Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Timo Nieminen vs Jack Findel-Hawkins 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 Nieminen vs Findel-Hawkins analysis and find out who is favored!
Timo Nieminen vs Jack Findel-Hawkins Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Nieminen 0 - 0 Findel-Hawkins
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Nieminen has won 0% of points on their second serve, while Findel-Hawkins has won 0%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Nieminen, in recent form, has won 0% of their opponent's second serve points, while Findel-Hawkins has won 0%. The same stats for first serve returns are 0% and 0% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Nieminen has saved 0% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Findel-Hawkins has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Nieminen has won 0% of matches played (W/L 0/ 0), with Findel-Hawkins winning 0% (W/L 0/ 0) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Nieminen has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 60% (W/L 132/ 89), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 38% (W/L 3/ 5). Findel-Hawkins has their best career surface win % on Grass, winning 63% (W/L 10/ 6), and worse career win % on Clay, winning 33% (W/L 2/ 4).
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Nieminen has played against opponents with an average rank of while Findel-Hawkins has played against players with an average rank of .
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Nieminen has won 0% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Findel-Hawkins has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Nieminen has converted 0% of breakpoint opportunities, and Findel-Hawkins has converted 0% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
- If you are interested in models that predict tennis matches, this article is a good start (Warning: Stats geeks only)
Ret.
Rank
254
High
42
Age
R
Plays
0
Total0
0
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
Ret.
Rank
635
High
29
Age
R
Plays
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
Form
L
W
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
58% (429-311)
Career Total W/L
59% (70-49)
0% (0-0)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$1,300
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.
The Best Odds For Timo Nieminen vs Jack Findel-Hawkins For Any Market:
We highly recommend you open accounts with at least 3 Bookmakers as depending on the match, odds can vary a lot between them, and always getting the best odds available will improve your profitability a lot in the long run. We recommend these Sportsbooks for you so sign up now! Check the current best odds by clicking the Sportsbook links below:
Sportsbooks & Bookies Promo Codes For Nieminen VS Findel-Hawkins
Sportsbook
Offer
Nieminen VS Findel-Hawkins H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| w/o | |||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Timo Nieminen | Jack Findel-Hawkins |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Games Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 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 | 0 |
| Aces Total | 0 | 0 |
| DFs per game | 0 | 0 |
| DFs Total | 0 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 1st Match | 1st Match |
| Avg Opp Rank | 0 | 0 |
| 1st Serve % | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st Serve W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| BPs Won% Total | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Return Pts W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 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% (0/0) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
Timo Nieminen Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats 
Guillermo Olaso
Player
Timo Nieminen
51%
(
45 of
88)
1st Serve %
62%
(
49 of
79)
1
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
9
58%
(
26 of
45)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
26 of
49)
58%
(
25 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
88%
(
7 of
8)
Break Points Won
45%
(
5 of
11)
42%
(
37 of
88)
Rtn Points Won
52%
(
41 of
79)
92
Total Points Won
75
|
4-6 6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 | 2-6 6-2 6-4 | H2H | |||
| Q1 |
Stats
Matthias Bachinger
Player
Timo Nieminen
41%
(
20 of
49)
1st Serve %
65%
(
39 of
60)
2
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
6
65%
(
13 of
20)
1st Serve Won
51%
(
20 of
39)
55%
(
16 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
7 of
21)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
41%
(
20 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
33 of
60)
62
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 | 6-4 6-0 | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-4 7-6(11) | H2H | |||
| R1 | 6-3 7-5 | H2H | |||
| R1 | 3-6 6-2 7-6(5) | H2H | |||
| Q2 |
Stats
Rameez Junaid
Player
Timo Nieminen
57%
(
46 of
81)
1st Serve %
48%
(
23 of
48)
0
Aces
0
5
Double Faults
3
61%
(
28 of
46)
1st Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
46%
(
16 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
11 of
25)
46%
(
6 of
13)
Break Points Won
18%
(
3 of
17)
46%
(
37 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
29 of
48)
73
Total Points Won
56
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q2 |
Stats
Dominic Thiem
Player
Timo Nieminen
52%
(
33 of
64)
1st Serve %
44%
(
23 of
52)
1
Aces
1
5
Double Faults
8
61%
(
20 of
33)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
45%
(
14 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
24%
(
7 of
29)
50%
(
7 of
14)
Break Points Won
20%
(
3 of
15)
47%
(
30 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
63%
(
33 of
52)
67
Total Points Won
49
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Timo Nieminen
Player
Andreas Siljestrom
50%
(
32 of
64)
1st Serve %
56%
(
42 of
75)
0
Aces
3
10
Double Faults
3
72%
(
23 of
32)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
25 of
42)
44%
(
14 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
13 of
33)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
42%
(
27 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
37 of
75)
74
Total Points Won
65
|
6-3 7-5 | H2H | ||
view more
Jack Findel-Hawkins Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Strong Kirchheimer
Player
Jack Findel-Hawkins
69%
(
38 of
55)
1st Serve %
53%
(
31 of
59)
5
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
7
87%
(
33 of
38)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
22 of
31)
47%
(
8 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
11 of
28)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
6)
25%
(
14 of
55)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
26 of
59)
67
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Jack Findel-Hawkins
Player
Martins Rocens
57%
(
26 of
46)
1st Serve %
48%
(
30 of
62)
4
Aces
3
3
Double Faults
8
73%
(
19 of
26)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
18 of
30)
65%
(
13 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
31%
(
10 of
32)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
30%
(
14 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
34 of
62)
66
Total Points Won
42
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Jack Findel-Hawkins
Player
Daniel Labrador
57%
(
25 of
44)
1st Serve %
49%
(
22 of
45)
3
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
2
68%
(
17 of
25)
1st Serve Won
55%
(
12 of
22)
79%
(
15 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
26%
(
6 of
23)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
27%
(
12 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
27 of
45)
59
Total Points Won
30
|
6-2 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Kyle Seelig
Player
Jack Findel-Hawkins
84%
(
49 of
58)
1st Serve %
58%
(
33 of
57)
0
Aces
7
1
Double Faults
3
71%
(
35 of
49)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
21 of
33)
56%
(
5 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
10 of
24)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
67%
(
2 of
3)
31%
(
18 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
26 of
57)
66
Total Points Won
49
|
6-1 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| R1 | 6-4 6-4 | H2H | |||
| R1 |
Stats
Roberto Cid Subervi
Player
Jack Findel-Hawkins
60%
(
32 of
53)
1st Serve %
51%
(
24 of
47)
1
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
4
66%
(
21 of
32)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
12 of
24)
43%
(
9 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
17%
(
4 of
23)
64%
(
7 of
11)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
43%
(
23 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
66%
(
31 of
47)
61
Total Points Won
39
|
6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Alexander Lebedev
Player
Jack Findel-Hawkins
63%
(
27 of
43)
1st Serve %
60%
(
39 of
65)
7
Aces
6
0
Double Faults
2
89%
(
24 of
27)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
24 of
39)
75%
(
12 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
14 of
26)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
16%
(
7 of
43)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
27 of
65)
63
Total Points Won
45
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q2 | 6-3 6-4 | H2H | |||
| Q1 | 7-6(3) 6-4 | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Milan Welte
Player
Jack Findel-Hawkins
68%
(
36 of
53)
1st Serve %
61%
(
33 of
54)
4
Aces
5
0
Double Faults
3
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
19 of
33)
71%
(
12 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
9 of
21)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
32%
(
17 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
26 of
54)
62
Total Points Won
45
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Nieminen Vs Findel-Hawkins Prediction H2H Images To Share
More tennis photos of Nieminen are available here and Findel-Hawkins photos here.
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]
