Sebastian Gima vs Marlon Vankan Head-to-Head Stats, Results & Performance Comparison

• Recently, Vankan has been slightly better on their second serve, winning 44.28% of points compared to Gima’s 40.68%. Does this give Vankan a slight edge in their service games?
• In terms of return games, Gima takes the lead with a higher percentage on both second serve returns (50.39%) compared to Vankan (48.57%) and first serve returns (30.42%) compared to Vankan (32.19%). Could Gima's return proficiency prove decisive?
• Under pressure, Gima again has a slight advantage, saving 56.7% of breakpoints while Vankan saves 52.78%. How significant is this in pressure situations?
• When looking at the overall performance in the last year, Vankan has a better win rate of 54.1% in matches compared to Gima's 48.39%.
• Surface preferences reveal that Vankan excels on Clay with a 56% win rate, whereas Gima thrives on Hard courts with a 60% success rate. Does the surface choice sway the advantage?
• At the Futures/Satellites/ITF level, Vankan has a slightly better win percentage at 54.39% over Gima's 51.06%.
• Head-to-head records show that Gima has won their only encounter, with Gima winning 2 sets to Vankan's 1. Could past wins influence future outcomes?
• Regarding pressure games, each player has won one tiebreak against each other, indicating similar resilience in high-stakes moments.
• Vankan has faced tougher opponents with an average rank of 356.46 compared to Gima's 414.74, possibly providing Vankan with valuable experience.
• In deciding sets over the last year, Vankan wins 41% compared to Gima's 29%, suggesting Vankan may handle long matches better.
• On breakpoints, Vankan holds a slight edge, converting 35.46% of opportunities against Gima’s 33.16%, potentially crucial for in-game momentum shifts.

Editorial Prediction (June 2, 2025, UTC):

Analyzing the recent performance statistics, Vankan shows a stronger tendency in winning points on their second serve and has experienced playing against tougher opponents. These factors could work in Vankan’s favor in the upcoming match.

Gima, however, has demonstrated superior return game statistics and efficacy under pressure. They have also previously won against Vankan, indicating psychological confidence.

The players' proficiency on respective surfaces also plays a key role, with Vankan being adept on Clay—the surface for the upcoming match. This could tilt the balance slightly towards Vankan.

Vankan's ability to perform in deciding sets and marginally stronger breakpoint conversion seem significant for live-game situations. Given these factors, Vankan appears the more likely winner in the upcoming contest.