Predictions
Matches
Calendar
H2H
Rankings
Picks Blog
Tung-Lin Wu vs Chak Lam Coleman Wong 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 Wu vs Wong analysis and find out who is favored!
Tung-Lin Wu vs Chak Lam Coleman Wong Important H2H Prediction Stats:
Head-to-head: Wu 2 - 0 Wong
- Second serve performance recent form: In recent form (last 6 months), Wu has won 52.86% of points on his second serve, while Wong has won 49.89%. There is a high correlation between this stat and match prediction accuracy.
- Return game stats recent form: Return stats show Wu, in recent form, has won 50.37% of his opponent's second serve points, while Wong has won 47.9%. The same stats for first serve returns are 29.13% and 29.94% respectively and this has a high correlation to pick who is favored in this H2H matchup.
- Under pressure analysis: Wu has saved 53.74% of breakpoints in recent form, whereas Wong has saved 62.36% which is a useful statistic for in-game betting predictions.
- Performance overview: Over the last year Wu has won 49.09% of matches played (W/L 27/ 28), with Wong winning 63.64% (W/L 49/ 28) that gives us an overall head-to head prediction overview.
- Best surface: Wu has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 57% (W/L 170/ 129), and worse career win % on Grass, winning 25% (W/L 1/ 3). Wong has their best career surface win % on Hard, winning 59% (W/L 80/ 56), and worse career win % on I.hard, winning 43% (W/L 3/ 4).
- Player level: In the last year, Wu has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 52.38% of matches (W/L 22/ 20), where as Wong has played most of their matches on the Challengers/ITF tournaments > $10K, winning 56.76% of matches (W/L 21/ 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 2 times before with Wu winning 2 times. They have played 5 sets in total, with Wu winning 4 and Wong winning 1. The last match between Wu and Wong was at the Gwangju Challenger, 17-04-2024, Second, Hard with Tung-Lin Wu getting the victory 6-3 1-6 7-5.
- Head to head match duration: In past head to head matches, the average match time between these players has been 1:1:44.
- Deciding set H2H prediction: Wu and Wong have played a deciding set 1 times, with Wu winning 1 times and Wong 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 Wu winning 0, and Wong 0.
- Opponent quality stats: Over the last 12 months, Wu has played against opponents with an average rank of 305.93 while Wong has played against players with an average rank of 250.06.
- Deciding set performance vs all players: If you are interested in live predictions and betting, if this match goes into a deciding set, Wu has won 50% of deciding sets over the last 12 months, while Wong has won 66% in all matches played on tour.
- Break point conversion: In recent form, Wu has converted 37.95% of breakpoint opportunities, and Wong has converted 32.62% of their chances to break their opponents serve. A telling stat for in-game live betting tips when either player has a breakpoint opportunity.
271
Rank
158
High
26
Age
R
Plays
2
Total0
2
Hard0
0
Clay0
0
Indoor0
0
Grass0
181
Rank
180
High
19
Age
Plays
L
W
W
W
L
L
W
W
L
L
Form
W
W
L
W
L
W
L
L
L
L
54% (227-191)
Career Total W/L
57% (101-77)
46% (11-13)
YTD W/L
43% (10-13)
$106,780
Career Prize Money
$23,250
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 | Tung-Lin Wu | Chak Lam Coleman Wong |
|---|---|---|
| All H2H Matches | 2 | 0 |
| Sets Won | 4 | 1 |
| Games Won | 26 | 17 |
| Aces (Total) | 3 | 7 |
| DFs (Total) | 5 | 0 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:1:44 | 1:1:44 |
| 1st Serve % | 68% (67/98) | 63% (53/84) |
| 1st Serve Win% | 61% (41/67) | 62% (33/53) |
| 2nd Serve Win% | 42% (13/31) | 58% (18/31) |
| BPs Won% (Total) | 63% (5/8) | 33% (5/15) |
| Return Points W% | 39% (33/84) | 45% (44/98) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 100% (2/2) | 0% (0/2) |
| 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 | 100% (2/2) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (2/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| 1st set L, W | 0% (0/0) | 0% (2/0) |
| Winning Player | Losing Player | Score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6-3 1-6 7-5 |
Stats 
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
68%
(
67 of
98)
1st Serve %
63%
(
53 of
84)
3
Aces
7
5
Double Faults
0
61%
(
41 of
67)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
33 of
53)
42%
(
13 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
45%
(
44 of
98)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
33 of
84)
87
Total Points Won
95
|
||||
| 6-1 6-2 | |||||
Stats Breakdown Vs All H2H Opponents
| stats | Tung-Lin Wu | Chak Lam Coleman Wong |
|---|---|---|
| YTD W/L | 46% (11/13) | 43% (10/13) |
| Sets Win/Loss | 45% (25/30) | 46% (25/29) |
| Games Win/Loss | 49% (267/276) | 49% (265/280) |
| Hard Win/Loss | 48% (11/12) | 50% (10/10) |
| Clay Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/2) |
| Indoor Hard W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Grass Win/Loss | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Aces pg | 0.28 | 0.59 |
| Aces Total | 74 | 159 |
| DFs per game | 0.2 | 0.25 |
| DFs Total | 52 | 68 |
| Avg Match Time | 1:54:27 | 1:49:58 |
| Avg Opp Rank | 278.08 | 359.65 |
| 1st Serve % | 66% (1135/1712) | 56% (978/1762) |
| 1st Serve W% | 66% (750/1135) | 73% (710/978) |
| 2nd Serve W% | 53% (305/577) | 48% (378/784) |
| BPs Won% Total | 38% (63/166) | 33% (52/160) |
| Return Pts W% | 38% (633/1685) | 37% (667/1792) |
| Slam W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/1) |
| Masters W/L | 0% (0/0) | 50% (1/1) |
| Cups W/L | 0% (0/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Main Tour W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/1) |
| Tour Finals W/L | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| Challenger W/L | 44% (8/10) | 47% (9/10) |
| Futures W/L | 75% (3/1) | 0% (0/0) |
| Best of 3 Sets W% | 48% (11/23) | 43% (10/23) |
| Best of 5 Sets W% | 0% (0/0) | 0% (0/0) |
| TBs Win% (Total) | 50% (5/10) | 63% (5/8) |
| Deciding Set W% | 63% (5/8) | 38% (3/8) |
| 1st set W, W | 100% (9/9) | 80% (10/8) |
| 1st set W, L | 0% (9/0) | 20% (10/2) |
| 1st set L, W | 13% (15/2) | 15% (13/2) |
Tung-Lin Wu Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 |
Stats
Arthur Fery
Player
Tung-Lin Wu
66%
(
41 of
62)
1st Serve %
74%
(
40 of
54)
1
Aces
2
0
Double Faults
0
68%
(
28 of
41)
1st Serve Won
50%
(
20 of
40)
57%
(
12 of
21)
2nd Serve Won
57%
(
8 of
14)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
50%
(
1 of
2)
35%
(
22 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
48%
(
26 of
54)
66
Total Points Won
50
|
6-1 7-5 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Bu Yunchaokete
Player
Tung-Lin Wu
57%
(
39 of
68)
1st Serve %
72%
(
44 of
61)
4
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
0
69%
(
27 of
39)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
25 of
44)
52%
(
15 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
53%
(
9 of
17)
67%
(
4 of
6)
Break Points Won
13%
(
1 of
8)
38%
(
26 of
68)
Rtn Points Won
44%
(
27 of
61)
69
Total Points Won
60
|
6-4 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Moez Echargui
61%
(
39 of
64)
1st Serve %
55%
(
28 of
51)
3
Aces
1
4
Double Faults
3
77%
(
30 of
39)
1st Serve Won
57%
(
16 of
28)
48%
(
12 of
25)
2nd Serve Won
48%
(
11 of
23)
57%
(
4 of
7)
Break Points Won
17%
(
1 of
6)
34%
(
22 of
64)
Rtn Points Won
47%
(
24 of
51)
66
Total Points Won
49
|
6-2 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Beibit Zhukayev
65%
(
35 of
54)
1st Serve %
59%
(
35 of
59)
2
Aces
7
3
Double Faults
1
80%
(
28 of
35)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
25 of
35)
68%
(
13 of
19)
2nd Serve Won
46%
(
11 of
24)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
0)
24%
(
13 of
54)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
23 of
59)
64
Total Points Won
49
|
6-3 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
James McCabe
Player
Tung-Lin Wu
67%
(
60 of
90)
1st Serve %
69%
(
58 of
84)
8
Aces
4
3
Double Faults
2
72%
(
43 of
60)
1st Serve Won
66%
(
38 of
58)
53%
(
16 of
30)
2nd Serve Won
50%
(
13 of
26)
50%
(
5 of
10)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
34%
(
31 of
90)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
33 of
84)
92
Total Points Won
82
|
6-1 6-7(1) 6-2 | H2H | ||
| SF |
Stats
Lloyd Harris
Player
Tung-Lin Wu
53%
(
31 of
59)
1st Serve %
71%
(
42 of
59)
8
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
1
77%
(
24 of
31)
1st Serve Won
60%
(
25 of
42)
46%
(
13 of
28)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
7 of
17)
100%
(
5 of
5)
Break Points Won
25%
(
3 of
12)
37%
(
22 of
59)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
27 of
59)
64
Total Points Won
54
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Alibek Kachmazov
68%
(
65 of
96)
1st Serve %
58%
(
69 of
120)
4
Aces
8
1
Double Faults
6
68%
(
44 of
65)
1st Serve Won
65%
(
45 of
69)
71%
(
22 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
28 of
51)
23%
(
3 of
13)
Break Points Won
60%
(
3 of
5)
31%
(
30 of
96)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
47 of
120)
113
Total Points Won
103
|
6-3 5-7 7-6(3) | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
68%
(
67 of
98)
1st Serve %
63%
(
53 of
84)
3
Aces
7
5
Double Faults
0
61%
(
41 of
67)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
33 of
53)
42%
(
13 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
45%
(
44 of
98)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
33 of
84)
87
Total Points Won
95
|
6-3 1-6 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Dane Sweeny
76%
(
74 of
97)
1st Serve %
56%
(
52 of
93)
3
Aces
8
3
Double Faults
4
61%
(
45 of
74)
1st Serve Won
67%
(
35 of
52)
52%
(
12 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
18 of
41)
38%
(
5 of
13)
Break Points Won
30%
(
3 of
10)
41%
(
40 of
97)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
40 of
93)
97
Total Points Won
93
|
4-6 6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Paul Jubb
Player
Tung-Lin Wu
61%
(
38 of
62)
1st Serve %
72%
(
51 of
71)
2
Aces
1
3
Double Faults
2
82%
(
31 of
38)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
32 of
51)
63%
(
15 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
55%
(
11 of
20)
67%
(
2 of
3)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
26%
(
16 of
62)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
28 of
71)
74
Total Points Won
59
|
6-4 7-6(1) | H2H | ||
view more
Chak Lam Coleman Wong Recent Matches Played
Before:
| opponent | Score | H2H | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 |
Stats
Patrick Kypson
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
52%
(
31 of
60)
1st Serve %
49%
(
35 of
71)
6
Aces
6
1
Double Faults
4
84%
(
26 of
31)
1st Serve Won
63%
(
22 of
35)
55%
(
16 of
29)
2nd Serve Won
44%
(
16 of
36)
33%
(
4 of
12)
Break Points Won
25%
(
1 of
4)
30%
(
18 of
60)
Rtn Points Won
46%
(
33 of
71)
75
Total Points Won
56
|
7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Patrick Kypson
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
59%
(
33 of
56)
1st Serve %
67%
(
29 of
43)
1
Aces
3
1
Double Faults
5
73%
(
24 of
33)
1st Serve Won
59%
(
17 of
29)
65%
(
15 of
23)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
5 of
14)
100%
(
4 of
4)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
30%
(
17 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
49%
(
21 of
43)
60
Total Points Won
39
|
6-3 6-1 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Yuta Shimizu
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
66%
(
35 of
53)
1st Serve %
54%
(
37 of
68)
3
Aces
4
1
Double Faults
4
51%
(
18 of
35)
1st Serve Won
54%
(
20 of
37)
67%
(
12 of
18)
2nd Serve Won
32%
(
10 of
31)
67%
(
6 of
9)
Break Points Won
29%
(
2 of
7)
43%
(
23 of
53)
Rtn Points Won
56%
(
38 of
68)
68
Total Points Won
53
|
6-3 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Remy Bertola
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
66%
(
47 of
71)
1st Serve %
55%
(
38 of
69)
8
Aces
11
3
Double Faults
1
74%
(
35 of
47)
1st Serve Won
76%
(
29 of
38)
54%
(
13 of
24)
2nd Serve Won
39%
(
12 of
31)
38%
(
3 of
8)
Break Points Won
20%
(
1 of
5)
32%
(
23 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
28 of
69)
76
Total Points Won
64
|
6-4 6-4 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
Player
James Kent Trotter
54%
(
38 of
71)
1st Serve %
53%
(
34 of
64)
8
Aces
6
3
Double Faults
3
68%
(
26 of
38)
1st Serve Won
71%
(
24 of
34)
58%
(
19 of
33)
2nd Serve Won
43%
(
13 of
30)
44%
(
4 of
9)
Break Points Won
10%
(
1 of
10)
37%
(
26 of
71)
Rtn Points Won
42%
(
27 of
64)
72
Total Points Won
63
|
7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Tung-Lin Wu
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
68%
(
67 of
98)
1st Serve %
63%
(
53 of
84)
3
Aces
7
5
Double Faults
0
61%
(
41 of
67)
1st Serve Won
62%
(
33 of
53)
42%
(
13 of
31)
2nd Serve Won
58%
(
18 of
31)
63%
(
5 of
8)
Break Points Won
33%
(
5 of
15)
45%
(
44 of
98)
Rtn Points Won
39%
(
33 of
84)
87
Total Points Won
95
|
6-3 1-6 7-5 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
Player
Moez Echargui
49%
(
54 of
110)
1st Serve %
64%
(
69 of
108)
4
Aces
4
4
Double Faults
5
70%
(
38 of
54)
1st Serve Won
74%
(
51 of
69)
59%
(
33 of
56)
2nd Serve Won
36%
(
14 of
39)
50%
(
4 of
8)
Break Points Won
11%
(
1 of
9)
35%
(
39 of
110)
Rtn Points Won
40%
(
43 of
108)
114
Total Points Won
104
|
6-7(6) 7-5 6-3 | H2H | ||
| QF |
Stats
Seong Chan Hong
Player
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
52%
(
43 of
82)
1st Serve %
49%
(
40 of
82)
5
Aces
1
2
Double Faults
4
67%
(
29 of
43)
1st Serve Won
78%
(
31 of
40)
56%
(
22 of
39)
2nd Serve Won
38%
(
16 of
42)
71%
(
5 of
7)
Break Points Won
50%
(
3 of
6)
38%
(
31 of
82)
Rtn Points Won
43%
(
35 of
82)
86
Total Points Won
78
|
6-4 3-6 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R2 |
Stats
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
Player
Blake Ellis
61%
(
34 of
56)
1st Serve %
48%
(
32 of
66)
11
Aces
5
1
Double Faults
4
82%
(
28 of
34)
1st Serve Won
78%
(
25 of
32)
68%
(
15 of
22)
2nd Serve Won
41%
(
14 of
34)
43%
(
3 of
7)
Break Points Won
0%
(
0 of
4)
23%
(
13 of
56)
Rtn Points Won
41%
(
27 of
66)
70
Total Points Won
52
|
7-5 6-2 | H2H | ||
| R1 |
Stats
Chak Lam Coleman Wong
Player
Alexander Blockx
69%
(
36 of
52)
1st Serve %
63%
(
35 of
56)
1
Aces
1
1
Double Faults
3
72%
(
26 of
36)
1st Serve Won
40%
(
14 of
35)
38%
(
6 of
16)
2nd Serve Won
52%
(
11 of
21)
42%
(
5 of
12)
Break Points Won
100%
(
2 of
2)
38%
(
20 of
52)
Rtn Points Won
55%
(
31 of
56)
63
Total Points Won
45
|
6-3 6-3 | H2H | ||
view more
Wu Vs Wong 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]
