Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Marlon Vankan vs Patrick Zahraj 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 Vankan vs Zahraj analysis and find out who is favored!
Marlon Vankan vs Patrick Zahraj Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Vankan has won 44.14% of points on his second serve, while Zahraj has won 44.77%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Vankan, in recent form, has won 51.12% of his opponent's second serve points, while Zahraj has won 55.1%. The same stats for first serve returns are 32.73% and 34.16% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Vankan has saved 55.62% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Zahraj has saved 57.53% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Vankan has won 56.67% of matches played (W/L 34/ 26), with Zahraj winning 61.19% (W/L 41/ 26) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Vankan has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 56% (W/L 110/ 87), and worse career win % on Hard, winning 35% (W/L 9/ 17). Zahraj has their best career surface win % on I.hard, winning 58% (W/L 11/ 8), and worse career win % on Hard, winning 56% (W/L 18/ 14).
- Player level: In the last year, Vankan has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 57.89% of matches (W/L 33/ 24), where as Zahraj has played most of their matches on the Futures/Satellites/ITF tournaments $10K, winning 62.12% of matches (W/L 41/ 25). 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 Vankan winning 1 times. They have played 3 sets in total, with Vankan winning 2 and Zahraj winning 1. The last match between Vankan and Zahraj was at the M25 Arlon, 21-06-2022, Q3, Clay with Marlon Vankan getting the victory 3-6 6-4 10-6.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 2:15:0.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Vankan and Zahraj have played a deciding set 1 times, with Vankan winning 1 times and Zahraj 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 Vankan winning 0, and Zahraj 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Vankan has played against opponents with an average rank of 179.08 while Zahraj has played against players with an average rank of 124.67.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Vankan has won 68% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Zahraj has won 50% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Vankan has converted 39.57% of breakpoint opportunities, and Zahraj has converted 41.06% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
Head-to-head: Vankan 1 - 0 Zahraj
553
Rank
553
High
23
Age
Plays
1
Total0
0
Hard0
1
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
787
Rank
787
High
24
Age
Plays
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
Form
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
W
L
L
53% (123-110)
Career Total W/L
58% (83-61)
44% (8-10)
YTD W/L
57% (13-10)
$0
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.
| stats | Marlon Vankan | Patrick Zahraj |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 1 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 2 | 1 |
| Games Won | 19 | 16 |
| Aces (Total) | 1 | 1 |
| DFs (Total) | 2 | 3 |
| Avg Match Time | 2:15:0 | 2:15:0 |
| 1st Serve % | 66% (61/92) | 61% (42/69) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 54% (33/61) | 45% (19/42) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 55% (17/31) | 67% (18/27) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 38% (3/8) | 33% (4/12) |
| Return Points W% | 46% (32/69) | 46% (42/92) |
| 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 6-4 10-6 |
Stats 
Marlon Vankan
Player
Patrick Zahraj
66%
(
61 of
92)
1st Serve %
61%
(
42 of
69)
1
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
54%
(
33 of
61)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
19 of
42)
55%
(
17 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
67%
(
18 of
27)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
4 of
12)
46%
(
42 of
92)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
32 of
69)
82
Total Points Won
79
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Marlon Vankan | Patrick Zahraj |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 44% (8/10) | 57% (13/10) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 42% (19/26) | 56% (29/23) |
| Games Win/Loss | 46% (190/224) | 53% (270/243) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 73% (8/3) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 44% (8/10) | 50% (2/2) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/0) | 38% (3/5) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.12 | 0.48 |
| Aces Total | 24 | 120 |
| DFs per game | 0.24 | 0.43 |
| DFs Total | 49 | 109 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:57:38 | 1:41:51 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 152.28 | 179.35 |
| 1st Serve % | 66% (924/1390) | 61% (937/1538) |
| 1st Serve W% | 62% (569/924) | 69% (646/937) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 44% (206/466) | 45% (270/601) |
| BPs Won% Total | 40% (55/139) | 42% (69/166) |
| Return Pts W% | 40% (518/1306) | 42% (650/1554) |
| 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 | 50% (1/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Futures W/L | 44% (7/9) | 59% (13/9) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 41% (7/17) | 57% (13/23) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 71% (5/7) | 63% (5/8) |
| Deciding Set W% | 63% (5/8) | 50% (3/6) |
| 1st set W, W | 67% (9/6) | 83% (12/10) |
| 1st set W, L | 33% (9/3) | 17% (12/2) |
| 1st set L, W | 22% (9/2) | 27% (11/3) |
Marlon Vankan Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Jan Hrazdil
Player
Marlon Vankan
55%
(
31 of
56)
1st Serve %
63%
(
44 of
70)
-
Aces
-
3
Double Faults
4
68%
(
21 of
31)
1st Serve Won
43%
(
19 of
44)
40%
(
10 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
31%
(
8 of
26)
50%
(
7 of
14)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
45%
(
25 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
61%
(
43 of
70)
74
Total Points Won
52
|
6-4 6-0 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Joao Eduardo Schiessl
Player
Marlon Vankan
66%
(
33 of
50)
1st Serve %
61%
(
23 of
38)
3
Aces
0
0
Double Faults
1
76%
(
25 of
33)
1st Serve Won
52%
(
12 of
23)
47%
(
8 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
13%
(
2 of
15)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
34%
(
17 of
50)
Rtn Points Won
63%
(
24 of
38)
57
Total Points Won
31
|
6-3 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Marlon Vankan
Player
Eero Vasa
59%
(
36 of
61)
1st Serve %
64%
(
49 of
76)
3
Aces
6
2
Double Faults
2
81%
(
29 of
36)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
37 of
49)
60%
(
15 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
10 of
27)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
28%
(
17 of
61)
Rtn Points Won
38%
(
29 of
76)
73
Total Points Won
64
|
6-4 3-6 4-0 ret. | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Marlon Vankan
Player
Artur Kukasian
67%
(
82 of
122)
1st Serve %
56%
(
54 of
96)
2
Aces
4
5
Double Faults
7
56%
(
46 of
82)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
36 of
54)
50%
(
20 of
40)
2nd Serve Won
45%
(
19 of
42)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
31%
(
5 of
16)
46%
(
56 of
122)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
41 of
96)
107
Total Points Won
111
|
7-6(4) 2-6 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Atakan Karahan
Player
Marlon Vankan
53%
(
47 of
89)
1st Serve %
67%
(
66 of
99)
1
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
4
70%
(
33 of
47)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
42 of
66)
55%
(
23 of
42)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
16 of
33)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
3 of
9)
37%
(
33 of
89)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
41 of
99)
97
Total Points Won
91
|
5-7 6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Marlon Vankan
Player
Lewie Lane
72%
(
67 of
93)
1st Serve %
73%
(
69 of
95)
1
Aces
2
3
Double Faults
6
69%
(
46 of
67)
1st Serve Won
64%
(
44 of
69)
50%
(
13 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
9 of
26)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
38%
(
3 of
8)
37%
(
34 of
93)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
42 of
95)
101
Total Points Won
87
|
7-6(5) 4-6 6-0 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Louis Tessa
Player
Marlon Vankan
88%
(
37 of
42)
1st Serve %
63%
(
31 of
49)
-
Aces
-
-
Double Faults
-
81%
(
30 of
37)
1st Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
20%
(
1 of
5)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
8 of
18)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
26%
(
11 of
42)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
28 of
49)
59
Total Points Won
32
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Marlon Vankan
Player
Atakan Karahan
71%
(
58 of
82)
1st Serve %
63%
(
47 of
75)
-
Aces
-
2
Double Faults
2
67%
(
39 of
58)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
25 of
47)
29%
(
7 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
54%
(
15 of
28)
56%
(
5 of
9)
Break Points Won
44%
(
4 of
9)
44%
(
36 of
82)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
35 of
75)
81
Total Points Won
76
|
6-3 1-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Kuan-Yi Lee
Player
Marlon Vankan
65%
(
30 of
46)
1st Serve %
72%
(
46 of
64)
2
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
2
63%
(
19 of
30)
1st Serve Won
48%
(
22 of
46)
63%
(
10 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
8 of
18)
46%
(
6 of
13)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
37%
(
17 of
46)
Rtn Points Won
53%
(
34 of
64)
63
Total Points Won
47
|
6-4 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Marlon Vankan
Player
Louroi Martinez
60%
(
55 of
91)
1st Serve %
60%
(
58 of
97)
2
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
3
67%
(
37 of
55)
1st Serve Won
53%
(
31 of
58)
47%
(
17 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
18 of
39)
58%
(
7 of
12)
Break Points Won
43%
(
3 of
7)
41%
(
37 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
48 of
97)
102
Total Points Won
86
|
6-7(5) 6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
view more
Patrick Zahraj Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Omni Kumar
Player
Patrick Zahraj
64%
(
59 of
92)
1st Serve %
58%
(
30 of
52)
2
Aces
0
1
Double Faults
5
61%
(
36 of
59)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
39%
(
13 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
8 of
22)
75%
(
6 of
8)
Break Points Won
24%
(
4 of
17)
47%
(
43 of
92)
Rtn Points Won
62%
(
32 of
52)
81
Total Points Won
63
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
John Sperle
Player
Patrick Zahraj
66%
(
51 of
77)
1st Serve %
55%
(
49 of
89)
2
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
12
63%
(
32 of
51)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
34 of
49)
54%
(
14 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
14 of
40)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
40%
(
31 of
77)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
41 of
89)
87
Total Points Won
79
|
7-6(3) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Patrick Zahraj
Player
Matyas Cerny
69%
(
70 of
102)
1st Serve %
70%
(
57 of
82)
1
Aces
0
15
Double Faults
3
63%
(
44 of
70)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
31 of
57)
34%
(
11 of
32)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
9 of
25)
60%
(
6 of
10)
Break Points Won
29%
(
4 of
14)
46%
(
47 of
102)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
42 of
82)
97
Total Points Won
87
|
7-6(2) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Patrick Zahraj
Player
Vincent Marysko
64%
(
38 of
59)
1st Serve %
67%
(
41 of
61)
6
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
2
74%
(
28 of
38)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
22 of
41)
52%
(
11 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
8 of
20)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
34%
(
20 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
31 of
61)
70
Total Points Won
50
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Thomas Deschamps
Player
Patrick Zahraj
65%
(
34 of
52)
1st Serve %
58%
(
42 of
73)
4
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
6
68%
(
23 of
34)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
24 of
42)
50%
(
9 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
13 of
31)
42%
(
5 of
12)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
38%
(
20 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
36 of
73)
68
Total Points Won
57
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Patrick Zahraj
Player
Arthur Nagel
62%
(
54 of
87)
1st Serve %
55%
(
58 of
106)
5
Aces
11
8
Double Faults
5
76%
(
41 of
54)
1st Serve Won
72%
(
42 of
58)
33%
(
11 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
17 of
48)
29%
(
4 of
14)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
40%
(
35 of
87)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
47 of
106)
99
Total Points Won
94
|
7-6(4) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Henri Squire
Player
Patrick Zahraj
66%
(
69 of
105)
1st Serve %
67%
(
60 of
90)
26
Aces
11
5
Double Faults
6
84%
(
58 of
69)
1st Serve Won
75%
(
45 of
60)
42%
(
15 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
80%
(
4 of
5)
Break Points Won
25%
(
2 of
8)
30%
(
32 of
105)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
33 of
90)
106
Total Points Won
89
|
6-7(5) 6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Marcello Serafini
Player
Patrick Zahraj
63%
(
52 of
83)
1st Serve %
56%
(
41 of
73)
3
Aces
12
3
Double Faults
5
69%
(
36 of
52)
1st Serve Won
78%
(
32 of
41)
52%
(
16 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
17 of
32)
50%
(
3 of
6)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
37%
(
31 of
83)
Rtn Points Won
33%
(
24 of
73)
76
Total Points Won
80
|
2-6 6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Patrick Zahraj
Player
Ben Jones
54%
(
30 of
56)
1st Serve %
62%
(
32 of
52)
6
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
5
83%
(
25 of
30)
1st Serve Won
69%
(
22 of
32)
54%
(
14 of
26)
2nd Serve Won
25%
(
5 of
20)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
17 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
25 of
52)
64
Total Points Won
44
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Philip Henning
Player
Patrick Zahraj
67%
(
36 of
54)
1st Serve %
59%
(
40 of
68)
5
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
8
69%
(
25 of
36)
1st Serve Won
58%
(
23 of
40)
56%
(
10 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
10 of
28)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
35%
(
19 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
35 of
68)
70
Total Points Won
52
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Vankan Vs Zahraj Prediction H2H Images To Share
Potential H2H Matches This Week For Marlon Vankan
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]
