Nicolas Kicker vs Facundo Bagnis — Temuco CH Quarter-final

Temuco CH · CHALLENGER · Quarter-final
Nicolas Kicker
ARG8
Nicolas Kicker
#322ATP
1385ELO
1345Hard ELO
33 yrs · 178 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLWLWWWL
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 21 November 2022
hard
ARG1
Facundo Bagnis
#431ATP
1591ELO
1513Hard ELO
36 yrs · 183 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWLWWLWWWL
Kicker N.
6-0 6-2
Bagnis F.
Kicker N.
662
Bagnis F.
020

Nicolas Kicker defeated Facundo Bagnis 6-0 6-2 in the Temuco CH quarter-final on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Facundo Bagnis came in leading the head-to-head 2–0. Nicolas Kicker claimed a first win over Facundo Bagnis in three meetings, narrowing the head-to-head to 2–1.

Key context

Head to head

0–2
DateTournamentRoundSurfaceWinnerScore
2021-02-22CordobaR32clayFacundo Bagnis6-1 6-4
2016-02-22Sao PauloQ1clayFacundo Bagnis5-7 6-4 6-2

Serve vs return

This season
Kicker N.serving70% hold

wins 58% of points on serve vs Bagnis F.

Bagnis F.serving74% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Kicker N.

Serve advantage — Bagnis F.

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Statistics

This season
Kicker N.Bagnis F.
1st serve in·Slight edge
68%
63%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
64%
70%
2nd serve points won·Even
49%
51%
Service points won·Even
59%
63%
Return points won·Even
42%
40%
Break points saved·Even
58%
62%
Aces / match·Dominant
1.1
4.6
Double faults / match·Clear edge
1.9
2.7

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (170 vs 198). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Kicker N.Bagnis F.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
30
54
Break points saved·Dominant
56
92
Break points won·Slight edge
45
35
Deciding sets·Dominant
30
89
Tiebreaks·Dominant
51
3

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Kicker N.
5.2
Clear underdogUmpiry Score
Bagnis F.
6.7
Slight advantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
2.7Hard Elo 1345
Surface ELO
7.3+168 Hard Elo edge
2.0Overall Elo 1385
ELO gap
8.0Overall Elo 1591
5.0
H2H
5.0
3.6
Surface form
3.2
Fatigue & Travel
5.7
Minutes 14d
0.0
4.0
3-set count
0.0
6.0
Prev. match
8.0
6.0
Surface transition
6.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Freshness

Recent load
Kicker N.Bagnis F.
Freshness·
100
—

Kicker N.: 18 days rest. Higher means fresher. About

Conditions

Court speed
Medium-fastrewards aggression
SlowFast
Final
Andreozzi G.
Kicker N.[8]
4-66-46-2
Semi-finals
Andreozzi G.
Gomez E.[2]
3-67-56-1
Kicker N.[8]
Mejia N.
6-26-716-3
Quarter-finals
Andreozzi G.
Otegui J.
6-16-1
Gomez E.[2]
Olivo R.[7]
6-33-66-2
Kicker N.[8]
Bagnis F.[1]
6-06-2
Mejia N.
Hardt N.
6-716-46-4
R16
Gomez E.[2]
Farjat T.
6-17-5
Mejia N.
Lock B.
6-46-3
Hardt N.
Ayeni O.
6-33-67-5
Bagnis F.[1]
Torres J.
6-36-2
Otegui J.
Decamps G.
7-676-4
Kicker N.[8]
Reis Da Silva J.
3-66-46-3
Andreozzi G.
Tirante T.
7-646-776-4
Olivo R.[7]
Domingues J.
6-27-61
R32
Reis Da Silva J.
Galarza J.
6-45-76-3
Bagnis F.[1]
Lipovsek Puches T.
6-26-0
Ayeni O.
Navone M.
7-666-4
Gomez E.[2]
Paz J.
6-46-3
Farjat T.
Villanueva G.
6-36-4
Domingues J.
Bicknell B.
6-46-2
Olivo R.[7]
Zeballos F.
7-51-66-2
Otegui J.
Ficovich J.[4]
7-56-2
Decamps G.
Leite W.
6-36-0
Andreozzi G.
Mena F.[6]
2-67-606-2
Lock B.
Rodriguez Taverna S.[5]
7-636-2
Mejia N.
Burruchaga R.
6-36-1
Hardt N.
Bruna N.
6-16-3
Kicker N.[8]
Alvarez N.
6-27-5
Tirante T.
Dutra Da Silva D.
6-35-3
Torres J.
Zukas M.
6-02-1