Benjamin Bonzi and Nick Chappell will fight against each other in the semifinal of the Potchefstroom 1 Challenger for the 2nd time of their career. They are scheduled to play on Saturday at 11:00 am on COURT 10. In the following lines you can find the head to head analysis and prediction.
Prediction, odds and live streaming
The pick for Tennis Tonic is Benjamin Bonzi who should win in 2 sets.
As per the initial odds, Benjamin Bonzi is the pick to win this match.
Benjamin Bonzi -> 1.27
Nick Chappell -> 3.76
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 Benjamin Bonzi vs. Nick Chappell
This will be the 2nd time that Benjamin Bonzi and Nick Chappell square off. The head to head is 1-0 for Bonzi (see full H2H stats), 1-0 on hard.
The last time that they locked horns, Bonzi won 4-6 6-2 6-1 in the 1st round in Greece F5 (Heraklion) back in 2017.
Benjamin Bonzi
Ranked no. 137, Benjamin reached the 1st round after beating Geoffrey Blancaneaux 6-2 6-4, Roberto Quiroz 3-6 6-4 6-3 and Mirza Basic 6-3 6-1.
In the quarter, Benjamin had a good straight sets win against Basic (6-3 6-1). During the match Bonzi scored 57 points vs Basic’s 35. Benjamin was pretty aggressive to blast 24 winners.
Regarding the service games, Bonzi blasted 5 aces and he committed only 2 double faults. Benjamin Bonzi was quite effective on serve to win 89% (24/27) of his 1st serve and 59% (10/17) on the second serve. This was the main reason for not conceding a single break during the match. The French player broke Basic 4 times after converting 50% of his break points (4/8).
Overall Performance in this tournament
Bonzi has lost 1 set in this competition to win 57% of the points he played.
Bonzi has a solid win-loss record in the last 6 years having won 63% of his matches (209-125). 3-1 on hard in 2021. In connection with his performance on the same surface of this event, Bonzi has a 60-24 match record in the last 6 years on hard.
Bonzi’s best result of the year was reaching the final in the Istanbul Challenger.
The French player has a 11-4 win-loss record in 2021, 3-1 on hard (See FULL STATS).
Last year in the Potchefstroom 1 Challenger
Bonzi didn’t play in the Potchefstroom 1 Challenger in 2020.
Nick Chappell
Ranked no. 411, Nick got to the 1st round after beating Lucas Miedler 6-2 6-4, Jack Draper 6-3 6-4, Nicola Kuhn 6-1 2-6 7-63, Hugo Grenier 6-2 6-4 and Peter Polansky 6-4 6-73 6-4.
In the quarter, Nick defeated Polansky (6-4 6-73 6-4). During the match Chappell scored 110 points vs Polansky’s 101. Chappell was pretty aggressive to blast 48 winners.
Talking about serving, Chappell scored 9 aces and he committed only 3 double faults. Overall, Nick Chappell was very effective on serve to win 73% (48/66) of his 1st serve and 55% (23/42) on the second serve. However, this didn’t prevent his to concede the serve twice. The American broke Polansky 4 times after converting 67% of his break points (4/6).
Overall Performance in this tournament
Chappell has conceded 2 set in the tournament to win 54% of the points he played.
The American has a 5-0 win-loss record in 2021, 5-0 on hard (See FULL STATS).
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
| Points | Bonzi | Chappell |
|---|---|---|
| Match played | 3 | 5 |
| Tot Set | 7 | 12 |
| Tot Games | 62 | 116 |
| Pts | 208-154 | 379-320 |
| Total Points | 362 | 699 |
| Winners | 81 | 169 |
| %Winners | 39% | 45% |
Bonzi played 3 matches while Chappell competed in 5 matches. Chappell started his run from the qualifications while Bonzi had a direct access to the main draw. Both players lost a set in the event. Benjamin Bonzi conceded 1 set, while Nick Chappell lost 2 sets. Bonzi has played 5 set(s) less than Chappell (7 vs 12). Therefore, Bonzi played 54 games less than Chappell. Benjamin scored 81 winners (39% of the total points). On the other side, Nick managed to score 169 winners (45%).
Serve Performance
| Serve | Bonzi | Chappell |
|---|---|---|
| Aces | 17 | 23 |
| Avg per match | 5.7 | 4.6 |
| 1st in | 99/165 | 223/360 |
| %1st in | 60% | 62% |
| 1st pts | 81/99 | 169/223 |
| %1st pts | 82% | 76% |
| 2nd pts | 44/66 | 69/137 |
| %2nd pts | 67% | 50% |
Bonzi scored 17 aces (5.7 per match). Chappell fired 23 aces (4.6 per match). Bonzi won 82% points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 67% of the points. On the other side, Chappell won 76% of the points behind his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 50% of the points.
How they played the important points
| Breaks | Bonzi | Chappell |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 10 | 19 |
| Converted | 10/29 | 19/32 |
| % Converted | 34% | 59% |
| Conceded | 7 | 24 |
| Saved | 5 | 15 |
| % Saved | 71% | 63% |
| Times Broken | 2 | 9 |
Bonzi broke his opponents 10 times with a 34% conversion rate. Bonzi dropped his serve twice and he saved 71% of the break points that he conceded. Nick broke his opponents 19 times with a 59% conversion rate. Nick conceded his serve 9 times and he saved 63% of the break points that he conceded.
| Bonzi | |||||
| R1 Blancaneaux |
R2 Quiroz |
1/4 Basic |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-2 6-4 | 3-6 6-4 6-3 | 6-3 6-1 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7 | |
| Tot Games | 18 | 28 | 16 | 62 | |
| pts | 70-49 | 81-70 | 57-35 | 208-154 | |
| Total points | 119 | 151 | 92 | 362 | |
| Winners | 26 | 31 | 24 | 81 | |
| %Winners | 37% | 38% | 42% | 39% | |
| SERVE | |||||
| Aces | 5 | 7 | 5 | 17 | |
| Double Faults | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1st in | 32/49 | 40/72 | 27/44 | 99/165 | |
| % 1st in | 65% | 56% | 61% | 60% | |
| 1st pts | 26/32 | 31/40 | 24/27 | 81/99 | |
| % 1st pts | 81% | 78% | 89% | 82% | |
| 2nd pts | 12/17 | 22/32 | 10/17 | 44/66 | |
| % 2nd pts | 71% | 69% | 59% | 67% | |
| Breaks | |||||
| Won | 3 | 3 | 4 | 10 | |
| Converted | 3/15 | 3/6 | 4/8 | 10/29 | |
| Converted % | 20% | 50% | 50% | 34% | |
| Conceded | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7 | |
| Saved | 2/2 | 1/3 | 2/2 | 5 | |
| Saved % | 100% | 33% | 100% | 78% | |
| Times Broken | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | |
| Chappell | |||||||
| Q1 Miedler |
Q3 Draper |
R1 Kuhn |
R2 Grenier |
1/4 Polansky |
Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 6-2 6-4 | 6-3 6-4 | 6-1 2-6 7-63 | 6-2 6-4 | 6-4 6-73 6-4 | ||
| Tot Set | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 12 | |
| Tot Games | 18 | 19 | 28 | 18 | 33 | 116 | |
| pts | 60-43 | 63-48 | 84-81 | 62-47 | 110-101 | 379-320 | |
| Total points | 103 | 111 | 165 | 109 | 211 | 699 | |
| Winners | 20 | 25 | 49 | 27 | 48 | 169 | |
| %Winners | 33% | 40% | 58% | 44% | 44% | 45% | |
| SERVE | |||||||
| Aces | 6 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 23 | |
| Double Faults | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 14 | |
| 1st in | 26/46 | 34/57 | 61/94 | 36/55 | 66/108 | 223/360 | |
| % 1st in | 57% | 60% | 65% | 65% | 61% | 62% | |
| 1st pts | 20/26 | 25/34 | 49/61 | 27/36 | 48/66 | 169/223 | |
| % 1st pts | 77% | 74% | 80% | 75% | 73% | 76% | |
| 2nd pts | 11/20 | 15/23 | 12/33 | 8/19 | 23/42 | 69/137 | |
| % 2nd pts | 55% | 65% | 36% | 42% | 55% | 50% | |
| Breaks | |||||||
| Won | 5 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 19 | |
| Converted | 5/9 | 3/4 | 2/2 | 5/11 | 4/6 | 19/32 | |
| Converted % | 56% | 75% | 100% | 45% | 67% | 59% | |
| Conceded | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 24 | |
| Saved | 2/4 | 2/3 | 3/5 | 2/4 | 6/8 | 15 | |
| Saved % | 50% | 67% | 60% | 50% | 75% | 101% | |
| Times Broken | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | |
Head 2 Head
WWWWWWWLWW
LWWWLLWWWW Tennis Scores in Potchefstroom 1 Challenger
- Liam BroadyBroady – Chun Hsin TsengHsin Tseng (6-3 6-3) – See score progression
- Nick ChappellChappell – Peter PolanskyPolansky (6-4 6-73 6-4) – See score progression
- Cem IlkelIlkel – Dimitar KuzmanovKuzmanov (4-6 6-3 6-2) – See score progression
- Benjamin BonziBonzi – Mirza BasicBasic (6-3 6-1) – See score progression
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Nick ChappellChappell – Benjamin BonziBonzi (0-1) – H2H and prediction
- Cem IlkelIlkel – Liam BroadyBroady (0-0) – H2H and prediction
