Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Nathan Seateun vs Ray Ho 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 Seateun vs Ho analysis and find out who is favored!
Nathan Seateun vs Ray Ho Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Seateun has won 48.05% of points on his second serve, while Ho has won 42.28%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Seateun, in recent form, has won 53.05% of his opponent's second serve points, while Ho has won 54.19%. The same stats for first serve returns are 38.36% and 32.83% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Seateun has saved 54.05% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Ho has saved 54.65% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Seateun has won 50% of matches played (W/L 11/ 11), with Ho winning 51.28% (W/L 20/ 19) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Seateun has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 55% (W/L 96/ 79), and worse career win % on Hard, winning 51% (W/L 38/ 37). Ho has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 54% (W/L 31/ 26), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 0% (W/L 0/ 2).
- Player level: In the last year, Seateun has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 50% of matches (W/L 11/ 11), where as Ho has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 61.54% of matches (W/L 16/ 10). When comparing stats between players to predict the favorite, it is of course all relative to the event level they have been playing at.
- Direct H2H matches: They have played 2 times before with Seateun winning 1 times. They have played 4 sets in total, with Seateun winning 2 and Ho winning 2. The last match between Seateun and Ho was at the M15 Cairo, 09-12-2021, First, Clay with Nathan Seateun getting the victory 6-4 7-6(3).
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:46:30.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Seateun and Ho have played a deciding set 0 times, with Seateun winning 0 times and Ho 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 1 tiebreaks against each other with Seateun winning 1, and Ho 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Seateun has played against opponents with an average rank of 128.41 while Ho has played against players with an average rank of 179.79.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Seateun has won 100% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Ho has won 56% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Seateun has converted 48.53% of breakpoint opportunities, and Ho has converted 37.33% 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: Seateun 1 - 1 Ho
891
Rank
666
High
26
Age
Plays
1
Total1
0
Hard0
1
Clay1
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
889
Rank
715
High
24
Age
L
Plays
W
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
W
L
Form
W
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
L
53% (146-128)
Career Total W/L
53% (132-117)
57% (4-3)
YTD W/L
64% (9-5)
$0
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.
| stats | Nathan Seateun | Ray Ho |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 1 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 2 |
| Games Won | 18 | 22 |
| Aces (Total) | 6 | 8 |
| DFs (Total) | 1 | 1 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:46:30 | 1:46:30 |
| 1st Serve % | 76% (98/129) | 61% (76/125) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 59% (58/98) | 70% (53/76) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 45% (14/31) | 51% (25/49) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 33% (4/12) | 54% (7/13) |
| Return Points W% | 38% (47/125) | 44% (57/129) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 50% (1/2) | 50% (1/2) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Deciding Set Win% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (1/1) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (1/0) | 0% (1/0) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 7-6(3) |
Stats 
Nathan Seateun
Player
Ray Ho
75%
(
52 of
69)
1st Serve %
59%
(
46 of
78)
3
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
0
65%
(
34 of
52)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
28 of
46)
47%
(
8 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
39%
(
27 of
69)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
33 of
78)
75
Total Points Won
72
|
||||
| 6-4 6-1 |
Stats
Ray Ho
Player
Nathan Seateun
64%
(
30 of
47)
1st Serve %
77%
(
46 of
60)
7
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
0
83%
(
25 of
30)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
24 of
46)
47%
(
8 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
6 of
14)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
30%
(
14 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
30 of
60)
63
Total Points Won
44
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Nathan Seateun | Ray Ho |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 57% (4/3) | 64% (9/5) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 50% (8/8) | 58% (19/14) |
| Games Win/Loss | 51% (77/75) | 55% (160/133) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 50% (1/1) | 64% (9/5) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 60% (3/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.15 | 0.26 |
| Aces Total | 11 | 37 |
| DFs per game | 0.12 | 0.06 |
| DFs Total | 9 | 9 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:25:8 | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 65 | 120.21 |
| 1st Serve % | 65% (235/361) | 68% (428/630) |
| 1st Serve W% | 64% (151/235) | 63% (270/428) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 50% (63/126) | 39% (79/202) |
| BPs Won% Total | 42% (18/43) | 38% (24/64) |
| Return Pts W% | 43% (167/391) | 40% (242/607) |
| 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% (0/2) |
| Futures W/L | 57% (4/3) | 75% (9/3) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 57% (4/7) | 64% (9/14) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 33% (1/3) | 100% (2/2) |
| Deciding Set W% | 100% (2/2) | 80% (4/5) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (3/3) | 90% (10/9) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (3/0) | 10% (10/1) |
| 1st set L, W | 25% (4/1) | 0% (4/0) |
Nathan Seateun Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q2 | 6-2 6-4 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-1 7-6(5) | H2H | |||
| QF |
Stats
Corentin Denolly
Player
Nathan Seateun
67%
(
33 of
49)
1st Serve %
58%
(
33 of
57)
8
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
4
67%
(
22 of
33)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
19 of
33)
63%
(
10 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
6 of
24)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
35%
(
17 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
32 of
57)
64
Total Points Won
42
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Nathan Seateun
Player
Marlon Vankan
69%
(
76 of
110)
1st Serve %
76%
(
87 of
114)
4
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
4
62%
(
47 of
76)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
53 of
87)
68%
(
23 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
13 of
27)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
27%
(
3 of
11)
36%
(
40 of
110)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
48 of
114)
118
Total Points Won
106
|
6-7(3) 7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Nathan Seateun
Player
Lucas Bouquet
68%
(
67 of
99)
1st Serve %
58%
(
55 of
95)
4
Aces
3
0
Double Faults
3
76%
(
51 of
67)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
39 of
55)
47%
(
15 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
21 of
40)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
33%
(
33 of
99)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
35 of
95)
101
Total Points Won
93
|
6-3 4-6 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Toufik Sahtali
Player
Nathan Seateun
57%
(
51 of
89)
1st Serve %
69%
(
37 of
54)
-
Aces
-
2
Double Faults
0
63%
(
32 of
51)
1st Serve Won
46%
(
17 of
37)
47%
(
18 of
38)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
8 of
17)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
27%
(
3 of
11)
44%
(
39 of
89)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
29 of
54)
79
Total Points Won
64
|
7-6(1) 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Nathan Seateun
Player
Aymeric Bourne
54%
(
22 of
41)
1st Serve %
70%
(
31 of
44)
1
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
0
77%
(
17 of
22)
1st Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
58%
(
11 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
23%
(
3 of
13)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
32%
(
13 of
41)
Rtn Points Won
64%
(
28 of
44)
56
Total Points Won
29
|
6-3 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Stefanos Sakellaridis
Player
Nathan Seateun
68%
(
28 of
41)
1st Serve %
54%
(
29 of
54)
5
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
2
79%
(
22 of
28)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
16 of
29)
85%
(
11 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
8 of
25)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
20%
(
8 of
41)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
30 of
54)
63
Total Points Won
32
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| QF | 3-0 ret. | H2H | |||
| Q2 | 6-2 6-2 | H2H | |||
view more
Ray Ho Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Ye Cong Mo
Player
Ray Ho
76%
(
60 of
79)
1st Serve %
61%
(
52 of
85)
1
Aces
8
2
Double Faults
1
65%
(
39 of
60)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
33 of
52)
58%
(
11 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
12 of
33)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
37%
(
29 of
79)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
40 of
85)
90
Total Points Won
74
|
3-6 6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Ryotaro Taguchi
Player
Ray Ho
76%
(
44 of
58)
1st Serve %
74%
(
61 of
82)
1
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
2
68%
(
30 of
44)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
33 of
61)
36%
(
5 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
24%
(
5 of
21)
46%
(
6 of
13)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
40%
(
23 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
54%
(
44 of
82)
79
Total Points Won
61
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ray Ho
Player
Sanhui Shin
72%
(
58 of
81)
1st Serve %
83%
(
68 of
82)
6
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
2
71%
(
41 of
58)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
43 of
68)
39%
(
9 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
6 of
14)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
38%
(
31 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
33 of
82)
83
Total Points Won
80
|
6-2 3-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Ray Ho
Player
Daiki Yoshimura
66%
(
31 of
47)
1st Serve %
71%
(
42 of
59)
6
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
2
68%
(
21 of
31)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
19 of
42)
69%
(
11 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
6 of
17)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
32%
(
15 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
58%
(
34 of
59)
66
Total Points Won
40
|
6-0 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Ray Ho
Player
Taiyo Yamanaka
74%
(
43 of
58)
1st Serve %
57%
(
39 of
68)
2
Aces
4
0
Double Faults
1
70%
(
30 of
43)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
28 of
39)
60%
(
9 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
11 of
29)
22%
(
2 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
33%
(
19 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
29 of
68)
68
Total Points Won
58
|
6-3 3-6 10-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 | 6-3 4-6 10-5 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Ryotaro Matsumura
Player
Ray Ho
71%
(
30 of
42)
1st Serve %
67%
(
24 of
36)
2
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
1
77%
(
23 of
30)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
14 of
24)
67%
(
8 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
4 of
12)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
26%
(
11 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
18 of
36)
49
Total Points Won
29
|
6-2 4-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Ray Ho
Player
Yuki Mochizuki
71%
(
79 of
112)
1st Serve %
78%
(
83 of
107)
2
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
0
61%
(
48 of
79)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
53 of
83)
42%
(
14 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
38%
(
6 of
16)
45%
(
50 of
112)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
44 of
107)
106
Total Points Won
113
|
7-6(7) 2-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF | 6-3 6-0 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 6-1 6-1 | H2H | |||
view more
Seateun Vs Ho Prediction H2H Images To Share
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 [email protected]
