Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Zachary Svajda 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 Zandschulp vs Svajda analysis and find out who is favored!
Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Zachary Svajda Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Zandschulp 1 - 0 Svajda
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Zandschulp has won 47.18% of points on their second serve, while Svajda has won 51.24%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Zandschulp, in recent form, has won 49.14% of their opponent's second serve points, while Svajda has won 53%. The same stats for first serve returns are 30.75% and 31.35% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Zandschulp has saved 58.17% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Svajda has saved 54.77% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Zandschulp has won 47.27% of matches played (W/L 26/ 29), with Svajda winning 63.16% (W/L 48/ 28) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Zandschulp has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 66% (W/L 87/ 45), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 48% (W/L 10/ 11). Svajda has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 64% (W/L 110/ 62), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 40% (W/L 12/ 18).
- Player level: In the last year, Zandschulp has played most of their matches on the Main tour, winning 39.13% of matches (W/L 9/ 14), where as Svajda has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 67.35% of matches (W/L 33/ 16). 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 Zandschulp winning 1 times and Svajda being victorious 0 times. They have played 2 sets in total, with Zandschulp winning 2 and Svajda winning 0. The last match between Zandschulp and Svajda was at the Internazionali BNL d'Italia - Rome, 06-05-2024, Q1 round, Clay with Botic Van De Zandschulp getting the victory 6-2 6-2.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:19:14.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Zandschulp and Svajda have played a deciding set 0 times, with Zandschulp winning 0 times and Svajda 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 Zandschulp winning 0, and Svajda 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Zandschulp has played against opponents with an average rank of 174.98 while Svajda has played against players with an average rank of 213.33.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Zandschulp has won 65% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Svajda has won 63% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Zandschulp has converted 38.25% of breakpoint opportunities, and Svajda has converted 44.05% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
102
Rank
22
High
28
Age
R
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
123
Rank
122
High
21
Age
R
Plays
W
L
L
W
W
W
L
W
L
L
Form
L
W
W
L
W
L
L
L
W
L
63% (332-198)
Career Total W/L
58% (141-103)
41% (12-17)
YTD W/L
51% (18-17)
$2,900,825
Career Prize Money
$466,490
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.
Zandschulp VS Svajda H2H Stats Used In Our Predictions
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Zachary Svajda |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 0 |
| Games Won | 12 | 4 |
| Aces (Total) | 5 | 3 |
| DFs (Total) | 2 | 1 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:19:14 | 1:19:14 |
| 1st Serve % | 63% (38/60) | 53% (27/51) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 74% (28/38) | 56% (15/27) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 55% (12/22) | 54% (13/24) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 67% (4/6) | 0% (0/4) |
| Return Points W% | 45% (23/51) | 33% (20/60) |
| 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% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (1/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (1/0) |
Zandschulp VS Svajda H2h Matches played
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-2 6-2 |
Stats 
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Zachary Svajda
63%
(
38 of
60)
1st Serve %
53%
(
27 of
51)
5
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
74%
(
28 of
38)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
13 of
24)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
33%
(
20 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
23 of
51)
63
Total Points Won
48
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Botic Van De Zandschulp | Zachary Svajda |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 41% (12/17) | 51% (18/17) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 41% (27/39) | 53% (42/38) |
| Games Win/Loss | 47% (302/344) | 52% (375/351) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 36% (4/7) | 59% (16/11) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 47% (7/8) | 33% (2/4) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 33% (1/2) | 0% (0/2) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.39 | 0.32 |
| Aces Total | 124 | 112 |
| DFs per game | 0.29 | 0.21 |
| DFs Total | 90 | 74 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:47:3 | 1:27:59 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 185.48 | 207.14 |
| 1st Serve % | 63% (1275/2038) | 62% (1408/2257) |
| 1st Serve W% | 68% (869/1275) | 68% (963/1408) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 47% (360/763) | 51% (435/849) |
| BPs Won% Total | 38% (70/183) | 44% (100/227) |
| Return Pts W% | 38% (781/2053) | 40% (921/2294) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/2) | 50% (2/2) |
| Masters W/L | 50% (5/5) | 25% (1/3) |
| Cups W/L | 50% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 42% (5/7) | 56% (5/4) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 33% (1/2) | 56% (10/8) |
| Futures W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 46% (12/26) | 50% (17/34) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 50% (7/14) | 43% (3/7) |
| Deciding Set W% | 57% (4/7) | 36% (4/11) |
| 1st set W, W | 92% (12/11) | 84% (19/16) |
| 1st set W, L | 8% (12/1) | 16% (19/3) |
| 1st set L, W | 6% (17/1) | 13% (16/2) |
Botic Van De Zandschulp Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Fabio Fognini
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
59%
(
50 of
85)
1st Serve %
54%
(
41 of
76)
1
Aces
4
5
Double Faults
3
74%
(
37 of
50)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
24 of
41)
51%
(
18 of
35)
2nd Serve Won
29%
(
10 of
35)
57%
(
8 of
14)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
35%
(
30 of
85)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
42 of
76)
97
Total Points Won
64
|
6-1 6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Arthur Fils
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
47%
(
36 of
77)
1st Serve %
64%
(
48 of
75)
2
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
7
58%
(
21 of
36)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
29 of
48)
61%
(
25 of
41)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
8 of
27)
58%
(
7 of
12)
Break Points Won
57%
(
4 of
7)
40%
(
31 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
38 of
75)
84
Total Points Won
68
|
6-2 4-6 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Quentin Halys
67%
(
24 of
36)
1st Serve %
60%
(
30 of
50)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
4
83%
(
20 of
24)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
50%
(
6 of
12)
2nd Serve Won
30%
(
6 of
20)
50%
(
6 of
12)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
28%
(
10 of
36)
Rtn Points Won
64%
(
32 of
50)
58
Total Points Won
28
|
6-1 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Felix Auger Aliassime
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
61%
(
54 of
88)
1st Serve %
47%
(
28 of
59)
3
Aces
3
6
Double Faults
5
72%
(
39 of
54)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
17 of
28)
41%
(
14 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
16 of
31)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
40%
(
35 of
88)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
26 of
59)
79
Total Points Won
68
|
6-1 7-6(6) | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Nicolas Moreno De Alboran
66%
(
87 of
132)
1st Serve %
59%
(
71 of
121)
4
Aces
5
3
Double Faults
1
71%
(
62 of
87)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
50 of
71)
58%
(
26 of
45)
2nd Serve Won
60%
(
30 of
50)
29%
(
2 of
7)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
33%
(
44 of
132)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
41 of
121)
129
Total Points Won
124
|
7-5 6-7(5) 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Facundo Bagnis
68%
(
39 of
57)
1st Serve %
66%
(
35 of
53)
1
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
3
64%
(
25 of
39)
1st Serve Won
46%
(
16 of
35)
67%
(
12 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
9 of
18)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
35%
(
20 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
28 of
53)
65
Total Points Won
45
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Zachary Svajda
63%
(
38 of
60)
1st Serve %
53%
(
27 of
51)
5
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
74%
(
28 of
38)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
13 of
24)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
33%
(
20 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
23 of
51)
63
Total Points Won
48
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Arthur Rinderknech
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
57%
(
57 of
100)
1st Serve %
58%
(
57 of
99)
8
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
5
77%
(
44 of
57)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
43 of
57)
63%
(
27 of
43)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
22 of
42)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
29%
(
29 of
100)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
34 of
99)
105
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 6-7(7) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Ugo Humbert
Player
Botic Van De Zandschulp
69%
(
41 of
59)
1st Serve %
63%
(
33 of
52)
1
Aces
5
2
Double Faults
4
73%
(
30 of
41)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
20 of
33)
39%
(
7 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
37%
(
22 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
24 of
52)
61
Total Points Won
50
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Christopher Eubanks
67%
(
32 of
48)
1st Serve %
67%
(
32 of
48)
5
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
4
88%
(
28 of
32)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
38%
(
6 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
7 of
16)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
29%
(
14 of
48)
Rtn Points Won
50%
(
24 of
48)
58
Total Points Won
38
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Zachary Svajda Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q2 |
Stats
Jaime Faria
Player
Zachary Svajda
57%
(
33 of
58)
1st Serve %
66%
(
38 of
58)
11
Aces
2
2
Double Faults
1
94%
(
31 of
33)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
25 of
38)
48%
(
12 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
10 of
20)
100%
(
3 of
3)
Break Points Won
100%
(
1 of
1)
26%
(
15 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
23 of
58)
66
Total Points Won
50
|
7-6(3) 6-1 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Zachary Svajda
Player
Zsombor Piros
61%
(
34 of
56)
1st Serve %
50%
(
27 of
54)
2
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
4
79%
(
27 of
34)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
16 of
27)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
30%
(
17 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
23 of
54)
62
Total Points Won
48
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Jan Choinski
Player
Zachary Svajda
88%
(
29 of
33)
1st Serve %
53%
(
32 of
60)
3
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
1
90%
(
26 of
29)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
50%
(
2 of
4)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
10 of
28)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
15%
(
5 of
33)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
33 of
60)
61
Total Points Won
32
|
6-3 6-0 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Player
Zachary Svajda
63%
(
38 of
60)
1st Serve %
53%
(
27 of
51)
5
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
74%
(
28 of
38)
1st Serve Won
56%
(
15 of
27)
55%
(
12 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
13 of
24)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
33%
(
20 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
23 of
51)
63
Total Points Won
48
|
6-2 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Marton Fucsovics
Player
Zachary Svajda
65%
(
34 of
52)
1st Serve %
66%
(
35 of
53)
3
Aces
0
2
Double Faults
0
65%
(
22 of
34)
1st Serve Won
51%
(
18 of
35)
61%
(
11 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
33%
(
6 of
18)
83%
(
5 of
6)
Break Points Won
50%
(
2 of
4)
37%
(
19 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
29 of
53)
62
Total Points Won
43
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Zachary Svajda
Player
Zsombor Piros
61%
(
36 of
59)
1st Serve %
51%
(
35 of
68)
3
Aces
1
0
Double Faults
6
69%
(
25 of
36)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
22 of
35)
61%
(
14 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
13 of
33)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
34%
(
20 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
33 of
68)
72
Total Points Won
55
|
7-6(5) 6-0 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard
Player
Zachary Svajda
57%
(
25 of
44)
1st Serve %
67%
(
28 of
42)
7
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
3
80%
(
20 of
25)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
14 of
28)
58%
(
11 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
21%
(
3 of
14)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
5)
30%
(
13 of
44)
Rtn Points Won
60%
(
25 of
42)
56
Total Points Won
30
|
6-2 6-0 | H2H | ||
| QF | w/o | H2H | |||
| R2 |
Stats
Zachary Svajda
Player
Goncalo Oliveira
65%
(
37 of
57)
1st Serve %
65%
(
49 of
75)
3
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
5
70%
(
26 of
37)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
31 of
49)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
31%
(
8 of
26)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
33%
(
19 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
36 of
75)
74
Total Points Won
58
|
6-4 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Zachary Svajda
Player
Andre Ilagan
67%
(
33 of
49)
1st Serve %
58%
(
26 of
45)
6
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
3
82%
(
27 of
33)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
19 of
26)
63%
(
10 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
6 of
19)
60%
(
3 of
5)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
24%
(
12 of
49)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
20 of
45)
57
Total Points Won
37
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Zandschulp Vs Svajda 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]
