Michal Przysiezny vs Nathaniel Lammons 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 Przysiezny vs Lammons analysis and find out who is favored!
Michal Przysiezny vs Nathaniel Lammons Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Przysiezny has won 0% of points on his second serve, while Lammons has won 0%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Przysiezny, in recent form, has won 0% of his opponent's second serve points, while Lammons has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 0% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Przysiezny has saved 0% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Lammons has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Przysiezny has won 0% of matches played (W/L 0/ 0), with Lammons winning 0% (W/L 0/ 0) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Przysiezny has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 60% (W/L 156/ 103), and worse career win % on Hard, winning 50% (W/L 92/ 93). Lammons has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 61% (W/L 50/ 32), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 0% (W/L 0/ 1).
- Direct H2H matches: They have played 1 times before with Przysiezny winning 1 times. They have played 3 sets in total, with Przysiezny winning 2 and Lammons winning 1. The last match between Przysiezny and Lammons was at the Noumea Challenger, 30-12-2017, Q1 round, Hard with Michal Przysiezny getting the victory .
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 2:20:57.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Przysiezny and Lammons have played a deciding set 1 times, with Przysiezny winning 1 times and Lammons 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 2 tiebreaks against each other with Przysiezny winning 2, and Lammons 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Przysiezny has played against opponents with an average rank of while Lammons 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, Przysiezny has won 0% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Lammons has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Przysiezny has converted 0% of breakpoint opportunities, and Lammons 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: Przysiezny 1 - 0 Lammons
16
Total
0
Mast
8
Chall
0
Slam
0
Main
8
Minor
Ret.
Rank
57
High
40
Age
R
Plays
1
Total0
1
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
Ret.
Rank
591
High
30
Age
R
Plays
0
Total
0
Mast
0
Chall
0
Slam
0
Main
0
Minor
Form
56% (465-368)
Career Total W/L
54% (78-67)
0% (0-0)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$403,630
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.
Przysiezny VS Lammons H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
stats | Michal Przysiezny | Nathaniel Lammons |
---|---|---|
All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
Sets Won | 2 | 1 |
Games Won | 18 | 18 |
Aces (Total) | 7 | 25 |
DFs (Total) | 7 | 5 |
Avg Match Time | 2:20:57 | 2:20:57 |
1st Serve % | 66% (85/128) | 63% (66/104) |
1st Serve Win% | 74% (63/85) | 77% (51/66) |
2nd Serve Win% | 42% (18/43) | 53% (20/38) |
BPs Won% (Total) | 67% (2/3) | 25% (3/12) |
Return Points W% | 32% (33/104) | 37% (47/128) |
Best of 3 Sets W% | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
TBs Win% (Total) | 100% (2/2) | 0% (0/2) |
Deciding Set Win% | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
1st set W, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (1/0) |
1st set W, L | 0% (0/0) | 100% (1/1) |
1st set L, W | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
Przysiezny VS Lammons H2h Matches played
Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
4-6 7-6(5) 7-6(1) |
Michal Przysiezny
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
66%
(
85 of
128)
1st Serve %
63%
(
66 of
104)
7
Aces
25
7
Double Faults
5
74%
(
63 of
85)
1st Serve Won
77%
(
51 of
66)
42%
(
18 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
20 of
38)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
37%
(
47 of
128)
Rtn Points Won
32%
(
33 of
104)
114
Total Points Won
118
|
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
stats | Michal Przysiezny | Nathaniel Lammons |
---|---|---|
YTD W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Sets Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Games Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Hard Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Aces pg | 0 | 0 |
Aces Total | 0 | 0 |
DFs per game | 0 | 0 |
DFs Total | 0 | 0 |
Avg Match Time | 1st Match | 1st Match |
Avg Opp Rank | 0 | 0 |
1st Serve % | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
1st Serve W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
2nd Serve W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
BPs Won% Total | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Return Pts W% | 0% (0/0) | 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) | 0% (0/0) |
Challenger W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Best of 3 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
TBs Win% (Total) | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Deciding Set W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
1st set W, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
1st set W, L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Michal Przysiezny Recent Matches Played
opponent | Score | H2H | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
R1 |
Daniel Michalski
Player
Michal Przysiezny
53%
(
26 of
49)
1st Serve %
55%
(
48 of
87)
1
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
5
85%
(
22 of
26)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
28 of
48)
70%
(
16 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
18 of
39)
29%
(
4 of
14)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
22%
(
11 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
41 of
87)
79
Total Points Won
57
|
6-2 7-5 | H2H | ||
R1 |
Daniel Elahi Galan
Player
Michal Przysiezny
60%
(
32 of
53)
1st Serve %
54%
(
29 of
54)
4
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
2
94%
(
30 of
32)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
21 of
29)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
15 of
25)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
21%
(
11 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
33%
(
18 of
54)
60
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
R1 |
Zsombor Piros
Player
Michal Przysiezny
45%
(
21 of
47)
1st Serve %
55%
(
32 of
58)
3
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
3
81%
(
17 of
21)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
62%
(
16 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
11 of
26)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
30%
(
14 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
26 of
58)
59
Total Points Won
46
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
R1 |
Alexander Erler
Player
Michal Przysiezny
60%
(
21 of
35)
1st Serve %
53%
(
24 of
45)
6
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
3
67%
(
14 of
21)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
17 of
24)
50%
(
7 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
33%
(
2 of
6)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
40%
(
14 of
35)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
20 of
45)
41
Total Points Won
39
|
7-6(2) ret. | H2H | ||
R2 |
Tallon Griekspoor
Player
Michal Przysiezny
73%
(
44 of
60)
1st Serve %
57%
(
41 of
72)
6
Aces
3
0
Double Faults
2
75%
(
33 of
44)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
25 of
41)
44%
(
7 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
12 of
31)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
33%
(
20 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
35 of
72)
75
Total Points Won
57
|
6-0 2-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
R1 |
Michal Przysiezny
Player
Javier Barranco Cosano
63%
(
50 of
80)
1st Serve %
65%
(
50 of
77)
4
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
5
80%
(
40 of
50)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
34 of
50)
47%
(
14 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
13 of
27)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
33%
(
2 of
6)
33%
(
26 of
80)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
30 of
77)
84
Total Points Won
73
|
4-6 6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
Rubber 2 | 7-5 7-5 | H2H | |||
R1 |
Brayden Schnur
Player
Michal Przysiezny
75%
(
48 of
64)
1st Serve %
56%
(
46 of
82)
11
Aces
6
0
Double Faults
7
75%
(
36 of
48)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
35 of
46)
69%
(
11 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
28%
(
10 of
36)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
27%
(
17 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
37 of
82)
84
Total Points Won
62
|
7-6(3) 6-2 | H2H | ||
Q1 |
Sho Katayama
Player
Michal Przysiezny
72%
(
49 of
68)
1st Serve %
54%
(
44 of
82)
0
Aces
9
1
Double Faults
2
65%
(
32 of
49)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
31 of
44)
63%
(
12 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
17 of
38)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
3 of
3)
35%
(
24 of
68)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
34 of
82)
78
Total Points Won
72
|
6-4 2-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
R2 |
Tobias Kamke
Player
Michal Przysiezny
64%
(
32 of
50)
1st Serve %
60%
(
37 of
62)
4
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
4
94%
(
30 of
32)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
25 of
37)
61%
(
11 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
50%
(
2 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
18%
(
9 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
25 of
62)
66
Total Points Won
46
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H |
view more
Nathaniel Lammons Recent Matches Played
opponent | Score | H2H | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Q1 |
Gijs Brouwer
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
78%
(
25 of
32)
1st Serve %
68%
(
30 of
44)
1
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
1
92%
(
23 of
25)
1st Serve Won
43%
(
13 of
30)
71%
(
5 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
6 of
14)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
13%
(
4 of
32)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
25 of
44)
53
Total Points Won
23
|
6-0 6-2 | H2H | ||
Q1 |
Mats Rosenkranz
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
62%
(
58 of
94)
1st Serve %
63%
(
61 of
97)
18
Aces
15
2
Double Faults
3
83%
(
48 of
58)
1st Serve Won
85%
(
52 of
61)
47%
(
17 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
13 of
36)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
27%
(
3 of
11)
31%
(
29 of
94)
Rtn Points Won
33%
(
32 of
97)
97
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 4-6 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
Q1 |
Nicola Kuhn
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
65%
(
37 of
57)
1st Serve %
53%
(
32 of
60)
3
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
6
70%
(
26 of
37)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
70%
(
14 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
13 of
28)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
30%
(
17 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
26 of
60)
66
Total Points Won
51
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
Q1 |
Borna Gojo
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
70%
(
87 of
124)
1st Serve %
66%
(
71 of
107)
20
Aces
7
6
Double Faults
0
78%
(
68 of
87)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
52 of
71)
51%
(
19 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
64%
(
23 of
36)
100%
(
1 of
1)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
37 of
124)
Rtn Points Won
30%
(
32 of
107)
119
Total Points Won
112
|
7-6(2) 6-7(9) 6-4 | H2H | ||
R1 |
Denis Istomin
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
66%
(
60 of
91)
1st Serve %
67%
(
54 of
81)
5
Aces
6
0
Double Faults
2
77%
(
46 of
60)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
41 of
54)
55%
(
17 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
12 of
27)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
31%
(
28 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
28 of
81)
91
Total Points Won
81
|
6-3 5-7 6-4 | H2H | ||
QF |
Nathaniel Lammons
Player
Vladyslav Orlov
83%
(
43 of
52)
1st Serve %
74%
(
54 of
73)
12
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
2
79%
(
34 of
43)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
34 of
54)
56%
(
5 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
25%
(
13 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
31 of
73)
70
Total Points Won
55
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
Q1 |
Nathaniel Lammons
Player
Maxime Hamou
62%
(
33 of
53)
1st Serve %
58%
(
25 of
43)
12
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
2
82%
(
27 of
33)
1st Serve Won
80%
(
20 of
25)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
7 of
18)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
26%
(
14 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
16 of
43)
55
Total Points Won
41
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
QF |
Ruan Roelofse
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
61%
(
36 of
59)
1st Serve %
44%
(
24 of
54)
8
Aces
10
4
Double Faults
4
83%
(
30 of
36)
1st Serve Won
96%
(
23 of
24)
57%
(
13 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
27%
(
16 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
19 of
54)
62
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
QF |
Ricardo Rodriguez-Pace
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
66%
(
38 of
58)
1st Serve %
55%
(
28 of
51)
0
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
6
76%
(
29 of
38)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
17 of
28)
55%
(
11 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
31%
(
18 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
26 of
51)
66
Total Points Won
43
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
Q1 |
Julian Lenz
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
72%
(
58 of
81)
1st Serve %
68%
(
50 of
74)
1
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
72%
(
42 of
58)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
35 of
50)
74%
(
17 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
14 of
24)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
27%
(
22 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
25 of
74)
84
Total Points Won
71
|
4-6 6-1 6-4 | H2H |
view more