The Padel Brief

QuarterfinalMenNovember 5, 2026

Augsburger / Di Nenno v Fitzon / Lindmeyer

L. AugsburgerM. Di Nenno
Winner
66
B. FitzonJ. Lindmeyer
04
Grand Stand 200:43

Pre-match odds

Augsburger / Di Nenno

98%

Avg Elo 1825

Fitzon / Lindmeyer

2%

Avg Elo 1480

Elo gap 345

Augsburger / Di Nenno delivered as 98% favourites.

How the odds work

Each pair's strength is the average of its two players' Elo ratings. A 100-point gap makes the stronger pair a 76% favourite; 200 points, 91%. The model is calibrated on 7,500+ pro matches: when it says 70%, the favourite wins about 70% of the time.

These are the odds going into the match day, on the Elo each player carried in, so the result does not leak into them.

Elo ratings: Padel API

Match stats

Augsburger / Di NennoFitzon / Lindmeyer

66%
Points won
34%
74%
Points won on serve
41%
59%
Points won on return
26%
74%
1st-serve points won
41%
0%
2nd-serve points won
0%
59%
Points won returning 1st serve
26%
0%
Points won returning 2nd serve
0%
100%
Break points converted
100%
12
Longest run of points
4
8
Service games
8
Stats by set

Set 1

86%
Points won
14%
86%
Points won on serve
14%
86%
Points won on return
14%
86%
1st-serve points won
14%
0%
2nd-serve points won
0%
86%
Points won returning 1st serve
14%
0%
Points won returning 2nd serve
0%
100%
Break points converted
0%
12
Longest run of points
1
3
Service games
3

Set 2

57%
Points won
43%
68%
Points won on serve
53%
47%
Points won on return
32%
68%
1st-serve points won
53%
0%
2nd-serve points won
0%
47%
Points won returning 1st serve
32%
0%
Points won returning 2nd serve
0%
100%
Break points converted
100%
7
Longest run of points
4
5
Service games
5

Point by point

Scores read Augsburger / Di Nenno first, Fitzon / Lindmeyer second.

54 points shown — the point that wins each game is never published. The feed had gaps during this match, so some games are missing.

Set 16–0

Breaks 3–0

  1. 1–0

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 30–15
    3. 40–15BP
    Break
  2. 2–0

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 15–0
    Hold
  3. 3–0

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 30–0
    3. 40–0BP
    Break
  4. 4–0

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 15–15
    2. 30–15
    3. 40–15
    Hold
  5. 5–0

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 15–15
    3. 30–15
    4. 40–15BP
    Break
  6. 6–0

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 30–0
    3. 40–0
    Hold

Set 26–4

Breaks 2–0

  1. 1–0

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 15–15
    2. 30–15
    3. 40–15BP
    Break
  2. 2–0

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 30–0
    3. 40–0
    Hold
  3. 2–0

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 0–15
    2. 15–15
    3. 30–30
    4. 30–40
    5. 40–40
    6. 40–A

    1 game not captured

    —
  4. 3–2

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 40–30BP
    Break
  5. 4–2

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 0–15
    2. 15–15
    3. 30–15
    4. 40–15
    5. 40–30
    6. 40–40
    Hold
  6. 4–3

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 0–15
    2. 0–30
    3. 0–40
    4. 15–40
    5. 30–40
    6. 15–40
    7. 30–40
    Hold
  7. 5–3

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 30–0
    3. 40–0
    Hold
  8. 5–4

    Fitzon / Lindmeyer serving

    1. 0–15
    2. 0–30
    3. 0–40
    4. 15–40
    Hold
  9. 6–4

    Augsburger / Di Nenno serving

    1. 15–0
    2. 30–0
    3. 30–15
    4. 30–30
    Hold

The point that wins a game is never published by the source feed, so the winner of each game is derived from the next game's score. Where the feed had a gap, no winner is claimed.