Ben Shelton and Botic Van De Zandschulp will face off in the 2nd round of the BMW Open for the 2nd time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Wednesday at 1:30 pm on CENTER COURT. In the following paragraphs, you can find the head to head analysis and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Ben Shelton who should win in 3 sets.
Ben Shelton -> 1.666
Botic Van De Zandschulp -> 2.21
Click here to see the updated quotes and live streaming (only selected countries - USA excluded).
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.
Prediction and head to head Ben Shelton vs. Botic Van De Zandschulp
This will be the 2nd time that Ben Shelton and Botic Van De Zandschulp face off. The head to head is 1-0 for Van De Zandschulp (see full H2H stats), but they have never played each other on clay.
The last time that they competed against each other, Van De Zandschulp won 3-6 7-5 6-4 in the qualifications in at the U.S. Open back in 2021.
Ben Shelton
Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2025 | 15-9 | 9-5 | 5-3 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2024 | 42-26 | 22-13 | 8-4 | 8-5 | 4-4 | 0-0 |
2023 | 28-26 | 21-13 | 4-8 | 1-2 | 2-3 | 0-0 |
2022 | 40-11 | 16-9 | 0-0 | 24-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2021 | 18-7 | 7-3 | 5-2 | 6-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 15, Shelton reached the 2nd round after beating Borna Gojo 4-6 7-6(6) 7-6(3).
In the 1st round against Gojo, Shelton recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (4-6 7-66 7-63).During the match, Shelton scored less points (3) than Gojo. In fact, the world no. 15 won 104 points vs Gojo’s. That means that Shelton was more focused during the important points. The American was extremely aggressive to blast 48 winners.
Regarding the service games, Shelton fired 9 aces and he committed only 5 double faults. Overall, Ben Shelton was very efficient on serve to win 77% (48/62) of his 1st serve and 69% (36/52) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve once.
Shelton has a solid match record in the last 5 years having won 64% of his matches (139-77). 1-1 on clay in 2025. Talking about his performance on the same surface of this tournament, Shelton has a composed18-15 win-loss record in the last 5 years on clay.
Ben’s best result of the season was getting to the semifinal at the Australian Open .
The American has a composed 11-7 win-loss record in 2025, 1-1 on clay (See FULL STATS).
Previously in Munich
The American has never competed in this tournament before.
Botic Van De Zandschulp
9 - 11win/loss
85
22
Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2025 | 10-14 | 7-6 | 3-5 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2024 | 33-33 | 9-11 | 16-12 | 7-8 | 1-2 | 0-0 |
2023 | 27-25 | 10-9 | 4-6 | 12-7 | 1-3 | 0-0 |
2022 | 38-29 | 14-11 | 11-7 | 7-7 | 6-4 | 0-0 |
2021 | 53-23 | 17-5 | 24-10 | 9-5 | 3-3 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 89, Van De Zandschulp reached the 2nd round after defeating Max Hans Rehberg 6-3 6-1, Learner Tien 6-2 6-2
and Roberto Bautista Agut 6-4 3-6 6-4.In the 1st round, Botic defeated Bautista-Agut (6-4 3-6 6-4). During the match Van De Zandschulp scored 92 points vs Bautista-Agut’s 88. The Dutch was pretty aggressive to blast 46 winners.
Talking about serving, Van De Zandschulp fired 11 aces and he committed only 4 double faults. Botic Van De Zandschulp lost the serve twice and he saved 1 break points. Furthermore, Van De Zandschulp put 72% of his first serves in, winning 77% (46/60) of the points behind his 1st serve and 43% (10/23) on the 2nd serve. The Dutch broke Bautista-Agut twice after converting 18% of his break points (2/11).
Botic has an overall 9-11 win-loss record in 2025, 2-2 on clay (See FULL STATS).
Previously in Munich
Previously, his best result was reaching the final in 2022 and 2023. See his history.
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
Points | Shelton | Van De Zandschulp |
---|---|---|
Match played | 1 | 2 |
Tot Set | 3 | 5 |
Tot Games | 36 | 45 |
Pts | 104-107 | 148-123 |
Total Points | 211 | 271 |
Winners | 48 | 67 |
%Winners | 46% | 45% |
Shelton played 1 match while Van De Zandschulp competed in 2 matches. Van De Zandschulp started his run from the qualifications while Shelton had a direct access to the main draw. Both players lost a set in the event. Ben Shelton surrendered 1 set, while Botic Van De Zandschulp lost 1 set. Shelton has played 2 set(s) less than Van De Zandschulp (3 vs 5). Therefore, Shelton played 9 games less than Van De Zandschulp. Ben scored 48 winners (46% of the total points). On the other side, Botic struck 67 winners (45%).
Serve Performance
Serve | Shelton | Van De Zandschulp |
---|---|---|
Aces | 9 | 14 |
Avg per match | 9 | 7 |
1st in | 62/114 | 85/128 |
%1st in | 54% | 66% |
1st pts | 48/62 | 67/85 |
%1st pts | 77% | 79% |
2nd pts | 36/52 | 23/43 |
%2nd pts | 69% | 53% |
Shelton blasted 9 aces . Van De Zandschulp managed to score 14 aces (7 per match). Shelton won 77% points on his first serve. He very solid his second serve to win 69% of the points. On the other side, Van De Zandschulp won 79% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 53% of the points.
How they played the important points
Breaks | Shelton | Van De Zandschulp |
---|---|---|
Won | 0 | 6 |
Converted | 0/3 | 6/16 |
% Converted | 0% | 38% |
Conceded | 10 | 4 |
Saved | 9 | 2 |
% Saved | 90% | 50% |
Times Broken | 1 | 2 |
The American hasn’t manged yet to break his opponent. He didn’t manage to even clinch a single break point. The American surrendered his serve once and he saved 90% of the break points that he conceded. The Dutch broke his opponents 6 times with a 38% conversion rate. Botic conceded his serve twice and he saved 50% of the break points that he conceded.
Shelton | |||
R1 Gojo | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|
Score | 4-6 7-66 7-63 | ||
Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
Tot Games | 36 | 36 | |
pts | 104-107 | 104-107 | |
Total points | 211 | 211 | |
Winners | 48 | 48 | |
%Winners | 46% | 46% | |
SERVE | |||
Aces | 9 | 9 | |
Double Faults | 5 | 5 | |
1st in | 62/114 | 62/114 | |
% 1st in | 54% | 54% | |
1st pts | 48/62 | 48/62 | |
% 1st pts | 77% | 77% | |
2nd pts | 36/52 | 36/52 | |
% 2nd pts | 69% | 69% | |
Breaks | |||
Won | 0 | 0 | |
Converted | 0/3 | 0/3 | |
Converted % | 0% | 0% | |
Conceded | 10 | 10 | |
Saved | 9/10 | 9 | |
Saved % | 90% | 90% | |
Times Broken | 1 | 1 |
Van De Zandschulp | |||||
Q1 Hans Rehberg | Q3 Tien | R1 Bautista-Agut | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Score | 6-3 6-1 | 6-2 6-2 | 6-4 3-6 6-4 | ||
Tot Set | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 | |
Tot Games | 16 | 16 | 29 | 61 | |
pts | 56-35 | – | 92-88 | 148-123 | |
Total points | 91 | 0 | 180 | 271 | |
Winners | 21 | 46 | 67 | ||
%Winners | 38% | 0% | 50% | 45% | |
SERVE | |||||
Aces | 3 | 0 | 11 | 14 | |
Double Faults | 2 | 4 | 6 | ||
1st in | 25/45 | / | 60/83 | 85/128 | |
% 1st in | 56% | 0% | 72% | 66% | |
1st pts | 21/25 | / | 46/60 | 67/85 | |
% 1st pts | 84% | 0% | 77% | 79% | |
2nd pts | 13/20 | / | 10/23 | 23/43 | |
% 2nd pts | 65% | 0% | 43% | 53% | |
Breaks | |||||
Won | 4 | 2 | 6 | ||
Converted | 4/5 | / | 2/11 | 6/16 | |
Converted % | 80% | 0% | 18% | 38% | |
Conceded | 1 | 3 | 4 | ||
Saved | 1/1 | 0/ | 1/3 | 2 | |
Saved % | 100% | – | 33% | 133% | |
Times Broken | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Tennis Scores in Munich
- Diego Dedura-PalomeroDedura-Palomero – Denis ShapovalovShapovalov (7-62 3-0 ret.) – See score progression
- Alexander ShevchenkoShevchenko – Flavio CobolliCobolli (6-72 6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Ugo HumbertHumbert – Nicolas JarryJarry (4-6 6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Botic Van De ZandschulpVan De Zandschulp – Roberto Bautista AgutBautista Agut (6-4 3-6 6-4) – See score progression
- Luciano DarderiDarderi – Christopher O ConnellO Connell (7-63 7-63) – See score progression
- Fabian MarozsanMarozsan – Justin EngelEngel (6-4 6-1) – See score progression
- Yannick HanfmannHanfmann – Jakub MensikMensik (7-64 4-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Francisco CerundoloCerundolo – Jan-Lennard StruffStruff (6-0 6-2) – See score progression
- Tallon GriekspoorGriekspoor – Learner TienTien (6-4 6-2) – See score progression
- Daniel AltmaierAltmaier – Chun Hsin TsengHsin Tseng (7-65 7-65) – See score progression
- Andre Goransson/Sem VerbeekGoransson/Sem Verbeek – Francisco Cerundolo/Flavio CobolliCerundolo/Flavio Cobolli (3-6 6-4 10-6) – See score progression
- Miomir KecmanovicKecmanovic – Marcos GironGiron (6-2 6-72 7-69) – See score progression
- Alexander ZverevZverev – Alexandre MullerMuller (6-4 6-1) – See score progression
- Sander Gille/Jan ZielinskiGille/Jan Zielinski – Andreas Mies/Jan-Lennard StruffMies/Jan-Lennard Struff (6-3 3-6 10-3) – See score progression
- Ben SheltonShelton – Borna GojoGojo (4-6 7-66 7-63) – See score progression
- David GoffinGoffin – Billy HarrisHarris (6-2 6-72 6-4) – See score progression
- Yannick HanfmannHanfmann – Jakub MensikMensik (7-6(4) 4-6 6-3) – See score progression
- Ugo HumbertHumbert – Nicolas JarryJarry (4-6 6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Fabian MarozsanMarozsan – Justin EngelEngel (6-4 6-1) – See score progression
- Diego Dedura-PalomeroDedura-Palomero – Denis ShapovalovShapovalov (7-6(2) 3-0 ret.) – See score progression
- Francisco CerundoloCerundolo – Jan-Lennard StruffStruff (6-0 6-2) – See score progression
- Alexander ShevchenkoShevchenko – Flavio CobolliCobolli (6-7(2) 6-3 6-4) – See score progression
- Luciano DarderiDarderi – Christopher O’ConnellO’Connell (7-6(3) 7-6(3)) – See score progression
- Botic Van De ZandschulpVan De Zandschulp – Roberto Bautista AgutBautista Agut (6-4 3-6 6-4) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Alexander ZverevZverev – Daniel AltmaierAltmaier (2-1) – H2H and prediction
- Botic Van De ZandschulpVan De Zandschulp – (1-0) – H2H and prediction
- Tallon GriekspoorGriekspoor – Yannick HanfmannHanfmann (1-2) – H2H and prediction
- Zizou BergsBergs – Alexander BublikBublik (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Ugo HumbertHumbert – Fabian MarozsanMarozsan (2-0) – H2H and prediction
- Francisco CerundoloCerundolo – Alexander ShevchenkoShevchenko (2-1) – H2H and prediction
- Mariano NavoneNavone – Felix Auger AliassimeAuger Aliassime (0-0) – H2H and prediction