Mac Visser vs Uladzimir Ignatik Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
Wojtek Kolan
Published on 13 Nov at 11:28 AM UTC
HEAD TO HEAD
M. Visser vs U. Ignatik

NED
0
Win
Played
1
Win

BLR
0
Win
Played
1
Win
Head-to-head: Visser 0 - 1 Ignatik
They have played 2 sets in total, with Mac Visser winning 0 and Uladzimir Ignatik winning 2. The last match between Uladzimir Ignatik and Mac Visser was at the M15 Heraklion, 13-11-2025, Round: R2, Surface: Hard, with Uladzimir Ignatik getting the victory 6-1 7-6(5).
| Players | Head To Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Visser | 0 |
| Ignatik | 1 |
Last 1 H2H Matches:
(R2) M15 Heraklion(11-13-25)
M. Visser vs U. Ignatik H2H Profile
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| $0 | Career Prize Money | $205,460 |
| 56.82% (25-19) | Career Total W/L | 57.61% (560-412) |
| 0 | Hard | 1 |
| 0 | Titles | 23 |
| 0 | Total H2H Matches | 1 |
| 0% (0-0) | YTD Win/Loss | 0% (0-0) |
M. Visser vs U. Ignatik Match Preview:
- Mac Visser boasts a recent second serve win rate of 41.18%, surpassing Uladzimir Ignatik's 37.55%. Could this provide Visser an edge? Yes, as second serve proficiency strongly affects match outcomes.
- Uladzimir Ignatik excels in return games, capturing 50.28% of all second serve return points, compared to Mac Visser's 45.63%. Can Ignatik's return skills be advantageous? Definitely, given their connection to match prediction accuracy.
- Both players struggle more with first serve returns, yet Visser has a slight advantage, capturing 33.83% versus Ignatik's 29.04%. Does this give Visser an edge? It enhances his chances slightly.
- Under pressure, Visser saves 49.71% of his breakpoints, outpacing Ignatik's 43.90%. Is breakpoint resilience significant? It surely is, helping maintain momentum in crucial moments.
- Despite a 58.97% match win rate for Visser over the last year, Ignatik leads with a 70.00% win rate. Does this indicate Ignatik as a stronger contender? It suggests consistency in performance.
- Visser's favored surface is Hard, while Ignatik excels on Clay. Will the match surface impact the outcome? Surface preference can sway results, favoring a player based on conditions.
- Both players typically compete in Futures/Satellites/ITF circuits, but Ignatik's win percentage is higher. Does tournament level matter? Yes, as experience and competition level play a crucial role.
- Visser's recent opponents rank lower on average than Ignatik's, with Visser facing players at an average rank of 218.08 versus Ignatik's 154.5. Does stronger competition prepare Ignatik better? Facing tougher competition could enhance skills and match preparedness.
- In deciding sets, Visser has an impressive win rate of 77%, compared to Ignatik's 25%. Could a deciding set favor Visser? His track record suggests he thrives under such conditions.
- Ignatik converts breakpoints more frequently at 44.12% compared to Visser's 33.87%. Does this give Ignatik a competitive advantage? Efficient breakpoint conversion can shift match dynamics.
Editorial Prediction (November 13, 2025, UTC):
In evaluating their recent performances, Mac Visser stands out with his superior second serve efficiency and ability to maintain composure under pressure, as indicated by saving more breakpoints and dominating deciding sets.
Uladzimir Ignatik, however, counters with a remarkable record in return games and breakpoint conversion. His history of defeating higher-ranked opponents and a higher win percentage over the past year suggests he possesses the skills necessary to tackle difficult matches.
While Visser performs exceptionally well on hard courts, Ignatik shows dominance on clay, highlighting the significance of the playing surface in this encounter. Considering all aspects, Ignatik's consistent form and superior competition level slightly edge him over Visser.
Based on these analyses, Uladzimir Ignatik is the more likely victor in this match, though Mac Visser's potential should not be underestimated.
Mac Visser vs Uladzimir Ignatik Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88.
M. Visser vs U. Ignatik H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 0 | H2H Matches Won | 1 |
| 0 | Sets Won | 2 |
| 7 | Games Won | 13 |
| 0 | Aces (Total) | 6 |
| 3 | Total Double Faults | 3 |
| 1:38:34 | Average Match Time | 1:38:34 |
| 63% (50/79) | 1st Serve % | 59% (29/49) |
| 48% (24/50) | 1st Serve Win % | 83% (24/29) |
| 38% (11/29) | 2nd Serve Win % | 40% (8/20) |
| 75% (3/4) | Break Pts Won % | 38% (6/16) |
| 35% (17/49) | Return Points Win % | 56% (44/79) |
| 0% (0/1) | Best‑of‑3 Win % | 100% (1/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 100% (1/1) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/1) |
| 0% (0/1) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
Recent Performance Stats
M. Visser Recent Matches Played
| OPPONENT | RESULT | SCORE | H2H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
R2 | L | 6-1 7-6(5) | ||
R1 | W | 6-2 3-6 6-3 | ||
Q3 | W | 6-4 2-6 10-7 | ||
Q2 | W | 7-5 1-6 10-7 | ||
Q3 | L | 7-5 6-2 | ||
U. Ignatik Recent Matches Played
| OPPONENT | RESULT | SCORE | H2H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SF | L | 6-3 ret. | ||
QF | W | 7-6(4) 6-7(5) 6-3 | ||
R2 | W | 6-1 7-6(5) | ||
R1 | W | 6-2 6-3 | ||
Q1 | L | 6-1 6-3 | ||

M. Visser vs U. Ignatik Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 56.82% (25/19) | YTD Win/Loss | 57.61% (560/412) |
| 52.88% (55/49) | Sets Win/Loss | 56.90% (1315/996) |
| 51.61% (544/510) | Games Win/Loss | 52.90% (11829/10530) |
| 55.56% (5/4) | Hard Win/Loss | 58.33% (154/110) |
| 56.25% (18/14) | Clay Win/Loss | 58.06% (245/177) |
| 66.67% (2/1) | Indoor Hard W/L | 57.09% (157/118) |
| 0% (0/0) | Grass Win/Loss | 36.36% (4/7) |
| 0.08 | Aces Per Game | 0.4 |
| 41 | Aces Total | 4332 |
| 0.11 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.18 |
| 59 | Total Double Faults | 2009 |
| 1st Match | Average Match Time | 1:1:26 |
| 213.05 | Average Opponent Rank | 595.76 |
| 62% (1028/1662) | 1st Serve % | 62% (27483/44296) |
| 60% (616/1028) | 1st Serve Win % | 73% (20107/27483) |
| 48% (304/634) | 2nd Serve Win % | 48% (8009/16813) |
| 45% (92/203) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 41% (1672/4124) |
| 45% (727/1616) | Return Points Win % | 38% (17123/45069) |
| 0% (0/0) | Slam W/L | 35.00% (14/26) |
| 0% (0/0) | Masters W/L | 33.33% (1/2) |
| 0% (0/0) | Cups W/L | 44.44% (12/15) |
| 0% (0/0) | Main Tour W/L | 26.32% (5/14) |
| 0% (0/0) | Challenger W/L | 49.90% (256/257) |
| 56.82% (25/19) | Futures W/L | 73.51% (272/98) |
| 57% (25/44) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 58% (538/932) |
| 0% (0/0) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 46% (13/28) |
| 30% (3/10) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 48% (192/400) |
| 69% (11/16) | Deciding Set Win % | 46% (159/343) |
| 91% (23/21) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 79% (606/481) |
| 9% (23/2) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 20% (606/124) |
| 19% (21/4) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 21% (366/78) |