Borna Coric vs Antoine Escoffier — Lugano CH Round of 16

Lugano CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 16
CRO2
Borna Coric
#855ATP
29 yrs · 188 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLLLLLWWW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 24 February 2025
hard
FRA
Antoine Escoffier
#753ATP
1436ELO
1413Hard ELO
34 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLLWWWLWLL
Coric B.
6-4 6-4
Escoffier A.
Coric B.
662
Escoffier A.
440

Borna Coric defeated Antoine Escoffier 6-4 6-4 in the Lugano CH round of 16 on hard. The upset overturned the form book — Antoine Escoffier came in ranked #753, defending last year's round of 16.

Key context

  • Match story: Borna Coric edged a tight contest from start to finish — 6–4 6–4.

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Coric B.serving85% hold

wins 66% of points on serve vs Escoffier A.

Escoffier A.serving73% hold

wins 60% of points on serve vs Coric B.

Serve advantage — Coric B.

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
Coric B.Escoffier A.
1st serve in·Slight edge
62%
57%
1st serve points won·Slight edge
73%
67%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
55%
48%
Service points won·Slight edge
66%
59%
Return points won·Even
39%
39%
Break points saved·Even
61%
60%
Aces / match·Even
4.0
3.8
Double faults / match·Dominant
1.8
4.5

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (37 vs 36). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Coric B.Escoffier A.
Clutch Rating·Dominant
71
10
Break points saved·Dominant
98
68
Break points won·Clear edge
36
18
Deciding sets·Dominant
84
11
Tiebreaks·Dominant
90
3

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

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Coric B.
5.1
Clear underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Extended break: 28 days (−0.3)
Escoffier A.
4.2
Heavy underdogUmpiry ScorePartial · surface data limited
  • Recent retirement (−1.5)
Form & Matchup
5.0No prior meetings
H2H
5.0
3.2
Surface form
3.3
0.0Lost last 4
Win streak
0.0
Fatigue & Travel
Minutes 14d
8.3
3-set count
7.0
8.0
Prev. match
9.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
6.0

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.

Conditions

Court speed
Fastbig serves, short points
SlowFast
Final
Coric B.[2]
Collignon R.[1]
6-36-1
Semi-finals
Collignon R.[1]
Cassone M.
7-634-66-3
Coric B.[2]
Prizmic D.
6-26-4
Quarter-finals
Collignon R.[1]
Draxl L.[8]
6-46-4
Cassone M.
Van Assche L.[3]
7-620-67-64
Prizmic D.
Gaubas V.[7]
6-26-3
Coric B.[2]
Squire H.[6]
6-26-2
R16
Collignon R.[1]
Durasovic V.
6-47-5
Gaubas V.[7]
Rottgering M.
6-727-56-4
Coric B.[2]
Escoffier A.
6-46-4
Draxl L.[8]
Ruusuvuori E.
6-47-62
Van Assche L.[3]
Choinski J.
6-36-1
Cassone M.
Grenier H.[5]
7-677-66
Squire H.[6]
Bertola R.
7-656-4
Prizmic D.
Blockx A.[4]
6-36-2
R32
Rottgering M.
Zhukayev B.
4-67-6107-65
Prizmic D.
Paul J.
6-36-2
Gaubas V.[7]
Stricker D.
6-31-66-2
Durasovic V.
Hassan B.
6-41-66-4
Ruusuvuori E.
Chidekh C.
6-33-66-4
Draxl L.[8]
Sakamoto R.
6-46-4
Choinski J.
Zahraj P.
6-26-736-3
Cassone M.
Berankis R.
6-16-2
Blockx A.[4]
Prado Angelo J.
6-26-3
Squire H.[6]
Andreev A.
6-37-5
Escoffier A.
Brunold M.
6-26-3
Bertola R.
Butvilas E.
2-67-57-64
Coric B.[2]
Onclin G.
6-46-2
Collignon R.[1]
Sachko V.
6-47-5
Grenier H.[5]
Cui J.
6-26-4
Van Assche L.[3]
Wu T.
2-66-26-0