Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Nerman Fatic vs Daniel Masur 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 Fatic vs Masur analysis and find out who is favored!
Nerman Fatic vs Daniel Masur Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Fatic 1 - 0 Masur
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Fatic has won 49.45% of points on their second serve, while Masur has won 51.96%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Fatic, in recent form, has won 42.92% of their opponent's second serve points, while Masur has won 51.66%. The same stats for first serve returns are 32.08% and 31.03% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Fatic has saved 58.93% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Masur has saved 64.8% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Fatic has won 53.85% of matches played (W/L 35/ 30), with Masur winning 67.14% (W/L 47/ 23) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Fatic has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 59% (W/L 281/ 192), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 0% (W/L 0/ 1). Masur has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 56% (W/L 134/ 104), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 42% (W/L 8/ 11).
- Player level: In the last year, Fatic has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 52.38% of matches (W/L 22/ 20), where as Masur has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 74.36% of matches (W/L 29/ 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 1 times before with Fatic winning 1 times and Masur being victorious 0 times. They have played 3 sets in total, with Fatic winning 2 and Masur winning 1. The last match between Fatic and Masur was at the Zagreb Challenger, 10-05-2022, First, Clay with Nerman Fatic getting the victory 3-6 6-2 6-1.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:54:28.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Fatic and Masur have played a deciding set 1 times, with Fatic winning 1 times and Masur 0 times. Very useful for predicting the outcome if this match goes the distance.
- Head-to-Head extreme pressure situations: They have played 0 tiebreaks against each other with Fatic winning 0, and Masur 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Fatic has played against opponents with an average rank of 279.17 while Masur has played against players with an average rank of 198.31.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Fatic has won 50% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Masur has won 55% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Fatic has converted 35.35% of breakpoint opportunities, and Masur has converted 44.44% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
220
Rank
191
High
29
Age
R
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
295
Rank
176
High
29
Age
R
Plays
L
L
L
W
L
L
L
L
W
W
Form
W
L
L
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
57% (341-255)
Career Total W/L
58% (384-279)
40% (8-12)
YTD W/L
78% (32-9)
$73,995
Career Prize Money
$151,200
0
YTD Titles
3
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 | Nerman Fatic | Daniel Masur |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 1 |
| Games Won | 15 | 9 |
| Aces (Total) | 3 | 1 |
| DFs (Total) | 7 | 10 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:54:28 | 1:54:28 |
| 1st Serve % | 63% (50/79) | 58% (46/79) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 72% (36/50) | 59% (27/46) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 28% (8/29) | 36% (12/33) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 54% (7/13) | 57% (4/7) |
| Return Points W% | 51% (40/79) | 44% (35/79) |
| 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) | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 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) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-6 6-2 6-1 |
Stats 
Nerman Fatic
Player
Daniel Masur
63%
(
50 of
79)
1st Serve %
58%
(
46 of
79)
3
Aces
1
7
Double Faults
10
72%
(
36 of
50)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
27 of
46)
28%
(
8 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
12 of
33)
54%
(
7 of
13)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
44%
(
35 of
79)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
40 of
79)
84
Total Points Won
74
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Nerman Fatic | Daniel Masur |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 40% (8/12) | 78% (32/9) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 43% (20/26) | 74% (70/25) |
| Games Win/Loss | 47% (206/231) | 57% (538/401) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 50% (3/3) | 33% (1/2) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 31% (4/9) | 60% (3/2) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 100% (1/0) | 85% (28/5) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.43 | 0.48 |
| Aces Total | 92 | 222 |
| DFs per game | 0.2 | 0.23 |
| DFs Total | 43 | 106 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:35:25 | 1:41:19 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 312.75 | 178 |
| 1st Serve % | 64% (807/1258) | 65% (1858/2853) |
| 1st Serve W% | 69% (560/807) | 76% (1406/1858) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 49% (223/451) | 52% (518/995) |
| BPs Won% Total | 35% (35/99) | 44% (131/296) |
| Return Pts W% | 36% (469/1307) | 40% (1180/2978) |
| Slam W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| Masters W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Cups W/L | 100% (1/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 50% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 38% (5/8) | 82% (9/2) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 79% (23/6) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 42% (8/19) | 78% (32/41) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 50% (4/8) | 67% (12/18) |
| Deciding Set W% | 40% (2/5) | 54% (7/13) |
| 1st set W, W | 70% (10/7) | 88% (34/30) |
| 1st set W, L | 30% (10/3) | 12% (34/4) |
| 1st set L, W | 10% (10/1) | 29% (7/2) |
Nerman Fatic Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
Stats
Nerman Fatic
Player
Aziz Dougaz
78%
(
47 of
60)
1st Serve %
68%
(
36 of
53)
3
Aces
3
0
Double Faults
2
77%
(
36 of
47)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
26 of
36)
62%
(
8 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
8 of
17)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
27%
(
16 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
36%
(
19 of
53)
63
Total Points Won
50
|
6-2 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Nerman Fatic
Player
Timofey Skatov
70%
(
33 of
47)
1st Serve %
54%
(
29 of
54)
1
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
1
70%
(
23 of
33)
1st Serve Won
41%
(
12 of
29)
71%
(
10 of
14)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
15 of
25)
40%
(
4 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
30%
(
14 of
47)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
27 of
54)
60
Total Points Won
41
|
6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Felipe Meligeni Alves
Player
Nerman Fatic
81%
(
47 of
58)
1st Serve %
70%
(
39 of
56)
3
Aces
7
0
Double Faults
3
74%
(
35 of
47)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
26 of
39)
82%
(
9 of
11)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
9 of
17)
33%
(
2 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
24%
(
14 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
21 of
56)
65
Total Points Won
49
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Brandon Nakashima
Player
Nerman Fatic
53%
(
39 of
74)
1st Serve %
65%
(
56 of
86)
3
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
6
82%
(
32 of
39)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
41 of
56)
63%
(
22 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
15 of
30)
17%
(
1 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
27%
(
20 of
74)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
30 of
86)
84
Total Points Won
76
|
7-6(5) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Jesper De Jong
Player
Nerman Fatic
57%
(
49 of
86)
1st Serve %
70%
(
58 of
83)
3
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
1
78%
(
38 of
49)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
41 of
58)
51%
(
19 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
56%
(
14 of
25)
20%
(
1 of
5)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
34%
(
29 of
86)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
28 of
83)
85
Total Points Won
84
|
3-6 7-6(6) 4-1 ret. | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Alejandro Moro Canas
Player
Nerman Fatic
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve %
59%
(
33 of
56)
2
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
4
72%
(
28 of
39)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
20 of
33)
53%
(
8 of
15)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
9 of
23)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
33%
(
18 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
27 of
56)
63
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Nerman Fatic
Player
Edoardo Lavagno
75%
(
39 of
52)
1st Serve %
64%
(
36 of
56)
1
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
4
74%
(
29 of
39)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
21 of
36)
69%
(
9 of
13)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
12 of
20)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
27%
(
14 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
23 of
56)
61
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Zsombor Piros
Player
Nerman Fatic
73%
(
57 of
78)
1st Serve %
56%
(
48 of
85)
5
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
2
70%
(
40 of
57)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
26 of
48)
38%
(
8 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
49%
(
18 of
37)
46%
(
6 of
13)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
38%
(
30 of
78)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
41 of
85)
89
Total Points Won
74
|
4-6 6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Riccardo Bonadio
Player
Nerman Fatic
63%
(
40 of
64)
1st Serve %
58%
(
29 of
50)
1
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
2
55%
(
22 of
40)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
14 of
29)
54%
(
13 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
6 of
21)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
45%
(
29 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
30 of
50)
65
Total Points Won
49
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Ugo Blanchet
Player
Nerman Fatic
59%
(
42 of
71)
1st Serve %
63%
(
32 of
51)
2
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
1
67%
(
28 of
42)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
22 of
32)
62%
(
18 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
35%
(
25 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
21 of
51)
67
Total Points Won
55
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Daniel Masur Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SF |
Stats
Timofey Skatov
Player
Daniel Masur
49%
(
41 of
84)
1st Serve %
62%
(
48 of
77)
1
Aces
2
7
Double Faults
6
71%
(
29 of
41)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
32 of
48)
56%
(
24 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
34%
(
10 of
29)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
22%
(
2 of
9)
37%
(
31 of
84)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
35 of
77)
88
Total Points Won
73
|
7-5 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Daniel Masur
Player
Lucas Gerch
65%
(
35 of
54)
1st Serve %
45%
(
20 of
44)
2
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
1
66%
(
23 of
35)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
12 of
20)
63%
(
12 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
9%
(
1 of
11)
35%
(
19 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
22 of
44)
57
Total Points Won
41
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Daniel Masur
Player
Vilius Gaubas
57%
(
44 of
77)
1st Serve %
64%
(
45 of
70)
3
Aces
0
5
Double Faults
2
75%
(
33 of
44)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
28 of
45)
42%
(
14 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
4 of
8)
39%
(
30 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
30 of
70)
77
Total Points Won
70
|
7-6(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Masur
Player
Michael Geerts
58%
(
49 of
85)
1st Serve %
52%
(
51 of
99)
10
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
4
78%
(
38 of
49)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
31 of
51)
47%
(
17 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
24 of
48)
42%
(
5 of
12)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
35%
(
30 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
44 of
99)
99
Total Points Won
85
|
6-1 5-7 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Cox
Player
Daniel Masur
82%
(
36 of
44)
1st Serve %
70%
(
30 of
43)
10
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
1
83%
(
30 of
36)
1st Serve Won
47%
(
14 of
30)
25%
(
2 of
8)
2nd Serve Won
23%
(
3 of
13)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
27%
(
12 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
26 of
43)
58
Total Points Won
29
|
6-0 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ewen Lumsden
Player
Daniel Masur
67%
(
60 of
89)
1st Serve %
76%
(
84 of
111)
8
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
1
72%
(
43 of
60)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
55 of
84)
62%
(
18 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
14 of
27)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
31%
(
28 of
89)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
42 of
111)
103
Total Points Won
97
|
4-6 7-6(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Masur
Player
Daniel Cox
69%
(
38 of
55)
1st Serve %
62%
(
40 of
65)
1
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
2
66%
(
25 of
38)
1st Serve Won
68%
(
27 of
40)
71%
(
12 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
12 of
25)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
33%
(
18 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
26 of
65)
63
Total Points Won
57
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Alejandro Moro Canas
Player
Daniel Masur
68%
(
65 of
95)
1st Serve %
61%
(
57 of
93)
8
Aces
4
2
Double Faults
0
71%
(
46 of
65)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
35 of
57)
50%
(
15 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
17 of
36)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
75%
(
3 of
4)
36%
(
34 of
95)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
41 of
93)
102
Total Points Won
86
|
6-7(5) 6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Buvaysar Gadamauri
Player
Daniel Masur
60%
(
64 of
106)
1st Serve %
63%
(
70 of
111)
8
Aces
9
6
Double Faults
2
78%
(
50 of
64)
1st Serve Won
77%
(
54 of
70)
52%
(
22 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
18 of
41)
30%
(
3 of
10)
Break Points Won
14%
(
1 of
7)
32%
(
34 of
106)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
39 of
111)
111
Total Points Won
106
|
7-5 6-7(4) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Daniel Masur
Player
Theo Papamalamis
82%
(
46 of
56)
1st Serve %
53%
(
41 of
77)
2
Aces
4
0
Double Faults
2
83%
(
38 of
46)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
24 of
41)
30%
(
3 of
10)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
19 of
36)
33%
(
4 of
12)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
27%
(
15 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
34 of
77)
75
Total Points Won
58
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Fatic Vs Masur Prediction H2H Images To Share
Potential H2H Matches This Week For Nerman Fatic
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]
