Paul Barbier Gazeu vs Joe Leather Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison
Wojtek Kolan
Published on 04 Aug at 09:55 AM UTC
HEAD TO HEAD
P. Barbier Gazeu vs J. Leather

FRA
1
Win
Played
0
Win

GBR
1
Win
Played
0
Win
Head-to-head: Gazeu 1 - 0 Leather
They have played 3 sets in total, with Paul Barbier Gazeu winning 2 and Joe Leather winning 1. The last match between Paul Barbier Gazeu and Joe Leather was at the M25 Roehampton, 04-08-2025, Round: Q3, Surface: Hard, with Paul Barbier Gazeu getting the victory 6-1 6-7(2) 10-7.
| Players | Head To Head Match Wins |
|---|---|
| Gazeu | 1 |
| Leather | 0 |
Last 1 H2H Matches:
(Q3) M25 Roehampton(08-04-25)
P. B. Gazeu vs J. Leather H2H Profile
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| $0 | Career Prize Money | $0 |
| 47.69% (31-34) | Career Total W/L | 59.82% (67-45) |
| 1 | Hard | 0 |
| 1 | Total H2H Matches | 0 |
| 0% (0-0) | YTD Win/Loss | 0% (0-0) |
P. B. Gazeu vs J. Leather Match Preview:
- Gazeu's second serve performance is stronger, winning 44.5% of points compared to Leather's 41.3%. Could this edge impact the match outcome?
- In return games, Leather has a distinct advantage, winning 49% of opponent's second serve points versus Gazeu's 36.6%.
- For first serve returns, Leather also excels with 30.03% success against Gazeu's 21.22%.
- Both players have similar capability under pressure, saving breakpoints at approximately 48% each.
- Recent match victories favor Gazeu with a 67.86% win rate, while Leather has 59.38%.
- Gazeu performs best on clay with a 57% win rate, whereas Leather dominates on hard courts with 61% success.
- Both players have predominantly competed in $10K level tournaments, with Gazeu having slightly more success.
- Gazeu has faced tougher competition, with opponents averaging a rank of 163.07, compared to Leather's 214.73 average.
- For matches requiring a deciding set, Leather is more resilient, winning 63% of such matches compared to Gazeu's 25%.
- In breakpoint conversion, Leather outshines with 43.24% success, while Gazeu lags behind at 22.73%.
Editorial Prediction (August 4, 2025, UTC):
In assessing the overall match dynamics, both Gazeu and Leather display competitive strengths, though in different aspects of the game. Gazeu shows superior performance on second serves and faces higher-ranked opponents more frequently, indicating experience against strong competition.
Leather outperforms significantly in returning the opponent's serve and converting breakpoints, which may prove decisive during pivotal moments in the match. On hard courts, Leather's historical success provides them with a psychological advantage.
Considering the likelihood of a match extending to a deciding set, Leather demonstrates greater resilience, which could be crucial. Overall, despite Gazeu's strong serve statistics, Leather appears to have the edge with her return game and ability to convert essential points.
Based on these observations, Leather is predicted to have the higher probability of winning the upcoming match.
Paul Barbier Gazeu vs Joe Leather Editorial Preview By TennisTipster88.
P. B. Gazeu vs J. Leather H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H2H Matches Won | 0 |
| 2 | Sets Won | 1 |
| 22 | Games Won | 15 |
| 3 | Aces (Total) | 1 |
| 1 | Total Double Faults | 1 |
| 1:45:24 | Average Match Time | 1:45:24 |
| 70% (47/67) | 1st Serve % | 68% (55/81) |
| 72% (34/47) | 1st Serve Win % | 67% (37/55) |
| 40% (8/20) | 2nd Serve Win % | 35% (9/26) |
| 31% (4/13) | Break Pts Won % | 100% (2/2) |
| 43% (35/81) | Return Points Win % | 37% (25/67) |
| 100% (1/1) | Best‑of‑3 Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | Deciding Set Win % | 0% (0/1) |
| 100% (1/1) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/1) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 0% (0/0) |
| 0% (0/0) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 0% (0/1) |
P. B. Gazeu Recent Matches Played
| OPPONENT | RESULT | SCORE | H2H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Q3 | L | 6-4 6-2 | ||
Q1 | W | 6-4 6-2 | ||
R1 | L | 6-4 6-4 | ||
Q3 | W | 6-1 6-7(2) 10-7 | ||
Q1 | W | 6-1 6-3 | ||
J. Leather Recent Matches Played
| OPPONENT | RESULT | SCORE | H2H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Q2 | W | 6-2 6-1 | ||
Q1 | W | 6-3 6-2 | ||
Q3 | L | 6-2 4-6 10-8 | ||
Q2 | W | 6-3 6-1 | ||
R1 | L | 6-1 6-1 | ||

P. B. Gazeu vs J. Leather Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| Stats | ||
|---|---|---|
| 47.69% (31/34) | YTD Win/Loss | 59.82% (67/45) |
| 50.00% (71/71) | Sets Win/Loss | 58.89% (149/104) |
| 50.15% (676/672) | Games Win/Loss | 54.22% (1348/1138) |
| 31.25% (5/11) | Hard Win/Loss | 61.54% (64/40) |
| 57.14% (24/18) | Clay Win/Loss | 0.00% (0/1) |
| 28.57% (2/5) | Indoor Hard W/L | 42.86% (3/4) |
| 0.28 | Aces Per Game | 0.1 |
| 181 | Aces Total | 126 |
| 0.22 | Double Faults Per Game | 0.13 |
| 144 | Total Double Faults | 159 |
| 1:7:9 | Average Match Time | 1st Match |
| 309.38 | Average Opponent Rank | 185.57 |
| 61% (1903/3108) | 1st Serve % | 68% (2449/3618) |
| 67% (1279/1903) | 1st Serve Win % | 64% (1569/2449) |
| 50% (601/1205) | 2nd Serve Win % | 48% (562/1169) |
| 44% (116/266) | Break Points Won % (Total) | 41% (111/273) |
| 38% (1145/3024) | Return Points Win % | 38% (1290/3420) |
| 47.69% (31/34) | Futures W/L | 59.82% (67/45) |
| 50% (31/62) | Best of 3 Sets Win % | 59% (66/111) |
| 27% (3/11) | Tiebreaks Win % (Total) | 48% (13/27) |
| 40% (6/15) | Deciding Set Win % | 47% (14/30) |
| 85% (33/28) | 1st Set Won, Won Match | 90% (67/60) |
| 15% (33/5) | 1st Set Won, Lost Match | 10% (67/7) |
| 9% (32/3) | 1st Set Lost, Won Match | 13% (45/6) |
Other Tennis Predictions Today
Tennis Previews & Betting Tips

Shintaro Mochizuki vs Federico Arnaboldi Prediction – ATP Bergamo Challenger – 18th November 2025 Best Bets

Simona Waltert vs Solana Sierra Prediction – WTA Billie Jean King Cup, PO, Group C – 16th November 2025 Best Bets

Linda Noskova vs Antonia Ruzic Prediction – WTA Billie Jean King Cup, PO, Group D – 16th November 2025 Best Bets

Iga Swiatek vs Gabriela Lee Prediction – WTA Billie Jean King Cup, PO, Group B – 16th November 2025 Best Bets

Carlos Alcaraz vs Jannik Sinner Prediction – ATP Nitto ATP Finals – 16th November 2025 Best Bets
