G. Crivellaro
To Win
J. P. Paz
To Win
Kenny de Schepper vs Juan Pablo Paz Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
W W L L W L L L L LHead To Head: Schepper 2 - 0 Paz
They have played 5 sets in total, with Schepper winning 4 and Paz winning 1. The last match between Schepper and Paz was at the M15 Monastir, 15-04-2025, Round: First, Surface: Hard, with Kenny de Schepper getting the victory 3-6 7-6(4) 6-2.
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Kenny de Schepper | 2 |
| Juan Pablo Paz | 0 |
LAST H2H MATCH: M15 Monastir(15-04-2025)
Kenny de Schepper
Juan Pablo Paz
3
6
7
6
6
2
| Schepper | Stats | Paz |
|---|---|---|
| 48% (16-17) | YTD Win/Loss | 29% (4-10) |
| 2 | Head-to-Head | 0 |
| 626 | Ranking | 610 |
| 62 | Highest Rank | 284 |
| 38 | Age | 30 |
| L | Plays | R |
| 0 | Titles | 8 |
| 53% (538-471) | Career Total W/L | 58% (484-345) |
| $620,970 | Career Prize Money | $2,105 |
| 1 | Hard H2H | 0 |
| 1 | Clay H2H | 0 |
Upcoming Match
24 Jun 2025 / First
ODDS
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Jovic VS Klimovicova PREDICTION Grass
Wimbledon - London wta
24 Jun 2025 / Q1 round
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
Shelton VS Tien PREDICTION Grass
Mallorca Championships - Mallorca atp
25 Jun 2025 / Second
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-6 7-6(4) 6-2 | |||||
| 7-6(2) 7-6(2) |
Stats 
Kenny de Schepper
Player
Juan Pablo Paz
72%
(
50 of
69)
1st Serve %
53%
(
41 of
77)
6
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
3
72%
(
36 of
50)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
23 of
41)
68%
(
13 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
64%
(
23 of
36)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
100%
(
3 of
3)
29%
(
20 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
31 of
77)
80
Total Points Won
66
|
||||
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2 | H2H Matches | 0 |
| 4 | Sets Won | 1 |
| 30 | Games Won | 26 |
| 6 | Aces (Total) | 2 |
| 2 | Total Double Faults | 3 |
| 1:1:30 | Average Match Time | 1:1:30 |
| 72% (50/69) | 1st Serve % | 53% (41/77) |
| 72% (36/50) | 1st Serve Win % | 56% (23/41) |
| 68% (13/19) | 2nd Serve Win % | 64% (23/36) |
| 60% (3/5) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 100% (3/3) |
| 40% (31/77) | Return Points Win % | 29% (20/69) |
| 100% (2/2) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 0% (0/2) |
| 100% (3/3) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 0% (0/3) |
| 100% (1/1) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (1/0) |
| 0% (1/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 100% (1/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (1/0) |
Currently displayed stats includes matches of all levels. To exclude lower level events (as per ATP / WTA official stats) toggle button in page footer.
Schepper vs Paz Match Preview :
The upcoming tennis match between Paz and Schepper presents an intriguing analysis based on their statistical performance over recent months. In terms of second serve effectiveness, Schepper has a slight edge, winning 48.22% of points compared to Paz's 43.75%. Such dynamics play a critical role in formulating match predictions, as a player's consistency on the second serve often correlates with match outcomes.
When analyzing return game statistics, Schepper also exhibits superior performance, securing 46.17% of points on their opponent's second serve, while Paz has managed 42.44%. Additionally, Schepper converts 28.83% of points on first serve returns against Paz's 24.69%. These figures are significant in determining who may have the upper hand in this head-to-head context.
Exploring their ability to handle pressure, Paz shows a slight advantage in saving breakpoints, with a 56.32% success rate versus Schepper's 55.98%. Such performance metrics are particularly relevant for in-game betting predictions, where players' resilience can sway match direction during critical points.
Looking at recent performance trajectories, Paz has been active, winning 60.66% of matches over the past year, while Schepper's record stands at 0%, as they have not competed during this period. This contrast in match experience may influence the overall outcome prediction.
On favored playing surfaces, Paz excels on clay, winning 60% of matches, whereas Schepper's performance metrics on preferred surfaces remain unspecified. Paz's experience is mostly within Futures/Satellites/ITF $10K circuits, boasting a 63.46% win rate, while Schepper lacks recent match play data, impacting comparative analysis.
Examining their direct encounters, Schepper leads with a previous victory in their only match, winning both sets. Their performance in high-pressure situations also favors Schepper, who secured both tiebreak scenarios previously played. The absence of a deciding set in their encounters tells us little about endurance when the match extends.
Considering opponent quality, while data is incomplete for Schepper, Paz has faced competitors with an average rank of 108.23 over the last 12 months. This could potentially impact predictions if the match heads into a deciding set, as Paz has won 54% of such sets compared to Schepper's 0%.
In conclusion, while Paz demonstrates solid performance stats and recent match activity, Schepper’s previous head-to-head success and efficient return game may tilt the balance in their favor. Analyzing all factors, the prediction leans toward Schepper leveraging their past advantage to secure victory in this match.
Schepper vs Paz Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88
Kenny de Schepper Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Tom Paris
Player
Kenny de Schepper
58%
(
59 of
102)
1st Serve %
61%
(
56 of
92)
1
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
5
71%
(
42 of
59)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
42 of
56)
63%
(
27 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
14 of
36)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
32%
(
33 of
102)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
36 of
92)
105
Total Points Won
89
|
6-7(5) 6-0 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Kenny de Schepper
Player
Nikolay Vylegzhanin
68%
(
38 of
56)
1st Serve %
68%
(
48 of
71)
10
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
5
79%
(
30 of
38)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
27 of
48)
50%
(
9 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
7)
30%
(
17 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
32 of
71)
71
Total Points Won
56
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Remy Bertola
Player
Kenny de Schepper
58%
(
11 of
19)
1st Serve %
50%
(
10 of
20)
0
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
3
82%
(
9 of
11)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
5 of
10)
50%
(
4 of
8)
2nd Serve Won
20%
(
2 of
10)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
32%
(
6 of
19)
Rtn Points Won
65%
(
13 of
20)
26
Total Points Won
13
|
6-0 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kenny de Schepper
Player
Manas Manoj Dhamne
64%
(
45 of
70)
1st Serve %
78%
(
52 of
67)
2
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
2
69%
(
31 of
45)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
31 of
52)
44%
(
11 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
6 of
15)
25%
(
3 of
12)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
40%
(
28 of
70)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
30 of
67)
72
Total Points Won
65
|
7-5 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tristan Lamasine
Player
Kenny de Schepper
57%
(
59 of
103)
1st Serve %
66%
(
67 of
102)
2
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
2
75%
(
44 of
59)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
42 of
67)
57%
(
25 of
44)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
19 of
35)
27%
(
3 of
11)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
33%
(
34 of
103)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
41 of
102)
110
Total Points Won
95
|
7-5 4-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kenny de Schepper
Player
Fabien Salle
74%
(
58 of
78)
1st Serve %
62%
(
48 of
78)
8
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
0
74%
(
43 of
58)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
28 of
48)
35%
(
7 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
36%
(
28 of
78)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
38 of
78)
88
Total Points Won
68
|
5-7 6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Lorenzo Giustino
Player
Kenny de Schepper
57%
(
54 of
94)
1st Serve %
66%
(
78 of
118)
2
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
5
70%
(
38 of
54)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
53 of
78)
48%
(
19 of
40)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
13 of
40)
40%
(
6 of
15)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
39%
(
37 of
94)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
52 of
118)
109
Total Points Won
103
|
6-4 5-7 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kenny de Schepper
Player
Mario Gonzalez Fernandez
64%
(
32 of
50)
1st Serve %
66%
(
29 of
44)
3
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
3
81%
(
26 of
32)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
17 of
29)
17%
(
3 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
8 of
15)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
42%
(
21 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
19 of
44)
48
Total Points Won
46
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Juan Pablo Paz Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Rudolf Molleker
Player
Juan Pablo Paz
55%
(
27 of
49)
1st Serve %
58%
(
37 of
64)
4
Aces
4
4
Double Faults
4
89%
(
24 of
27)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
24 of
37)
45%
(
10 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
9 of
27)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
31%
(
15 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
31 of
64)
65
Total Points Won
48
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Martin Krumich
Player
Juan Pablo Paz
71%
(
25 of
35)
1st Serve %
50%
(
16 of
32)
1
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
3
60%
(
15 of
25)
1st Serve Won
44%
(
7 of
16)
60%
(
6 of
10)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
8 of
16)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
40%
(
14 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
38
Total Points Won
29
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Stefan Horia Haita
Player
Juan Pablo Paz
72%
(
62 of
86)
1st Serve %
61%
(
54 of
88)
2
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
1
61%
(
38 of
62)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
40 of
54)
67%
(
16 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
16 of
34)
33%
(
2 of
6)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
37%
(
32 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
32 of
88)
86
Total Points Won
88
|
4-6 7-6(5) 3-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 | 3-6 7-6(4) 6-2 | H2H | |||
| R2 | 2-6 6-1 6-3 | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-2 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 |
Stats
Zdenek Kolar
Player
Juan Pablo Paz
69%
(
35 of
51)
1st Serve %
68%
(
40 of
59)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
71%
(
25 of
35)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
22 of
40)
56%
(
9 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
33%
(
17 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
30 of
59)
64
Total Points Won
46
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Max Alcala Gurri
Player
Juan Pablo Paz
50%
(
1 of
2)
1st Serve %
50%
(
3 of
6)
0
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
0
100%
(
1 of
1)
1st Serve Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
100%
(
1 of
1)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
100%
(
1 of
1)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
0%
(
0 of
2)
Rtn Points Won
67%
(
4 of
6)
6
Total Points Won
2
|
1-0 ret. | H2H | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 53% (538/471) | Win/Loss | 58% (484/345) |
| 0% (0/0) | Sets Win/Loss | 57% (1059/784) |
| 0% (0/0) | Games Win/Loss | 54% (8908/7683) |
| 56% (116/93) | Hard Win/Loss | 43% (13/17) |
| 47% (151/168) | Clay Win/Loss | 59% (471/323) |
| 56% (236/184) | Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/5) |
| 57% (35/26) | Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) |
| 0 | Aces Per Game | 0.2 |
| 0 | Aces Total | 1582 |
| 0 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.18 |
| 0 | Total Double Faults | 1419 |
| 1st Match | Average Match Time | 1:16:59 |
| 0 | Average Opponent Rank | 511.24 |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Serve % | 62% (23916/38793) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Serve Win % | 67% (16001/23916) |
| 0% (0/0) | 2nd Serve Win % | 50% (7485/14874) |
| 0% (0/0) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 46% (2046/4473) |
| 0% (0/0) | Return Points Win % | 42% (16667/39322) |
| 46% (25/29) | Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 32% (6/13) | Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/3) | Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 50% (83/83) | Main Tour W/L | 25% (1/3) |
| 52% (243/222) | Challenger W/L | 48% (76/81) |
| 60% (181/121) | Futures W/L | 61% (407/261) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 58% (469/803) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 25% (1/4) |
| 0% (0/0) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 50% (87/174) |
| 0% (0/0) | Deciding Set Win % | 50% (101/204) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 88% (499/438) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 12% (499/60) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 14% (330/45) |
Schepper vs. Paz Prediction Form Trend:
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]
