Jan Hrazdil vs Matteo Fondriest Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
L W L W W L L W W L
Form
W W W L W L L W W LHead-To-Head: Hrazdil 1 - 0 Fondriest
They have played 3 sets in total, with Hrazdil winning 2 and Fondriest winning 1. The last match between Hrazdil and Fondriest was at the M25 Trento, 17-02-2025, Q3, I.hard with Jan Hrazdil getting the victory 3-6 6-4 10-5.
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Jan Hrazdil | 1 |
| Matteo Fondriest | 0 |
M25 Trento(17-02-2025)
3
6
6
4
10
5
| Hrazdil | Stats | Fondriest |
|---|---|---|
| 50% (5-5) | YTD Win/Loss | 58% (14-10) |
| 1 | Head-to-Head | 0 |
| N/A | Ranking | N/A |
| Highest Rank | ||
| 20 | Age | 20 |
| - | Plays | - |
| 0 | Titles | 0 |
| 48% (47-51) | Career Total W/L | 53% (82-73) |
| $0 | Career Prize Money | $0 |
| 0 | YTD Titles | 0 |
| 0 | Hard H2H | 0 |
| 0 | Clay H2H | 0 |
| 1 | Indoor H2H | 0 |
| 0 | Grass H2H | 0 |
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Sabalenka VS Paolini PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami wta
27 Mar 2025 / Semifinals
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
Fritz VS Berrettini PREDICTION Hard
Miami Open - Miami atp
27 Mar 2025 / Quarterfinals
ODDS
PREDICTION
EDGE
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-6 6-4 10-5 |
Stats 
Jan Hrazdil
Player
Matteo Fondriest
57%
(
39 of
69)
1st Serve %
55%
(
32 of
58)
3
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
1
72%
(
28 of
39)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
22 of
32)
53%
(
16 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
15 of
26)
50%
(
1 of
2)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
36%
(
25 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
21 of
58)
65
Total Points Won
62
|
||||
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 1 |
| 19 | Games Won | 15 |
| 3 | Aces (Total) | 1 |
| 3 | Total Double Faults | 1 |
| 1:41:22 | Average Match Time | 1:41:22 |
| 57% (39/69) | 1st Serve % | 55% (32/58) |
| 72% (28/39) | 1st Serve Win % | 69% (22/32) |
| 53% (16/30) | 2nd Serve Win % | 58% (15/26) |
| 50% (1/2) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 29% (2/7) |
| 36% (21/58) | Return Points Win % | 36% (25/69) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 0% (0/0) |
| 100% (1/1) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (1/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 100% (1/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Jan Hrazdil vs Matteo Fondriest Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Jan Hrazdil 1 - 0 Matteo Fondriest
Prediction Insights for the Upcoming Tennis Match:
- The recent performance of Hrazdil on their second serve has resulted in winning 42.04% of points, while Fondriest has achieved a higher success rate of 48.75%. This statistic exhibits a significant correlation to accurately predict the outcome of the match.
- Examining return game statistics from recent matches, Hrazdil has displayed proficiency by winning 50.97% of their opponents' second serve points, whereas Fondriest has outperformed with a success rate of 53.31%. Similarly, the first serve return statistics indicate that Hrazdil has achieved 30.27% success while Fondriest has achieved 33.21%. These figures play a considerable role in determining the favored player in this head-to-head matchup.
- An analysis of how players perform under pressure showcases that Hrazdil has successfully saved 54.37% of breakpoints during recent matches, whereas Fondriest has saved 52.81%. This statistic proves to be invaluable when making predictions for in-game betting.
- Considering the overall performance over the past year, Hrazdil has won 47.17% of matches played (25 out of 53), while Fondriest has a higher success rate of 59.46% (44 out of 74). This provides an insightful overview to predict the head-to-head outcome.
- When it comes to the best surface for each player, Hrazdil exhibits a remarkable clay court record, winning 52% of matches (29 out of 56). In contrast, their performance on hard courts shows a lower win percentage of 42% (10 out of 24). On the other hand, Fondriest excels on hard courts, winning 55% of matches (33 out of 60), while their performance on indoor hard courts results in a win percentage of 43% (3 out of 7).
- An evaluation of player level indicates that Hrazdil has predominantly competed in $10K Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments over the past year, winning 48.08% of matches (25 out of 52). In comparison, Fondriest has participated in the same tournaments, achieving a higher success rate of 59.46% (44 out of 74). When predicting the favorite player, it is crucial to consider the level of events they have been competing in.
- Assessing opponent quality, Hrazdil has faced opponents with an average rank of 244.94 in the past 12 months, while Fondriest has encountered players with an average rank of 168.45. These statistics shed light on the level of competition each player has faced.
- For those interested in live predictions and betting, it is noteworthy to know that Hrazdil has won 31% of deciding sets in the past year. In comparison, Fondriest has showcased a higher performance, winning 47% of all matches played on tour. These statistics can guide in-game betting decisions.
- While historical player performance is helpful in predicting tennis matches, it is essential to consider current event stats for an indication of form. To further assess the in-form player, please refer to the section below if they have already played a match in the ongoing event. Additionally, certain players may perform better in specific events, and this factor should be taken into account when predicting the match outcome.
- Break point conversion rates provide valuable insights into live betting tips. Hrazdil has successfully converted 34.62% of breakpoint opportunities, while Fondriest has capitalized on 48.57% of their chances to break their opponents' serve. These statistics are particularly informative during crucial moments of the match.
- If you are seeking models that predict tennis matches, you may find this article to be a valuable resource. Please note that it caters to statistics enthusiasts.
Jan Hrazdil Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Luc Fomba
Player
Jan Hrazdil
56%
(
41 of
73)
1st Serve %
48%
(
37 of
77)
5
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
13
66%
(
27 of
41)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
27 of
37)
56%
(
18 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
16 of
40)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
38%
(
28 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
34 of
77)
79
Total Points Won
71
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 6-3 6-3 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-3 6-4 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-1 1-6 10-7 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Luca Parenti
Player
Jan Hrazdil
49%
(
25 of
51)
1st Serve %
41%
(
24 of
58)
3
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
17
76%
(
19 of
25)
1st Serve Won
79%
(
19 of
24)
69%
(
18 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
10 of
34)
100%
(
4 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
27%
(
14 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
29 of
58)
66
Total Points Won
43
|
6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Jan Hrazdil
Player
Matteo Fondriest
57%
(
39 of
69)
1st Serve %
55%
(
32 of
58)
3
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
1
72%
(
28 of
39)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
22 of
32)
53%
(
16 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
15 of
26)
50%
(
1 of
2)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
36%
(
25 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
21 of
58)
65
Total Points Won
62
|
3-6 6-4 10-5 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Jan Hrazdil
Player
Mak Mikovic
54%
(
34 of
63)
1st Serve %
62%
(
34 of
55)
11
Aces
1
6
Double Faults
5
76%
(
26 of
34)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
19 of
34)
59%
(
17 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
11 of
21)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
7)
32%
(
20 of
63)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
25 of
55)
68
Total Points Won
50
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF | 6-2 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-1 6-0 | H2H | |||
| Q1 |
Stats
Toby Samuel
Player
Jan Hrazdil
67%
(
32 of
48)
1st Serve %
59%
(
34 of
58)
0
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
5
84%
(
27 of
32)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
20 of
34)
44%
(
7 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
9 of
24)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
29%
(
14 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
29 of
58)
63
Total Points Won
43
|
6-1 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Matteo Fondriest Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Mohamed Nazim Makhlouf
Player
Matteo Fondriest
57%
(
44 of
77)
1st Serve %
53%
(
35 of
66)
2
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
0
57%
(
25 of
44)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
26 of
35)
48%
(
16 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
25%
(
2 of
8)
Break Points Won
67%
(
4 of
6)
47%
(
36 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
27 of
66)
68
Total Points Won
75
|
1-6 6-4 10-8 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 4-6 6-1 10-3 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-3 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 |
Stats
Michael Vrbensky
Player
Matteo Fondriest
62%
(
54 of
87)
1st Serve %
67%
(
39 of
58)
2
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
1
57%
(
31 of
54)
1st Serve Won
46%
(
18 of
39)
52%
(
17 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
63%
(
12 of
19)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
45%
(
39 of
87)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
28 of
58)
76
Total Points Won
69
|
6-4 7-5 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 6-7(1) 6-3 13-11 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-2 6-3 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Nikolay Vylegzhanin
Player
Matteo Fondriest
61%
(
55 of
90)
1st Serve %
54%
(
58 of
107)
2
Aces
7
5
Double Faults
3
62%
(
34 of
55)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
38 of
58)
46%
(
16 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
14 of
49)
70%
(
7 of
10)
Break Points Won
63%
(
5 of
8)
44%
(
40 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
55 of
107)
105
Total Points Won
92
|
4-6 7-6(6) 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Matteo Fondriest
Player
Andrea Paolini
67%
(
33 of
49)
1st Serve %
66%
(
23 of
35)
9
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
1
82%
(
27 of
33)
1st Serve Won
30%
(
7 of
23)
38%
(
6 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
17%
(
2 of
12)
86%
(
6 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
33%
(
16 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
74%
(
26 of
35)
59
Total Points Won
25
|
6-0 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 3-6 6-0 10-3 | H2H | |||
| QF |
Stats
Matteo Fondriest
Player
Allan Gatoto
60%
(
34 of
57)
1st Serve %
43%
(
23 of
53)
4
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
4
68%
(
23 of
34)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
13 of
23)
57%
(
13 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
13 of
30)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
37%
(
21 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
27 of
53)
63
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 48% (47/51) | Win/Loss | 53% (82/73) |
| 50% (109/110) | Sets Win/Loss | 53% (187/164) |
| 51% (1078/1034) | Games Win/Loss | 52% (1790/1641) |
| 43% (12/16) | Hard Win/Loss | 57% (40/30) |
| 52% (29/27) | Clay Win/Loss | 51% (37/36) |
| 43% (6/8) | Indoor Hard W/L | 42% (5/7) |
| 0% (0/0) | Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) |
| 0.17 | Aces Per Game | 0.12 |
| 179 | Aces Total | 194 |
| 0.35 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.06 |
| 363 | Total Double Faults | 108 |
| 1:4:33 | Average Match Time | 1st Match |
| 273 | Average Opponent Rank | 156.99 |
| 58% (2653/4579) | 1st Serve % | 56% (2457/4408) |
| 66% (1753/2653) | 1st Serve Win % | 65% (1605/2457) |
| 43% (823/1926) | 2nd Serve Win % | 49% (947/1951) |
| 45% (192/422) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 43% (175/407) |
| 41% (1796/4387) | Return Points Win % | 40% (1719/4338) |
| 0% (0/0) | 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) |
| 33% (1/2) | Challenger W/L | 0% (0/1) |
| 48% (46/49) | Futures W/L | 53% (82/72) |
| 48% (46/96) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 53% (81/154) |
| 0% (0/1) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 100% (1/1) |
| 33% (9/27) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 48% (16/33) |
| 35% (8/23) | Deciding Set Win % | 43% (17/40) |
| 86% (49/42) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 83% (84/70) |
| 14% (49/7) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 17% (84/14) |
| 10% (49/5) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 17% (71/12) |
Other Predictions
Today's Tennis Prediction News :
- Loading news...
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]
