Minjong Park vs Kody Pearson Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
By Wojtek Kolan
Form
W W W L W W W L W L
Form
W L L W L W L W W LHead-To-Head: Park 1 - 0 Pearson
They have played 2 sets in total, with Park winning 2 and Pearson winning 0. The last match between Park and Pearson was at the M25 Ahmedabad, 25-03-2025, Round: Q3, Surface: Hard, with Minjong Park getting the victory 6-4 7-6(5).
| Players | Head-To-Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Minjong Park | 1 |
| Kody Pearson | 0 |
LAST H2H MATCH: M25 Ahmedabad(25-03-2025)
Minjong Park
Kody Pearson
6
4
7
6
| Park | Stats | Pearson |
|---|---|---|
| 61% (11-7) | YTD Win/Loss | 50% (7-7) |
| 1 | Head-to-Head | 0 |
| N/A | Ranking | 862 |
| Highest Rank | 790 | |
| 23 | Age | 25 |
| - | Plays | R |
| 0 | Titles | 0 |
| 57% (34-26) | Career Total W/L | 50% (122-120) |
| $0 | Career Prize Money | $0 |
| 1 | Hard H2H | 0 |
Today’s Tennis Tips:
Garland VS Friedsam PREDICTION Clay
French Open - Paris wta
23 May 2025 / Q3
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
Muchova VS Parks PREDICTION Clay
French Open - Paris wta
25 May 2025 / First
ODDS
OUR PREDICTION
EDGE
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 7-6(5) |
Stats 
Minjong Park
Player
Kody Pearson
58%
(
46 of
79)
1st Serve %
69%
(
46 of
67)
0
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
72%
(
33 of
46)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
35 of
46)
52%
(
17 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
100%
(
2 of
2)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
37%
(
29 of
79)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
24 of
67)
74
Total Points Won
72
|
||||
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 0 |
| 13 | Games Won | 10 |
| 0 | Aces (Total) | 1 |
| 2 | Total Double Faults | 3 |
| 1:59:41 | Average Match Time | 1:59:41 |
| 58% (46/79) | 1st Serve % | 69% (46/67) |
| 72% (33/46) | 1st Serve Win % | 76% (35/46) |
| 52% (17/33) | 2nd Serve Win % | 38% (8/21) |
| 100% (2/2) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 14% (1/7) |
| 36% (24/67) | Return Points Win % | 37% (29/79) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (1/0) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 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.
Park vs Pearson Match Preview :
When considering the second serve performance over the last six months, recent data indicates that Pearson has a slight edge, securing 37.17% of points compared to Park's closely matched 37.1%. This marginal difference could play a critical role in shaping match predictions. Similarly essential are the return game stats, where Pearson again leads by returning 47.75% of their opponent's second serve points, with Park lagging at 44.94%. This superior edge is also reflected in first serve return stats, where Pearson captures 31.01%, leaving Park behind with 25%.
Evaluating performance under pressure, Pearson’s ability to save breakpoints stands at 49.64%, comfortably surpassing Park's 41.67%. This distinction can be beneficial for making in-game betting predictions. Over the past year, Pearson’s match win percentage is 39.39%, with a win-loss record of 13-20, while Park exhibits a stronger performance, winning 60% of matches with a 9-6 record. These statistics underscore Park's higher consistency in clinching victories.
In terms of surface proficiency, Pearson finds their stride on grass, boasting a 55% win rate, while Park excels on hard courts with a 57% success rate. Notably, both players have an abysmal performance on their least favored surfaces, with Pearson winless (0-3) on indoor hard courts and Park without a victory (0-1) on grass. Match experience in the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K reveals Pearson winning 44.44% (with a 12-15 record), as opposed to Park’s 60% win rate (with a 9-6 record), which may indicate different levels of play experience and match readiness.
An examination of opponent quality over the past year gives Park an edge with an average opponent rank of 151.27, compared to Pearson’s 421.76. In matches extending to a deciding set, Pearson has prevailed in 50% of occurrences, while Park has yet to secure a win in such situations. This factor could have significant implications for live match predictions and betting enthusiasm.
Examining conversion rates of breakpoints, Pearson manages to convert 37.18% of opportunities, whereas Park struggles with a mere 20% success rate. Such metrics are pivotal for in-play betting strategies when either athlete has a chance to break their opponent's serve. While past performance is crucially informative for forecasting tennis match results, event-specific current statistics must also be weighed to identify informed player indications. Considering all these data points, the analytical prediction leans towards Park as the likely winner based on a stronger overall record and higher caliber of opponents faced, despite Pearson’s slight advantages in certain technical areas.
Park vs Pearson Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88
Minjong Park Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q2 | 6-1 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-0 6-1 | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-4 6-4 | H2H | |||
| QF | 7-5 6-0 | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-3 6-2 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-1 6-1 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Aryan Shah
Player
Minjong Park
56%
(
22 of
39)
1st Serve %
56%
(
24 of
43)
5
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
0
95%
(
21 of
22)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
17 of
24)
65%
(
11 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
5 of
19)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
18%
(
7 of
39)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
21 of
43)
53
Total Points Won
29
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Minjong Park
Player
Kody Pearson
58%
(
46 of
79)
1st Serve %
69%
(
46 of
67)
0
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
72%
(
33 of
46)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
35 of
46)
52%
(
17 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
100%
(
2 of
2)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
37%
(
29 of
79)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
24 of
67)
74
Total Points Won
72
|
6-4 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
view more
Kody Pearson Recent Matches Played
Before:
| OPPONENT | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Oliver Crawford
Player
Kody Pearson
72%
(
95 of
132)
1st Serve %
53%
(
62 of
116)
7
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
9
63%
(
60 of
95)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
46 of
62)
51%
(
19 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
29 of
54)
33%
(
4 of
12)
Break Points Won
31%
(
4 of
13)
40%
(
53 of
132)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
41 of
116)
120
Total Points Won
128
|
4-6 7-6(2) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Kody Pearson
Player
Atharva Sharma
67%
(
40 of
60)
1st Serve %
72%
(
47 of
65)
0
Aces
2
5
Double Faults
1
73%
(
29 of
40)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
27 of
47)
45%
(
9 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
7 of
18)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
37%
(
22 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
31 of
65)
69
Total Points Won
56
|
6-1 4-6 12-10 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-2 6-2 | H2H | |||
| QF |
Stats
Minjong Park
Player
Kody Pearson
58%
(
46 of
79)
1st Serve %
69%
(
46 of
67)
0
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
72%
(
33 of
46)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
35 of
46)
52%
(
17 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
8 of
21)
100%
(
2 of
2)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
37%
(
29 of
79)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
24 of
67)
74
Total Points Won
72
|
6-4 7-6(5) | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Kody Pearson
Player
Vullnet Tashi
57%
(
39 of
68)
1st Serve %
45%
(
31 of
69)
8
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
10
72%
(
28 of
39)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
21 of
31)
45%
(
13 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
34%
(
13 of
38)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
40%
(
27 of
68)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
35 of
69)
76
Total Points Won
61
|
4-6 6-1 11-9 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Scott Jones
Player
Kody Pearson
68%
(
51 of
75)
1st Serve %
70%
(
43 of
61)
0
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
63%
(
32 of
51)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
24 of
43)
38%
(
9 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
56%
(
10 of
18)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
45%
(
34 of
75)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
27 of
61)
68
Total Points Won
68
|
6-4 4-6 10-6 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-7(6) 6-1 12-10 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Dane Sweeny
Player
Kody Pearson
69%
(
31 of
45)
1st Serve %
68%
(
41 of
60)
2
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
4
71%
(
22 of
31)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
23 of
41)
64%
(
9 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
21%
(
4 of
19)
36%
(
5 of
14)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
31%
(
14 of
45)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
33 of
60)
64
Total Points Won
41
|
6-0 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 57% (34/26) | Win/Loss | 50% (122/120) |
| 57% (74/56) | Sets Win/Loss | 50% (274/274) |
| 54% (636/541) | Games Win/Loss | 51% (2618/2518) |
| 58% (32/23) | Hard Win/Loss | 54% (94/80) |
| 50% (2/2) | Clay Win/Loss | 39% (20/31) |
| 0% (0/0) | Indoor Hard W/L | 33% (2/4) |
| 0% (0/1) | Grass Win/Loss | 55% (6/5) |
| 0.1 | Aces Per Game | 0.16 |
| 56 | Aces Total | 396 |
| 0.15 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.26 |
| 89 | Total Double Faults | 644 |
| 1:1:50 | Average Match Time | 1st Match |
| 293.07 | Average Opponent Rank | 364.78 |
| 58% (1346/2317) | 1st Serve % | 61% (5888/9699) |
| 64% (860/1346) | 1st Serve Win % | 66% (3913/5888) |
| 50% (490/971) | 2nd Serve Win % | 45% (1715/3811) |
| 46% (123/270) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 42% (387/925) |
| 44% (964/2209) | Return Points Win % | 39% (3767/9585) |
| 0% (0/1) | Cups W/L | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | Challenger W/L | 13% (2/13) |
| 58% (34/25) | Futures W/L | 53% (120/107) |
| 57% (30/53) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 50% (120/240) |
| 25% (1/4) | Best of 5 Sets Win % | 100% (1/1) |
| 46% (6/13) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 38% (23/61) |
| 33% (3/9) | Deciding Set Win % | 52% (33/64) |
| 87% (38/33) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 86% (110/95) |
| 13% (38/5) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 14% (110/15) |
| 5% (22/1) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 20% (132/27) |
Park vs. Pearson 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]
