Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Kristjan Tamm vs Cengiz AKSU 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 Tamm vs AKSU analysis and find out who is favored!
Kristjan Tamm vs Cengiz AKSU Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Tamm has won 45.26% of points on his second serve, while AKSU has won 0%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Tamm, in recent form, has won 47.32% of his opponent's second serve points, while AKSU has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 31.52% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Tamm has saved 68.29% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas AKSU has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Tamm has won 50% of matches played (W/L 14/ 14), with AKSU winning 0% (W/L 0/ 0) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Tamm has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 57% (W/L 94/ 70), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 37% (W/L 11/ 19). AKSU has their best career surface win % on , winning % (W/L / ), and worse career win % on , winning % (W/L / ).
- Player level: In the last year, Tamm has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 51.85% of matches (W/L 14/ 13), where as AKSU has played most of their matches on the , winning 0% of matches (W/L / ). 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, Tamm has played against opponents with an average rank of 153.14 while AKSU has played against players with an average rank of .
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Tamm has won 56% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while AKSU has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Tamm has converted 38.24% of breakpoint opportunities, and AKSU has converted 0% 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: Tamm 0 - 0 AKSU
N/A
Rank
High
25
Age
Plays
0
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
N/A
Rank
High
25
Age
R
Plays
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
L
Form
Career Total W/L
YTD W/L
$0
Career Prize Money
$0
YTD Titles
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 | Kristjan Tamm | Cengiz AKSU |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 50% (8/8) | 1st Match |
| Sets Win/Loss | 50% (19/19) | 1st Match |
| Games Win/Loss | 50% (179/181) | 1st Match |
| Hard Win/Loss | 50% (8/8) | 1st Match |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Aces pg | 0.57 | 1st Match |
| Aces Total | 99 | 1st Match |
| DFs per game | 0.31 | 1st Match |
| DFs Total | 54 | 1st Match |
| Avg Match Time | 1:52:18 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 206.69 | 1st Match |
| 1st Serve % | 61% (737/1201) | 1st Match |
| 1st Serve W% | 71% (524/737) | 1st Match |
| 2nd Serve W% | 45% (210/464) | 1st Match |
| BPs Won% Total | 38% (39/102) | 1st Match |
| Return Pts W% | 37% (429/1146) | 1st Match |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Main Tour W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Challenger W/L | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| Futures W/L | 50% (8/8) | 1st Match |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 53% (8/15) | 1st Match |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 1st Match |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 40% (2/5) | 1st Match |
| Deciding Set W% | 57% (4/7) | 1st Match |
| 1st set W, W | 88% (8/7) | 1st Match |
| 1st set W, L | 13% (8/1) | 1st Match |
| 1st set L, W | 13% (8/1) | 1st Match |
Kristjan Tamm Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats 
Joshua Sheehy
Player
Kristjan Tamm
59%
(
66 of
111)
1st Serve %
70%
(
73 of
104)
3
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
4
65%
(
43 of
66)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
50 of
73)
64%
(
29 of
45)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
14 of
31)
25%
(
2 of
8)
Break Points Won
17%
(
2 of
12)
35%
(
39 of
111)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
40 of
104)
112
Total Points Won
103
|
6-3 3-6 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Kristjan Tamm
Player
Corban Crowther
63%
(
31 of
49)
1st Serve %
54%
(
27 of
50)
3
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
2
77%
(
24 of
31)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
18 of
27)
72%
(
13 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
24%
(
12 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
20 of
50)
57
Total Points Won
42
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kristjan Tamm
Player
Egor Agafonov
67%
(
62 of
92)
1st Serve %
59%
(
51 of
86)
1
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
3
65%
(
40 of
62)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
31 of
51)
60%
(
18 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
14 of
35)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
37%
(
34 of
92)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
41 of
86)
99
Total Points Won
79
|
6-3 4-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Moerani Bouzige
Player
Kristjan Tamm
67%
(
46 of
69)
1st Serve %
61%
(
46 of
76)
7
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
3
74%
(
34 of
46)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
32 of
46)
57%
(
13 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
32%
(
22 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
32 of
76)
79
Total Points Won
66
|
7-6(5) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Kristjan Tamm
Player
Filip Peliwo
58%
(
49 of
84)
1st Serve %
54%
(
45 of
84)
7
Aces
1
7
Double Faults
0
71%
(
35 of
49)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
27 of
45)
29%
(
10 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
21 of
39)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
38%
(
5 of
13)
46%
(
39 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
36 of
84)
81
Total Points Won
87
|
6-2 1-6 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kristjan Tamm
Player
Ye Hongyu
57%
(
26 of
46)
1st Serve %
70%
(
42 of
60)
2
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
6
92%
(
24 of
26)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
27 of
42)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
8 of
18)
27%
(
3 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
22%
(
10 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
25 of
60)
61
Total Points Won
45
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tauheed Browning
Player
Kristjan Tamm
58%
(
49 of
85)
1st Serve %
63%
(
48 of
76)
4
Aces
2
6
Double Faults
1
71%
(
35 of
49)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
35 of
48)
58%
(
21 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
10 of
28)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
34%
(
29 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
31 of
76)
87
Total Points Won
74
|
4-6 6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Mees Rottgering
Player
Kristjan Tamm
100%
(
4 of
4)
1st Serve %
64%
(
9 of
14)
-
Aces
-
0
Double Faults
1
100%
(
4 of
4)
1st Serve Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
0%
(
0 of
0)
2nd Serve Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
0%
(
0 of
4)
Rtn Points Won
71%
(
10 of
14)
14
Total Points Won
4
|
3-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Kristjan Tamm
Player
Illya Beloborodko
58%
(
64 of
111)
1st Serve %
57%
(
47 of
82)
2
Aces
9
6
Double Faults
6
72%
(
46 of
64)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
35 of
47)
51%
(
24 of
47)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
19 of
35)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
20%
(
2 of
10)
37%
(
41 of
111)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
28 of
82)
98
Total Points Won
95
|
3-6 6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Kristjan Tamm
Player
Milan Drinic
56%
(
76 of
136)
1st Serve %
69%
(
100 of
144)
24
Aces
8
8
Double Faults
3
80%
(
61 of
76)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
67 of
100)
38%
(
23 of
60)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
17 of
44)
31%
(
4 of
13)
Break Points Won
20%
(
3 of
15)
38%
(
52 of
136)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
60 of
144)
144
Total Points Won
136
|
7-6(5) 6-7(4) 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Cengiz AKSU Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Joao Eduardo Schiessl
Player
Cengiz Aksu
76%
(
32 of
42)
1st Serve %
56%
(
28 of
50)
-
Aces
-
2
Double Faults
4
84%
(
27 of
32)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
16 of
28)
30%
(
3 of
10)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
7 of
22)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
29%
(
12 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
27 of
50)
57
Total Points Won
35
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Cengiz Aksu
Player
Viacheslav Bielinskyi
70%
(
32 of
46)
1st Serve %
63%
(
33 of
52)
1
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
0
84%
(
27 of
32)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
20 of
33)
57%
(
8 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
24%
(
11 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
25 of
52)
60
Total Points Won
38
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Cengiz Aksu
Player
Hien Pham
68%
(
28 of
41)
1st Serve %
76%
(
28 of
37)
3
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
79%
(
22 of
28)
1st Serve Won
25%
(
7 of
28)
54%
(
7 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
100%
(
6 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
29%
(
12 of
41)
Rtn Points Won
73%
(
27 of
37)
56
Total Points Won
22
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Cengiz Aksu
Player
Louis Van Herck
60%
(
29 of
48)
1st Serve %
71%
(
59 of
83)
2
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
2
69%
(
20 of
29)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
35 of
59)
68%
(
13 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
9 of
24)
27%
(
4 of
15)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
31%
(
15 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
39 of
83)
72
Total Points Won
59
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-2 6-1 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-3 7-5 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Francesco Ferrari
Player
Cengiz Aksu
63%
(
41 of
65)
1st Serve %
59%
(
45 of
76)
-
Aces
-
1
Double Faults
4
63%
(
26 of
41)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
26 of
45)
46%
(
11 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
12 of
31)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
43%
(
28 of
65)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
38 of
76)
75
Total Points Won
66
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Maxime Chazal
Player
Cengiz Aksu
60%
(
34 of
57)
1st Serve %
65%
(
46 of
71)
3
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
1
82%
(
28 of
34)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
25 of
46)
48%
(
11 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
32%
(
18 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
34 of
71)
73
Total Points Won
55
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Dominik Kellovsky
Player
Cengiz Aksu
80%
(
74 of
92)
1st Serve %
74%
(
54 of
73)
1
Aces
2
7
Double Faults
3
68%
(
50 of
74)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
33 of
54)
44%
(
8 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
22%
(
2 of
9)
37%
(
34 of
92)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
33 of
73)
91
Total Points Won
74
|
6-1 4-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Peter Heller
Player
Cengiz Aksu
52%
(
45 of
86)
1st Serve %
70%
(
57 of
82)
2
Aces
0
3
Double Faults
2
71%
(
32 of
45)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
33 of
57)
49%
(
20 of
41)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
13 of
25)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
40%
(
4 of
10)
40%
(
34 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
36 of
82)
88
Total Points Won
80
|
6-3 3-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Tamm Vs AKSU Prediction H2H Images To Share
Potential H2H Matches This Week For Kristjan Tamm
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 support@matchstat.com
