard surfaces.

However, Havermans shows superior proficiency in returning serves and converting break point opportunities, which can be pivotal in crucial match moments.

While Seibold fares better in deciding sets, suggesting resilience in tightly contested situations, Havermans' better breakpoint defense could counter Seibold's tendencies.

Considering all factors, Seibold appears likely to win the upcoming match given their consistency and past success rate against comparable adversaries. Yet, Havermans’ notable strengths on return and breakpoints suggest potential for an upset.