Kimmer Coppejans and Duje Ajdukovic will face off in the 2nd round of the Francavilla Challenger for the 1st time in their career. They are scheduled to compete on Thursday at 5:00 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 Kimmer Coppejans who should win in 3 sets.
As per the initial odds, Kimmer Coppejans is the pick to win this match.
Kimmer Coppejans -> 1.51
Duje Ajdukovic -> 2.43
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 Kimmer Coppejans vs. Duje Ajdukovic
There is no head to head record between Kimmer Coppejans and Duje Ajdukovic since this will be the first time that they will fight against each other in the main tour.
Kimmer Coppejans
Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2024 | 28-8 | 22-4 | 6-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2023 | 31-30 | 4-5 | 24-19 | 0-5 | 3-1 | 0-0 |
2022 | 36-28 | 6-8 | 30-20 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2021 | 22-27 | 4-5 | 17-18 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 0-1 |
2020 | 14-17 | 6-5 | 5-9 | 3-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Ranked no. 176, the Belgian reached the 2nd round after beating Renzo Olivo 5-7 6-1 6-4.
In the 1st round against Olivo, The Belgian recovered from a 1-set down deficit before winning (5-7 6-1 6-4). During the match, Coppejans scored 107 points vs Olivo’s 89. The Belgian was very aggressive to blast 48 winners.
Talking about the service games, Coppejans was unable to score even 1 ace in the course of the match and he committed only 5 double faults. Kimmer Coppejans lost the serve 3 times and he saved 8 break points. Furthermore, Coppejans put 73% of his first serves in, winning 68% (48/71) of the points behind his 1st serve and 50% (13/26) on the 2nd serve. The Belgian broke Olivo 5 times after converting 45% of his break points (5/11).
Coppejans has good win-loss record in the last 10 years having won 56% of his matches (333-257). 11-8 on clay in 2023. Regarding his performance on the same surface of this event, Coppejans has a compiled 243-163 match record in the last years on clay.
Coppejans’s best result of the current year was getting to the semifinal in the Sanremo Challenger.
The Belgian has a compiled 12-13 win-loss record in 2023, 11-8 on clay (See FULL STATS).
Previously in the Francavilla Challenger
Duje Ajdukovic
Year | Total | Hard | Clay | I.hard | Grass | Carpet |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2024 | 38-31 | 18-13 | 13-10 | 7-5 | 0-3 | 0-0 |
2023 | 59-25 | 2-1 | 50-21 | 7-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2022 | 27-31 | 0-1 | 22-23 | 3-4 | 2-3 | 0-0 |
2021 | 33-31 | 1-1 | 29-23 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
2020 | 30-11 | 4-3 | 22-6 | 2-1 | 0-0 | 2-1 |
Ranked no. 375, Duje got to the 2nd round after beating Daniel Cukierman 4-6 6-3 6-2, Enrico Dalla Valle 6-4 5-7 6-3 and Andrea Arnaboldi 6-2 6-2.
In the 1st round, Duje had a good straight sets win against Arnaboldi (6-2 6-2). During the match Ajdukovic scored 61 points vs Arnaboldi’s 44. Duje was exceptionally aggressive to blast 27 winners.
Talking about serving, Ajdukovic blasted 3 aces and he committed only 1 double fault for the entire match. Duje Ajdukovic was pretty effective on serve to win 71% (27/38) 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 Croatian broke Arnaboldi 4 times after converting 67% of his break points (4/6).
Duje’s best result of the year was getting to the final in M25 Dubrovnik,M25 Split and M15 Kursumlijska Banja.
Duje has an aggregate 20-8 win-loss record in 2023, 20-8 on clay (See FULL STATS).
H2H Performance in the tournament
Matches, sets, games and points
Points | Coppejans | Ajdukovic |
---|---|---|
Match played | 1 | 3 |
Tot Set | 3 | 8 |
Tot Games | 29 | 74 |
Pts | 107-89 | 254-217 |
Total Points | 196 | 471 |
Winners | 48 | 100 |
%Winners | 45% | 39% |
Coppejans played 1 match while Ajdukovic competed in 3 matches. Ajdukovic started his run from the qualifications while Coppejans had a direct access to the main draw. Both players lost a set in the event. Kimmer Coppejans conceded 1 set, while Duje Ajdukovic dropped 2 sets. Coppejans has played 5 set(s) less than Ajdukovic (3 vs 8). Therefore, Coppejans played 45 games less than Ajdukovic. Kimmer scored 48 winners (45% of the total points). On the other side, Duje fired 100 winners (39%).
Serve Performance
Serve | Coppejans | Ajdukovic |
---|---|---|
Aces | 0 | 10 |
Avg per match | 0 | 3.3 |
1st in | 71/97 | 138/220 |
%1st in | 73% | 63% |
1st pts | 48/71 | 100/138 |
%1st pts | 68% | 72% |
2nd pts | 13/26 | 45/82 |
%2nd pts | 50% | 55% |
Coppejans didn’t manage to fire a single ace to far. Ajdukovic recorded 10 aces (3.3 per match). Coppejans won 68% points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 50% of the points. On the other side, Ajdukovic won 72% of the points on his first serve. He had a solid display on his second serve to win 55% of the points.
How they played the important points
Breaks | Coppejans | Ajdukovic |
---|---|---|
Won | 5 | 13 |
Converted | 5/11 | 13/29 |
% Converted | 45% | 45% |
Conceded | 11 | 15 |
Saved | 8 | 10 |
% Saved | 73% | 67% |
Times Broken | 3 | 5 |
Coppejans broke his opponent 5 times with a 45% conversion rate. Kimmer conceded his serve 3 times and he saved 73% of the break points that he conceded. Ajdukovic broke his opponents 13 times with a 45% conversion rate. The Croatian conceded his serve 5 times and he saved 67% of the break points that he conceded.
Coppejans | |||
R1 Olivo |
Total | ||
---|---|---|---|
Score | 5-7 6-1 6-4 | ||
Tot Set | 3 | 3 | |
Tot Games | 29 | 29 | |
pts | 107-89 | 107-89 | |
Total points | 196 | 196 | |
Winners | 48 | 48 | |
%Winners | 45% | 45% | |
SERVE | |||
Aces | 0 | 0 | |
Double Faults | 5 | 5 | |
1st in | 71/97 | 71/97 | |
% 1st in | 73% | 73% | |
1st pts | 48/71 | 48/71 | |
% 1st pts | 68% | 68% | |
2nd pts | 13/26 | 13/26 | |
% 2nd pts | 50% | 50% | |
Breaks | |||
Won | 5 | 5 | |
Converted | 5/11 | 5/11 | |
Converted % | 45% | 45% | |
Conceded | 11 | 11 | |
Saved | 8/11 | 8 | |
Saved % | 73% | 73% | |
Times Broken | 3 | 3 |
Ajdukovic | |||||
Q1 Cukierman |
Q3 Dalla Valle |
R1 Arnaboldi |
Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Score | 4-6 6-3 6-2 | 6-4 5-7 6-3 | 6-2 6-2 | ||
Tot Set | 3 | 3 | 2 | 8 | |
Tot Games | 27 | 31 | 16 | 74 | |
pts | 101-87 | 92-86 | 61-44 | 254-217 | |
Total points | 188 | 178 | 105 | 471 | |
Winners | 34 | 39 | 27 | 100 | |
%Winners | 34% | 42% | 44% | 39% | |
SERVE | |||||
Aces | 1 | 6 | 3 | 10 | |
Double Faults | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | |
1st in | 49/85 | 51/83 | 38/52 | 138/220 | |
% 1st in | 58% | 61% | 73% | 63% | |
1st pts | 34/49 | 39/51 | 27/38 | 100/138 | |
% 1st pts | 69% | 76% | 71% | 72% | |
2nd pts | 23/36 | 14/32 | 8/14 | 45/82 | |
% 2nd pts | 64% | 44% | 57% | 55% | |
Breaks | |||||
Won | 4 | 5 | 4 | 13 | |
Converted | 4/13 | 5/10 | 4/6 | 13/29 | |
Converted % | 31% | 50% | 67% | 45% | |
Conceded | 9 | 3 | 3 | 15 | |
Saved | 7/9 | 0/3 | 3/3 | 10 | |
Saved % | 78% | 0% | 100% | 178% | |
Times Broken | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 |
Head 2 Head
Tennis Scores in Francavilla Challenger
- Lorenzo GiustinoGiustino – Dimitar KuzmanovKuzmanov (1-6 7-61 6-2) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Raphael CollignonCollignon – Stefano TravagliaTravaglia (6-3 6-4) – Stats, scores, rankings
- Benoit PairePaire – Alessandro GiannessiGiannessi (7-5 7-5) – Stats, scores, rankings
Upcoming matches in the draw
- Gianluca MagerMager – Nicolas Moreno De AlboranMoreno De Alboran (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Elmar EjupovicEjupovic – Thiago Agustin TiranteAgustin Tirante (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Kimmer CoppejansCoppejans – Duje AjdukovicAjdukovic (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Giovanni FonioFonio – Alejandro TabiloTabilo (0-0) – H2H and prediction
- Nicholas David IonelDavid Ionel – Edoardo LavagnoLavagno (2-1) – H2H and prediction