Botic Van De Zandschulp vs Adrian Mannarino — Paris Masters Round of 64

Paris Masters · ATP · Round of 64
Botic Van De Zandschulp
NED
Botic Van De Zandschulp
#55ATP
1743ELO
1711Hard ELO
$690kYTD
$6.6MCAREER
30 yrs · 191 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLLLLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 30 October 2023
hard
Adrian Mannarino
FRA
Adrian Mannarino
#49ATP
1673ELO
1647Hard ELO
$633kYTD
$15MCAREER
38 yrs · 180 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWLLWLWW
Van De Zandschulp B.
6-4 7-5
Mannarino A.
Van De Zandschulp B.
672
Mannarino A.
450

Botic Van De Zandschulp defeated Adrian Mannarino 6-4 7-5 in the Paris Masters round of 64 on hard. The result followed the form book — Botic Van De Zandschulp came in leading the head-to-head 3–1, defending last year's round of 64. Botic Van De Zandschulp extended the head-to-head to 4–1.

Key context

Head to head

3–1
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2024-02-26DubaiR32hardBotic Van De Zandschulp7-6(3) 7-5
2022-10-24BaselR32hardBotic Van De Zandschulp6-4 4-6 6-4
2022-08-22Winston-SalemSFhardAdrian Mannarino6-0 6-4
2022-01-03MelbourneR32hardBotic Van De Zandschulp6-4 6-3

Serve vs return

This season
Van De Zandschulp B.serving82% hold

wins 64% of points on serve vs Mannarino A.

Mannarino A.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Van De Zandschulp B.

Even serve battle

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Serve & return on hard

Van De Zandschulp B.Mannarino A.
41
Serve
37
43
Return
32

Per-surface Serve / Return Rating (0–100, percentile within the hard field, opponent-adjusted over 52 weeks). About

Statistics

This season
Van De Zandschulp B.Mannarino A.
1st serve in·Even
63%
60%
1st serve points won·Even
71%
69%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
47%
52%
Service points won·Even
62%
62%
Return points won·Even
38%
37%
Break points saved·Even
60%
58%
Aces / match·Slight edge
5.6
4.5
Double faults / match·Dominant
3.8
2.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (196 vs 200). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Van De Zandschulp B.Mannarino A.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
77
65
Break points saved·Even
98
96
Break points won·Even
68
66
Deciding sets·Slight edge
79
72
Tiebreaks·Dominant
81
38

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Van De Zandschulp B.
7.2
Strong advantageUmpiry Score
Mannarino A.
6.3
Marginal edgeUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
6.0+63 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.0Hard Elo 1647
6.3Overall Elo 1743
ELO gap
3.7Overall Elo 1673
6.7
H2H
3.3
6.1
Surface form
6.1
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
2.8
Minutes 14d
6.1
4.0
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
4.0
Country comfort
6.3
Context
6.0
Defending pts
6.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Freshness

Recent load
Van De Zandschulp B.Mannarino A.
Freshness·Clear edge
91
77

Van De Zandschulp B.: 12 days rest · 2 matches (14d) · Mannarino A.: 4 days rest · 2 matches, 46 games (7d). Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Weather
12°CDrizzle
Wind 9 km/hHumidity 92%
Final
Djokovic N.[1]
Dimitrov G.
6-46-3
Semi-finals
Djokovic N.[1]
Rublev A.[5]
5-77-637-5
Dimitrov G.
Tsitsipas S.[7]
6-36-717-63
Quarter-finals
Dimitrov G.
Hurkacz H.[11]
6-14-66-4
Tsitsipas S.[7]
Khachanov K.[16]
6-36-4
Djokovic N.[1]
Rune H.[6]
7-56-736-4
Rublev A.[5]
De Minaur A.[13]
4-66-36-1
R16
De Minaur A.[13]
Sinner J.[4]
W/O
Khachanov K.[16]
Safiullin R.
4-66-46-2
Dimitrov G.
Bublik A.
6-26-2
Rune H.[6]
Altmaier D.
6-36-3
Rublev A.[5]
Van De Zandschulp B.
6-36-3
Hurkacz H.[11]
Cerundolo F.
6-46-3
Tsitsipas S.[7]
Zverev A.[10]
7-626-4
Djokovic N.[1]
Griekspoor T.
4-67-626-4
R32
Altmaier D.
Fritz T.[9]
W/O
Bublik A.
Jarry N.
7-637-63
Hurkacz H.[11]
Bautista Agut R.
6-36-2
Djokovic N.[1]
Etcheverry T.
6-36-2
Griekspoor T.
Davidovich Fokina A.
6-26-2
Rune H.[6]
Thiem D.
6-46-2
Sinner J.[4]
Mcdonald M.
6-767-56-1
Van De Zandschulp B.
Paul T.[12]
6-42-66-3
Rublev A.[5]
Nishioka Y.
6-46-3
Cerundolo F.
Ruud C.[8]
7-56-4
Dimitrov G.
Medvedev D.[3]
6-36-747-62
Zverev A.[10]
Humbert U.
6-46-737-65
Khachanov K.[16]
Djere L.
6-47-5
Safiullin R.
Alcaraz C.[2]
6-36-4
Tsitsipas S.[7]
Auger Aliassime F.
6-37-64
De Minaur A.[13]
Lajovic D.
4-66-46-4
R64
Bublik A.
Tiafoe F.[14]
6-36-4
Dimitrov G.
Musetti L.
6-26-746-3
Auger Aliassime F.
Struff J.
7-636-4
Humbert U.
Giron M.
6-46-3
Fritz T.[9]
Baez S.
6-16-4
Paul T.[12]
Gasquet R.
0-66-27-66
Griekspoor T.
Eubanks C.
6-726-36-4
Nishioka Y.
Thompson J.
7-654-66-2
Etcheverry T.
Kecmanovic M.
4-67-666-4
Davidovich Fokina A.
Shelton B.[15]
7-645-76-3
Altmaier D.
Fils A.
6-26-4
Thiem D.
Wawrinka S.
3-66-37-5
Lajovic D.
Bonzi B.
7-56-3
De Minaur A.[13]
Murray A.
7-654-67-5
Van De Zandschulp B.
Mannarino A.
6-47-5
Cerundolo F.
Monfils G.
4-67-627-5
Bautista Agut R.
Lehecka J.
6-46-2
Djere L.
Van Assche L.
6-766-46-4
Safiullin R.
Muller A.
7-646-3
Hurkacz H.[11]
Korda S.
6-36-766-3
Khachanov K.[16]
Purcell M.
6-46-4
Mcdonald M.
Wolf J.
1-66-46-2
Zverev A.[10]
Fucsovics M.
4-67-56-4
Jarry N.
Popyrin A.
7-57-66