Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Nathaniel Lammons vs Julian Lenz 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 Lammons vs Lenz analysis and find out who is favored!
Nathaniel Lammons vs Julian Lenz Important H2H Prediction Stats:
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Lammons has won 0% of points on his second serve, while Lenz has won 0%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Lammons, in recent form, has won 0% of his opponent's second serve points, while Lenz 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: Lammons has saved 0% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Lenz has saved 0% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Lammons has won 0% of matches played (W/L 0/ 0), with Lenz winning 0% (W/L 0/ 0) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Lammons has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 61% (W/L 50/ 32), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 0% (W/L 0/ 1). Lenz has their best career surface win % on Clay, winning 56% (W/L 121/ 95), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 33% (W/L 1/ 2).
- Direct H2H matches: They have played 1 times before with Lammons winning 0 times. They have played 3 sets in total, with Lammons winning 1 and Lenz winning 2. The last match between Lammons and Lenz was at the Houston Challenger, 10-11-2018, Q1 round, Hard with Julian Lenz getting the victory .
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:29:19.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Lammons and Lenz have played a deciding set 1 times, with Lammons winning 0 times and Lenz 1 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 Lammons winning 0, and Lenz 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Lammons has played against opponents with an average rank of while Lenz 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, Lammons has won 0% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Lenz has won 0% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Lammons has converted 0% of breakpoint opportunities, and Lenz 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.
Head-to-head: Lammons 0 - 1 Lenz
Ret.
Rank
591
High
30
Age
R
Plays
0
Total1
0
Hard1
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
864
Rank
227
High
31
Age
R
Plays
L
L
L
W
W
L
L
L
L
L
Form
L
L
W
W
L
W
W
W
W
L
54% (78-67)
Career Total W/L
55% (207-169)
0% (0-0)
YTD W/L
0% (0-0)
$0
Career Prize Money
$25,665
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 | Nathaniel Lammons | Julian Lenz |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 0 | 1 |
| Sets Won | 1 | 2 |
| Games Won | 11 | 16 |
| Aces (Total) | 3 | 1 |
| DFs (Total) | 1 | 2 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:29:19 | 1:29:19 |
| 1st Serve % | 68% (50/74) | 72% (58/81) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 70% (35/50) | 72% (42/58) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 58% (14/24) | 74% (17/23) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 20% (1/5) | 38% (3/8) |
| Return Points W% | 27% (22/81) | 34% (25/74) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 0% (0/1) | 100% (1/1) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Deciding Set Win% | 0% (0/1) | 100% (1/1) |
| 1st set W, W | 0% (1/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 100% (1/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 100% (1/1) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 6-1 6-4 |
Stats 
Julian Lenz
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
72%
(
58 of
81)
1st Serve %
68%
(
50 of
74)
1
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
72%
(
42 of
58)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
35 of
50)
74%
(
17 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
14 of
24)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
27%
(
22 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
25 of
74)
84
Total Points Won
71
|
||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Nathaniel Lammons | Julian Lenz |
|---|---|---|
| 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) |
Nathaniel Lammons Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Gijs Brouwer
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
78%
(
25 of
32)
1st Serve %
68%
(
30 of
44)
1
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
1
92%
(
23 of
25)
1st Serve Won
43%
(
13 of
30)
71%
(
5 of
7)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
6 of
14)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
13%
(
4 of
32)
Rtn Points Won
57%
(
25 of
44)
53
Total Points Won
23
|
6-0 6-2 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Mats Rosenkranz
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
62%
(
58 of
94)
1st Serve %
63%
(
61 of
97)
18
Aces
15
2
Double Faults
3
83%
(
48 of
58)
1st Serve Won
85%
(
52 of
61)
47%
(
17 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
13 of
36)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
27%
(
3 of
11)
31%
(
29 of
94)
Rtn Points Won
33%
(
32 of
97)
97
Total Points Won
94
|
6-4 4-6 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Nicola Kuhn
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
65%
(
37 of
57)
1st Serve %
53%
(
32 of
60)
3
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
6
70%
(
26 of
37)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
21 of
32)
70%
(
14 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
13 of
28)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
30%
(
17 of
57)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
26 of
60)
66
Total Points Won
51
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Borna Gojo
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
70%
(
87 of
124)
1st Serve %
66%
(
71 of
107)
20
Aces
7
6
Double Faults
0
78%
(
68 of
87)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
52 of
71)
51%
(
19 of
37)
2nd Serve Won
64%
(
23 of
36)
100%
(
1 of
1)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
30%
(
37 of
124)
Rtn Points Won
30%
(
32 of
107)
119
Total Points Won
112
|
7-6(2) 6-7(9) 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Denis Istomin
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
66%
(
60 of
91)
1st Serve %
67%
(
54 of
81)
5
Aces
6
0
Double Faults
2
77%
(
46 of
60)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
41 of
54)
55%
(
17 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
12 of
27)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
31%
(
28 of
91)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
28 of
81)
91
Total Points Won
81
|
6-3 5-7 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Nathaniel Lammons
Player
Vladyslav Orlov
83%
(
43 of
52)
1st Serve %
74%
(
54 of
73)
12
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
2
79%
(
34 of
43)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
34 of
54)
56%
(
5 of
9)
2nd Serve Won
42%
(
8 of
19)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
25%
(
13 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
31 of
73)
70
Total Points Won
55
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Nathaniel Lammons
Player
Maxime Hamou
62%
(
33 of
53)
1st Serve %
58%
(
25 of
43)
12
Aces
2
1
Double Faults
2
82%
(
27 of
33)
1st Serve Won
80%
(
20 of
25)
60%
(
12 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
7 of
18)
75%
(
3 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
1)
26%
(
14 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
16 of
43)
55
Total Points Won
41
|
6-2 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Ruan Roelofse
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
61%
(
36 of
59)
1st Serve %
44%
(
24 of
54)
8
Aces
10
4
Double Faults
4
83%
(
30 of
36)
1st Serve Won
96%
(
23 of
24)
57%
(
13 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
40%
(
12 of
30)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
27%
(
16 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
19 of
54)
62
Total Points Won
51
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Ricardo Rodriguez-Pace
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
66%
(
38 of
58)
1st Serve %
55%
(
28 of
51)
0
Aces
3
4
Double Faults
6
76%
(
29 of
38)
1st Serve Won
61%
(
17 of
28)
55%
(
11 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
8 of
23)
36%
(
4 of
11)
Break Points Won
33%
(
1 of
3)
31%
(
18 of
58)
Rtn Points Won
51%
(
26 of
51)
66
Total Points Won
43
|
6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Nathaniel Lammons
72%
(
58 of
81)
1st Serve %
68%
(
50 of
74)
1
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
1
72%
(
42 of
58)
1st Serve Won
70%
(
35 of
50)
74%
(
17 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
14 of
24)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
27%
(
22 of
81)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
25 of
74)
84
Total Points Won
71
|
4-6 6-1 6-4 | H2H | ||
view more
Julian Lenz Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QF |
Stats
Robin Haase
Player
Julian Lenz
61%
(
71 of
117)
1st Serve %
71%
(
79 of
111)
11
Aces
8
2
Double Faults
2
80%
(
57 of
71)
1st Serve Won
73%
(
58 of
79)
41%
(
19 of
46)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
15 of
32)
40%
(
2 of
5)
Break Points Won
20%
(
2 of
10)
35%
(
41 of
117)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
38 of
111)
114
Total Points Won
114
|
6-4 4-6 7-6(4) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Evgeny Donskoy
67%
(
68 of
101)
1st Serve %
64%
(
69 of
107)
5
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
1
72%
(
49 of
68)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
49 of
69)
61%
(
20 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
47%
(
18 of
38)
36%
(
5 of
14)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
32%
(
32 of
101)
Rtn Points Won
37%
(
40 of
107)
109
Total Points Won
99
|
6-2 6-7(3) 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Dennis Novak
67%
(
68 of
102)
1st Serve %
65%
(
66 of
101)
11
Aces
10
2
Double Faults
3
69%
(
47 of
68)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
49 of
66)
65%
(
22 of
34)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
13 of
35)
33%
(
3 of
9)
Break Points Won
22%
(
2 of
9)
32%
(
33 of
102)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
39 of
101)
108
Total Points Won
95
|
4-6 6-1 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Hazem Naow
67%
(
34 of
51)
1st Serve %
70%
(
45 of
64)
5
Aces
2
4
Double Faults
2
71%
(
24 of
34)
1st Serve Won
44%
(
20 of
45)
53%
(
9 of
17)
2nd Serve Won
37%
(
7 of
19)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
40%
(
2 of
5)
35%
(
18 of
51)
Rtn Points Won
58%
(
37 of
64)
70
Total Points Won
45
|
6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Mikalai Haliak
62%
(
45 of
73)
1st Serve %
58%
(
51 of
88)
4
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
3
67%
(
30 of
45)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
32 of
51)
50%
(
14 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
35%
(
13 of
37)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
40%
(
29 of
73)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
43 of
88)
87
Total Points Won
74
|
7-6(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Nerman Fatic
Player
Julian Lenz
61%
(
36 of
59)
1st Serve %
66%
(
33 of
50)
19
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
1
86%
(
31 of
36)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
22 of
33)
65%
(
15 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
65%
(
11 of
17)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
2)
22%
(
13 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
34%
(
17 of
50)
63
Total Points Won
46
|
7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Aldin Setkic
58%
(
39 of
67)
1st Serve %
54%
(
38 of
71)
14
Aces
10
3
Double Faults
6
87%
(
34 of
39)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
29 of
38)
54%
(
15 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
17 of
33)
33%
(
1 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
27%
(
18 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
35%
(
25 of
71)
74
Total Points Won
64
|
7-6(3) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Julian Lenz
Player
Andrew Paulson
58%
(
69 of
120)
1st Serve %
62%
(
62 of
100)
12
Aces
13
7
Double Faults
5
78%
(
54 of
69)
1st Serve Won
77%
(
48 of
62)
59%
(
30 of
51)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
22 of
38)
100%
(
2 of
2)
Break Points Won
10%
(
1 of
10)
30%
(
36 of
120)
Rtn Points Won
30%
(
30 of
100)
114
Total Points Won
106
|
6-7(6) 7-6(5) 6-3 | H2H | ||
| Q1 |
Stats
Kai Wehnelt
Player
Julian Lenz
63%
(
60 of
96)
1st Serve %
63%
(
69 of
110)
2
Aces
4
6
Double Faults
8
77%
(
46 of
60)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
45 of
69)
28%
(
10 of
36)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
16 of
41)
45%
(
5 of
11)
Break Points Won
100%
(
5 of
5)
42%
(
40 of
96)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
49 of
110)
105
Total Points Won
101
|
7-6(5) 3-6 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Jurij Rodionov
Player
Julian Lenz
70%
(
47 of
67)
1st Serve %
66%
(
38 of
58)
3
Aces
3
2
Double Faults
2
68%
(
32 of
47)
1st Serve Won
45%
(
17 of
38)
55%
(
11 of
20)
2nd Serve Won
75%
(
15 of
20)
30%
(
3 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
3)
36%
(
24 of
67)
Rtn Points Won
45%
(
26 of
58)
69
Total Points Won
56
|
6-4 6-2 | H2H | ||
view more
Lammons Vs Lenz 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 support@matchstat.com
