Tommy Paul and John Isner will clash against each other in the quarter of the Infosys Hall of Fame Open for the 3rd time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Friday at 3:30 pm on CENTER COURT. In this post, we analyze their head to head performance and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Tommy Paul who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Tommy Paul is the pick to win this match.
Tommy Paul -> 1.49
John Isner -> 2.62
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
To be able to watch live streaming bet365, a funded account is required or you need to have placed a bet in the last 24 hours. 18+ BeGambleAware.
Here where top tennis events are broadcasted or streamed online (ATP, WTA).
At the challenger level, there will be free live streaming on Challenger TV.
Â
Prediction and head to head Tommy Paul vs. John Isner
This will be the 3rd time that Tommy Paul and John Isner square off. The head to head is 2-0 for Isner (see full H2H stats), but they have never competed against each other on grass.
The last time that they played, Isner won 7-6(3) 3-6 6-2 in the quarter in Acapulco back in 2020.
Highlights John Isner vs Tommy Paul – Acapulco 27-February-2020
Tommy Paul
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2-0 | 2-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 45-20 | 17-12 | 10-4 | 8-2 | 10-2 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 46-29 | 29-13 | 5-6 | 3-5 | 9-5 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 39-27 | 21-12 | 2-6 | 9-5 | 7-4 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 33-23 | 12-12 | 9-7 | 12-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 14 (career-high), Paul reached the quarter after defeating Ethan Quinn 6-4 6-2.
In the 2nd round, The American had a good straight sets win against Quinn (6-4 6-2). During the match, Paul scored 69 points vs Quinn’s 55. Paul was quite aggressive to blast 23 winners.
Regarding the service games, Paul struck 6 aces and he committed only 2 double faults. Tommy Paul lost the serve twice and he saved 2 break points. Furthermore, Paul put 46% of his first serves in, winning 85% (23/27) of the points behind his 1st serve and 41% (13/32) on the 2nd serve. Tommy broke Quinn 5 times after converting 45% of his break points (5/11).
Paul has a solid win-loss record in the last 9 years having won 63% of his matches (334-192). 9-4 on grass in 2023. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this event, Paul has an aggregate22-13 record in the last 9 years on grass.
Paul’s best result of the year was getting to the final in Acapulco,the Aix En Provence Challenger and Eastbourne.
The American has an aggregate 30-16 win-loss record in 2023, 9-4 on grass (See FULL STATS).
Previously in Newport
The American has never competed in this tournament before.
John Isner
7 - 9win/loss
172
8
LWLLWLLWWW | Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 9-14 | 2-9 | 0-2 | 4-1 | 3-2 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 23-17 | 9-9 | 7-4 | 3-2 | 4-2 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 23-13 | 18-7 | 5-2 | 0-3 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2020 | 10-10 | 9-8 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2019 | 30-18 | 22-14 | 0-0 | 3-3 | 5-1 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 126, Isner got to the quarter after defeating Alex Bolt 6-4 2-6 6-3 and Corentin Moutet 6-3 6-4.
In the 2nd round, Isner had a good straight sets win against Moutet (6-3 6-4). During the match Isner scored 62 points vs Moutet’s 45. Isner was very aggressive to blast 33 winners.
Talking about serving, Isner recorded 7 aces and he committed only 3 double faults. John Isner was extremely efficient on serve to win 89% (33/37) of his 1st serve and 57% (8/14) on the second serve. This was the main reason for not conceding a single break during the match. The American broke Moutet twice after converting 29% of his break points (2/7).
Overall Performance in this tournament
Isner has conceded 1 set in the tournament to win 53% of the points he played.
The American’s best result of the year was reaching the final in Dallas.
John has a composed 6-9 win-loss record in 2023, 2-1 on grass (See FULL STATS).
Previously in Newport
Previously, he won this tournament 4 times in 2011, 2012, 2017 and 2019. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament (main draw)
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Paul | Isner |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 2 |
| Tot Set | 2 | 5 |
| Tot Games | 18 | 46 |
| Pts | 69-55 | 138-121 |
| Total Points | 124 | 259 |
| Winners | 23 | 75 |
| %Winners | 33% | 54% |
Paul played 1 match while Isner competed in 2 matches. At the moment, John Isner surrendered 1 set while Tommy Paul hasn’t surrendered a set so far. Paul has played 3 set(s) less than Isner (2 vs 5). Therefore, Paul played 28 games less than Isner. The American scored 23 winners (33% of the total points). On the other side, The American struck 75 winners (54%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Paul | Isner |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 6 | 27 |
| Avg per match | 6 | 13.5 |
| 1st in | 27/59 | 93/132 |
| %1st in | 46% | 70% |
| 1st pts | 23/27 | 75/93 |
| %1st pts | 85% | 81% |
| 2nd pts | 13/32 | 21/39 |
| %2nd pts | 41% | 54% |
Paul fired 6 aces . Isner managed to score 27 aces (13.5 per match). Paul won 85% points on his first serve. He pretty effective on his second serve to win 41% of the points. On the other side, Isner won 81% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 54% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Paul | Isner |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 5 | 4 |
| Converted | 5/11 | 4/12 |
| % Converted | 45% | 33% |
| Conceded | 4 | 4 |
| Saved | 2 | 2 |
| % Saved | 50% | 50% |
| Times Broken | 2 | 2 |
The American broke his opponent 5 times with a 45% conversion rate. Paul surrendered his serve twice and he saved 50% of the break points that he conceded. Isner broke his opponents 4 times with a 33% conversion rate. John conceded his serve twice and he saved 50% of the break points that he conceded.
| Paul | |||
| R2 Quinn |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 6-2 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 18 | 18 | |
| pts | 69-55 | 69-55 | |
| Total points | 124 | 124 | |
| Winners | 23 | 23 | |
| %Winners | 33% | 33% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 6 | 6 | |
| Double Faults | 2 | 2 | |
| 1st in | 27/59 | 27/59 | |
| % 1st in | 46% | 46% | |
| 1st pts | 23/27 | 23/27 | |
| % 1st pts | 85% | 85% | |
| 2nd pts | 13/32 | 13/32 | |
| % 2nd pts | 41% | 41% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 5 | 5 | |
| Converted | 5/11 | 5/11 | |
| Converted % | 45% | 45% | |
| Conceded | 4 | 4 | |
| Saved | 2/4 | 2 | |
| Saved % | 50% | 50% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 2 | |
| Isner | ||||
| R1 Bolt |
R2 Moutet |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-4 2-6 6-3 | 6-3 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 2 | 5 | |
| Tot Games | 27 | 19 | 46 | |
| pts | 76-76 | 62-45 | 138-121 | |
| Total points | 152 | 107 | 259 | |
| Winners | 42 | 33 | 75 | |
| %Winners | 55% | 53% | 54% | |
| SERVE | ||||
| Aces | 20 | 7 | 27 | |
| Double Faults | 4 | 3 | 7 | |
| 1st in | 56/81 | 37/51 | 93/132 | |
| % 1st in | 69% | 73% | 70% | |
| 1st pts | 42/56 | 33/37 | 75/93 | |
| % 1st pts | 75% | 89% | 81% | |
| 2nd pts | 13/25 | 8/14 | 21/39 | |
| % 2nd pts | 52% | 57% | 54% | |
| Breaks | ||||
| Won | 2 | 2 | 4 | |
| Converted | 2/5 | 2/7 | 4/12 | |
| Converted % | 40% | 29% | 33% | |
| Conceded | 3 | 1 | 4 | |
| Saved | 1/3 | 1/1 | 2 | |
| Saved % | 33% | 100% | 133% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 0 | 2 | |
Head 2 Head
WW
Tennis Scores in Newport
- Ugo HumbertHumbert – Kevin AndersonAnderson (6-2 6-4) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Nathaniel Lammons/Jack WithrowLammons/Jack Withrow – Andre Goransson/Ben McLachlanGoransson/Ben McLachlan (7-5 4-6 13-11) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Adrian MannarinoMannarino – Jordan ThompsonThompson (6-0 6-74 6-2) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Anirudh Chandrasekar/N. Vijay Sundar PrashanthChandrasekar/N. Vijay Sundar Prashanth – Adrian Mannarino/Jordan ThompsonMannarino/Jordan Thompson (6-78 6-4 13-11) – Stats, scores, rankings
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Mackenzie McdonaldMcdonald – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Tommy PaulPaul – John IsnerIsner (0-2) – H2H and prediction
- Ugo HumbertHumbert – Adrian MannarinoMannarino (1-1) – H2H and prediction
