Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Federico Bondioli vs Learner Tien 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 Bondioli vs Tien analysis and find out who is favored!
Federico Bondioli vs Learner Tien Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Bondioli has won 49.44% of points on his second serve, while Tien has won 54.57%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Bondioli, in recent form, has won 47.23% of his opponent's second serve points, while Tien has won 54.5%. The same stats for first serve returns are 28.16% and 39.86% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Bondioli has saved 56.36% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Tien has saved 70.87% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Bondioli has won 44.44% of matches played (W/L 16/ 20), with Tien winning 77.5% (W/L 31/ 9) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Bondioli has their best career surface win % on Grass, winning 75% (W/L 3/ 1), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 33% (W/L 2/ 4). Tien has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 79% (W/L 11/ 3), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 43% (W/L 3/ 4).
- Player level: In the last year, Bondioli has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 50% of matches (W/L 16/ 16), where as Tien has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 85.19% of matches (W/L 23/ 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.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Bondioli has played against opponents with an average rank of 155.14 while Tien has played against players with an average rank of 111.5.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Bondioli has won 33% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Tien has won 70% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Bondioli has converted 39.08% of breakpoint opportunities, and Tien has converted 50.85% 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: Bondioli 0 - 0 Tien
886
Rank
884
High
18
Age
Plays
0
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
432
Rank
421
High
18
Age
Plays
L
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
L
L
Form
W
W
W
W
W
L
W
W
L
L
46% (27-32)
Career Total W/L
67% (46-23)
41% (7-10)
YTD W/L
57% (4-3)
$0
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 | Federico Bondioli | Learner Tien |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 41% (7/10) | 57% (4/3) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 43% (16/21) | 56% (9/7) |
| Games Win/Loss | 47% (157/180) | 57% (87/66) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 46% (6/7) | 67% (4/2) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/1) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 25% (1/3) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.39 | 0.24 |
| Aces Total | 64 | 18 |
| DFs per game | 0.3 | 0.16 |
| DFs Total | 49 | 12 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:29:17 | 1:40:19 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 51.53 | 104.43 |
| 1st Serve % | 63% (679/1071) | 61% (301/493) |
| 1st Serve W% | 68% (460/679) | 66% (200/301) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 50% (197/392) | 54% (104/192) |
| BPs Won% Total | 39% (29/74) | 57% (28/49) |
| Return Pts W% | 36% (377/1060) | 44% (207/471) |
| 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 | 0% (0/3) | 67% (4/2) |
| Futures W/L | 50% (7/7) | 0% (0/1) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 38% (6/16) | 57% (4/7) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 33% (2/6) | 33% (1/3) |
| Deciding Set W% | 25% (1/4) | 50% (1/2) |
| 1st set W, W | 78% (9/7) | 100% (4/4) |
| 1st set W, L | 22% (9/2) | 0% (4/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (8/0) | 0% (3/0) |
Federico Bondioli Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats 
Egor Gerasimov
Player
Federico Bondioli
55%
(
35 of
64)
1st Serve %
58%
(
36 of
62)
2
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
4
83%
(
29 of
35)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
26 of
36)
66%
(
19 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
15 of
26)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
25%
(
16 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
21 of
62)
69
Total Points Won
57
|
6-2 7-6(7) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
James McCabe
Player
Federico Bondioli
62%
(
43 of
69)
1st Serve %
46%
(
29 of
63)
3
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
3
67%
(
29 of
43)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
17 of
29)
58%
(
15 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
18 of
34)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
36%
(
25 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
28 of
63)
72
Total Points Won
60
|
7-6(6) 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Federico Cina
Player
Federico Bondioli
49%
(
22 of
45)
1st Serve %
73%
(
29 of
40)
6
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
2
86%
(
19 of
22)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
15 of
29)
65%
(
15 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
5 of
11)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
24%
(
11 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
20 of
40)
54
Total Points Won
31
|
6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Federico Bondioli
Player
Omar Knani
66%
(
47 of
71)
1st Serve %
69%
(
60 of
87)
3
Aces
2
6
Double Faults
0
83%
(
39 of
47)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
36 of
60)
29%
(
7 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
11 of
27)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
35%
(
25 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
40 of
87)
86
Total Points Won
72
|
7-6(8) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Leonardo Rossi
Player
Federico Bondioli
54%
(
25 of
46)
1st Serve %
71%
(
32 of
45)
3
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
4
80%
(
20 of
25)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
19 of
32)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
7 of
13)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
14 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
19 of
45)
51
Total Points Won
40
|
6-4 3-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Yurii Dzhavakian
Player
Federico Bondioli
66%
(
21 of
32)
1st Serve %
60%
(
31 of
52)
1
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
5
86%
(
18 of
21)
1st Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
91%
(
10 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
13%
(
4 of
32)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
31 of
52)
59
Total Points Won
25
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Federico Bondioli
Player
Amr Elsayed
62%
(
13 of
21)
1st Serve %
27%
(
4 of
15)
4
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
2
77%
(
10 of
13)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
38%
(
3 of
8)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
6 of
11)
0%
(
0 of
1)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
6)
38%
(
8 of
21)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
19
Total Points Won
17
|
2-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Federico Bondioli
Player
Saveliy Ivanov
71%
(
42 of
59)
1st Serve %
63%
(
32 of
51)
7
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
1
69%
(
29 of
42)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
71%
(
12 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
31%
(
18 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
22 of
51)
63
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Riccardo Bonadio
Player
Federico Bondioli
60%
(
56 of
93)
1st Serve %
69%
(
63 of
91)
5
Aces
9
2
Double Faults
3
71%
(
40 of
56)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
42 of
63)
57%
(
21 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
61%
(
17 of
28)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
34%
(
32 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
32 of
91)
93
Total Points Won
91
|
6-3 4-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Pierre Delage
Player
Federico Bondioli
62%
(
58 of
93)
1st Serve %
70%
(
55 of
79)
8
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
3
67%
(
39 of
58)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
41 of
55)
57%
(
20 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
37%
(
34 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
28 of
79)
87
Total Points Won
85
|
4-6 6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Learner Tien Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
William Grant
Player
Learner Tien
58%
(
35 of
60)
1st Serve %
75%
(
42 of
56)
6
Aces
0
6
Double Faults
2
69%
(
24 of
35)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
25 of
42)
40%
(
10 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
14%
(
2 of
14)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
43%
(
26 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
29 of
56)
63
Total Points Won
53
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Sebastian Fanselow
Player
Learner Tien
56%
(
59 of
106)
1st Serve %
68%
(
78 of
115)
11
Aces
3
6
Double Faults
2
85%
(
50 of
59)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
52 of
78)
49%
(
23 of
47)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
20 of
37)
20%
(
3 of
15)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
31%
(
33 of
106)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
43 of
115)
116
Total Points Won
105
|
7-6(4) 5-7 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Marco Trungelliti
56%
(
35 of
63)
1st Serve %
55%
(
22 of
40)
0
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
4
69%
(
24 of
35)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
12 of
22)
57%
(
16 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
22%
(
4 of
18)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
10)
37%
(
23 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
24 of
40)
64
Total Points Won
39
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Giovanni Oradini
51%
(
24 of
47)
1st Serve %
67%
(
30 of
45)
5
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
1
83%
(
20 of
24)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
16 of
30)
74%
(
17 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
8 of
15)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
21%
(
10 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
21 of
45)
58
Total Points Won
34
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Mitchell Krueger
Player
Learner Tien
69%
(
49 of
71)
1st Serve %
57%
(
43 of
76)
6
Aces
4
0
Double Faults
3
67%
(
33 of
49)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
24 of
43)
50%
(
11 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
18 of
33)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
40%
(
4 of
10)
38%
(
27 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
34 of
76)
78
Total Points Won
69
|
6-4 7-6(6) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Giovanni Oradini
61%
(
40 of
66)
1st Serve %
66%
(
46 of
70)
3
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
3
70%
(
28 of
40)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
22 of
46)
54%
(
14 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
12 of
24)
100%
(
4 of
4)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
36%
(
24 of
66)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
36 of
70)
78
Total Points Won
58
|
6-2 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Maxwell Mckennon
56%
(
39 of
70)
1st Serve %
70%
(
55 of
79)
3
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
4
69%
(
27 of
39)
1st Serve Won
51%
(
28 of
55)
55%
(
17 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
11 of
24)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
37%
(
26 of
70)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
40 of
79)
84
Total Points Won
65
|
6-2 3-6 6-0 | H2H | ||
| F |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Jacob Fearnley
80%
(
4 of
5)
1st Serve %
50%
(
5 of
10)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
3
100%
(
4 of
4)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
0%
(
0 of
1)
2nd Serve Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
25%
(
1 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
20%
(
1 of
5)
Rtn Points Won
70%
(
7 of
10)
11
Total Points Won
4
|
2-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Robert Cash
74%
(
56 of
76)
1st Serve %
70%
(
39 of
56)
1
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
0
70%
(
39 of
56)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
22 of
39)
45%
(
9 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
71%
(
12 of
17)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
6)
37%
(
28 of
76)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
22 of
56)
70
Total Points Won
62
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Learner Tien
Player
Adam Neff
58%
(
32 of
55)
1st Serve %
48%
(
22 of
46)
1
Aces
5
4
Double Faults
4
78%
(
25 of
32)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
13 of
22)
39%
(
9 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
6 of
24)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
38%
(
21 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
59%
(
27 of
46)
61
Total Points Won
40
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
view more
Bondioli Vs Tien 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]
