Suzan Lamens and Ann Li will play each other in the qualifications of the Hobart International for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to play on Sunday at 11:00 am on West Court. Here the head to head stats and relative prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Ann Li who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Ann Li is the pick to win this match.
Ann Li -> 1.67
Suzan Lamens -> 2.1
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 Suzan Lamens vs. Ann Li
There is no head to head record between Suzan Lamens and Ann Li since this will be the first time that they will play each other in the main tour.
Suzan Lamens
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 3-2 | 3-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 46-27 | 15-11 | 19-10 | 11-3 | 1-3 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 45-31 | 7-7 | 33-19 | 5-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 37-27 | 13-9 | 24-11 | 0-3 | 0-3 | 0-1 |
| 2021 | 48-27 | 21-9 | 22-14 | 5-3 | 0-0 | 0-1 |
Ranked no. 87, the Dutch reached the qualifications after defeating Renee Alame 6-0 6-3.
In the qualifications, The Dutch had a good straight sets win against Alame (6-0 6-3). During the match, Lamens scored 56 points vs Alame’s 26. The Dutch was quite aggressive to blast 17 winners.
Talking about the service games, Lamens wasn’t able to score even 1 ace during the match and she committed only 3 double faults. Overall, Suzan Lamens was quite efficient on serve to win 85% (17/20) of her 1st serve and 56% (10/18) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent her to concede the serve twice. Suzan broke Alame 6 times after converting 55% of her break points (6/11).
Lamens has positive match record in the last 10 years having won 58% of her matches (285-205). 3-1 on hard in 2025. Talking about her performance on the same surface of this competition, Lamens has a composed 75-61 record in the last years on hard.
Lamens has an overall 3-1 win-loss record in 2025, 3-1 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Previously in Hobart
Suzan has never competed in this tournament before.
Ann Li
| Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 3-1 | 3-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 2024 | 42-27 | 16-14 | 22-9 | 4-3 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 2023 | 36-28 | 16-13 | 15-9 | 4-4 | 1-2 | 0-0 |
| 2022 | 16-20 | 7-10 | 2-3 | 4-3 | 3-4 | 0-0 |
| 2021 | 25-14 | 19-8 | 1-1 | 4-2 | 1-3 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 96, Li reached the qualifications after beating Chloe Paquet 2-6 6-3 6-1.
In the qualifications against Paquet, Li recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (2-6 6-3 6-1). During the match Li scored 94 points vs Paquet’s 80. Li was very aggressive to blast 42 winners.
About the serving games, Li blasted 4 aces and she committed only 2 double faults. Ann Li lost the serve twice and she saved 6 break points. Furthermore, Li put 65% of her first serves in, winning 70% (42/60) of the points behind her 1st serve and 48% (16/33) on the 2nd serve. Li broke Paquet 4 times after converting 44% of her break points (4/9).
The American has an aggregate 2-1 win-loss record in 2025, 2-1 on hard (See FULL STATS).
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Lamens | Li |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 1 | 1 |
| Tot Set | 2 | 3 |
| Tot Games | 15 | 24 |
| Pts | 56-26 | 94-80 |
| Total Points | 82 | 174 |
| Winners | 17 | 42 |
| %Winners | 30% | 45% |
Both Lamens and Li played 1 match. Also both players started their run from the qualifications.At the moment, Ann Li surrendered 1 set while Suzan Lamens hasn’t conceded a set so far. Lamens has played 1 set(s) less than Li (2 vs 3). Therefore, Lamens played 9 games less than Li. Suzan scored 17 winners (30% of the total points). On the other side, Li struck 42 winners (45%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Lamens | Li |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 0 | 4 |
| Avg per match | 0 | 4 |
| 1st in | 20/38 | 60/93 |
| %1st in | 53% | 65% |
| 1st pts | 17/20 | 42/60 |
| %1st pts | 85% | 70% |
| 2nd pts | 10/18 | 16/33 |
| %2nd pts | 56% | 48% |
Lamens didn’t manage to fire a single ace to far. Li scored 4 aces . Lamens won 85% points behind her first serve. She extremely effective on her second serve to win 56% of the points. On the other side, Li won 70% of the points behind her first serve. She had a solid display on her second serve to win 48% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Lamens | Li |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 6 | 4 |
| Converted | 6/11 | 4/9 |
| % Converted | 55% | 44% |
| Conceded | 3 | 8 |
| Saved | 1 | 6 |
| % Saved | 33% | 75% |
| Times Broken | 2 | 2 |
The Dutch broke her opponent 6 times with a 55% conversion rate. The Dutch dropped her serve twice and she saved 33% of the break points that she conceded. Ann broke her opponent 4 times with a 44% conversion rate. Li conceded her serve twice and she saved 75% of the break points that she conceded.
| Lamens | |||
| Q1 Alame |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-0 6-3 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | |
| Tot Games | 15 | 15 | |
| pts | 56-26 | 56-26 | |
| Total points | 82 | 82 | |
| Winners | 17 | 17 | |
| %Winners | 30% | 30% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 0 | 0 | |
| Double Faults | 3 | 3 | |
| 1st in | 20/38 | 20/38 | |
| % 1st in | 53% | 53% | |
| 1st pts | 17/20 | 17/20 | |
| % 1st pts | 85% | 85% | |
| 2nd pts | 10/18 | 10/18 | |
| % 2nd pts | 56% | 56% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 6 | 6 | |
| Converted | 6/11 | 6/11 | |
| Converted % | 55% | 55% | |
| Conceded | 3 | 3 | |
| Saved | 1/3 | 1 | |
| Saved % | 33% | 33% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 2 | |
| Li | |||
| Q1 Paquet |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 2-6 6-3 6-1 | ||
| Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
| Tot Games | 24 | 24 | |
| pts | 94-80 | 94-80 | |
| Total points | 174 | 174 | |
| Winners | 42 | 42 | |
| %Winners | 45% | 45% | |
| SERVE | |||
| Aces | 4 | 4 | |
| Double Faults | 2 | 2 | |
| 1st in | 60/93 | 60/93 | |
| % 1st in | 65% | 65% | |
| 1st pts | 42/60 | 42/60 | |
| % 1st pts | 70% | 70% | |
| 2nd pts | 16/33 | 16/33 | |
| % 2nd pts | 48% | 48% | |
| Breaks | |||
| Won | 4 | 4 | |
| Converted | 4/9 | 4/9 | |
| Converted % | 44% | 44% | |
| Conceded | 8 | 8 | |
| Saved | 6/8 | 6 | |
| Saved % | 75% | 75% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 2 | |
Head 2 Head
LWLWW
WWLW Tennis Scores in Hobart
- Jody MaginleyMaginley – Juan Sebastian GomezSebastian Gomez (7-61 4-6 13-11) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Cayetano MarchMarch – Alexander CozbinovCozbinov (2-6 6-3 10-8) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Christian LangmoLangmo – Nicholas BybelBybel (6-2 6-4) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Wilfredo GonzalezGonzalez – Jesse FloresFlores (6-1 5-7 10-5) – Stats, scores, rankings
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Lucia BronzettiBronzetti – Greetje MinnenMinnen (0-1) – H2H and prediction
- Renata ZarazuaZarazua – Maria Lourdes CarleLourdes Carle (1-1) – H2H and prediction
- Arantxa RusRus – Nuria Parrizas-DiazParrizas-Diaz (0-3) – H2H and prediction
- Suzan LamensLamens – Ann LiLi (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Zeynep SonmezSonmez – Anna BondarBondar (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Dayana YastremskaYastremska – Katie VolynetsVolynets (0-1) – H2H and prediction
- Mccartney KesslerKessler – Rebecca SramkovaSramkova (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Amanda AnisimovaAnisimova – Daria GavrilovaGavrilova (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Lulu SunSun – Sofia KeninKenin (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Anna BlinkovaBlinkova – Bernarda PeraPera (3-3) – H2H and prediction
- Olga DanilovicDanilovic – (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Varvara GrachevaGracheva – Magda LinetteLinette (1-2) – H2H and prediction
- Yue YuanYuan – Maria Camila Osorio SerranoCamila Osorio Serrano (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Veronika KudermetovaKudermetova – Elisabetta CocciarettoCocciaretto (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Anhelina KalininaKalinina – Clara TausonTauson (2-1) – H2H and prediction
