Novak Djokovic vs. Francesco Maestrelli Match Analysis at the Australian Open 2026

Melbourne, Australia — On a warm Thursday afternoon at Melbourne Park, Novak Djokovic took a decisive step toward tennis immortality. In a match that highlighted the chasm between a seasoned legend and a promising newcomer, the 10-time Australian Open champion defeated Italian qualifier Francesco Maestrelli 6-3, 6-2, 6-2 in the Round of 64.

The victory was Djokovic’s 399th Grand Slam match win, leaving him just one shy of becoming the first player in history to reach the 400-win milestone. While the scoreline suggests a routine day at the office, the match offered a fascinating study in Djokovic’s suffocating efficiency against an opponent playing only his second-ever Grand Slam main draw match.

Match Overview: Experience vs. Raw Power

Francesco Maestrelli, ranked No. 141 in the world, entered Rod Laver Arena with the “big game” reputation characteristic of modern tennis powerhouses—a booming serve and aggressive groundstrokes. However, against Djokovic, raw power often dissolves into error.

The match statistics tell the story of a controlled demolition. While Maestrelli managed to strike 29 winners to Djokovic’s 35, he was undone by the consistency of the Serbian, who extracted error after error from the Italian’s racket. Djokovic’s serve was particularly impenetrable for most of the contest; he won 86% of his first-serve points, a number that left Maestrelli with few opportunities to gain a foothold.

Set 1: Establishing Control

The opening set set the tone for the afternoon. Djokovic, serving first, displayed immediate intent. The breakthrough came early in the second game. After a hold to open the match, Djokovic capitalized on Maestrelli’s nerves. The detailed match logs show Djokovic seizing a break for a 2-0 lead, aided by Maestrelli’s erratic forehand.

From there, the set followed a predictable rhythm. Maestrelli found his footing to hold serve in games 4, 6, and 8, relying on his powerful delivery—he would end the match with 10 aces. However, he could not touch the Djokovic serve. The Serbian held comfortably throughout, closing out the set 6-3 in Game 9. The final game of the set was a microcosm of Djokovic’s dominance: he raced to a 40-0 lead with an ace and a backhand winner before Maestrelli briefly threatened, but Djokovic sealed it after a few deuces.

Set 2: The Stranglehold Tightens

If the first set was a feeling-out process, the second was a masterclass in pressure. Djokovic broke Maestrelli immediately in the opening game. The qualifier’s forehand, which had been his primary weapon, began to leak errors under the relentless depth of Djokovic’s returns. At 15-40 in Game 1, Djokovic struck a backhand winner to secure the break.

Maestrelli fought bravely, holding serve in Game 3 and Game 5 to stay within touching distance at 2-3. Game 5 was particularly hard-fought, requiring Maestrelli to save break points and eventually win with a service winner after multiple deuces.

However, the resistance crumbled in the seventh game. Serving at 2-4, Maestrelli fell behind 0-15 after a double fault—one of four he would commit in the match. Djokovic sensed the moment, hitting a forehand winner to go up 15-40. Although Maestrelli saved one break point, a backhand forced error gave Djokovic the insurance break for 5-2. Djokovic then served out the set at love, punctuating it with a forehand winner and an ace.

Set 3: A Brief Hiccup and a Ruthless Response

The third set saw Djokovic race ahead, breaking Maestrelli in the third and fifth games to establish a commanding 4-1 lead. The match appeared destined for a quick conclusion, but tennis often provides late plot twists.

In Game 6, with Djokovic serving at 4-1, his concentration momentarily wavered. A rare sequence of errors—a backhand unforced error and a double fault at 15-40—gifted Maestrelli a break back. It was the only time in the match Djokovic dropped his serve, a blip that the noted perfectionist seemed to take personally.

The response was immediate and devastating. In the very next game (Game 7), Djokovic elevated his level to suffocate any hope of a comeback. He broke Maestrelli at love (0-40), winning four straight points. The final three points of the game were decided by Maestrelli errors—two forehand unforced errors and a backhand forced error—induced by Djokovic’s refusal to miss.

Serving for the match at 5-2, Djokovic was flawless. Game 8 was a procession:

• 15-0: Maestrelli Forehand Forced Error.
• 30-0: Djokovic Backhand Winner.
• 40-0: Maestrelli Backhand Forced Error.
• Game: Maestrelli Backhand Forced Error.

It was a clinical hold to love that encapsulated the entire contest: Djokovic applying pressure until his opponent cracked.

Statistical Breakdown

The stats sheet highlights the difference between a champion and a challenger. Djokovic’s serve was the bedrock of his victory. He won 59% of his first serve points in the final set, but his overall match win percentage on the first serve sat at a formidable 86%.

While Maestrelli hit 29 winners, he also committed 35 unforced errors, a ratio that makes it nearly impossible to threaten a defender of Djokovic’s caliber. In contrast, Djokovic kept his unforced error count to a tidy 23, while matching Maestrelli’s aggression with 35 winners of his own.

Most telling was the performance on break points. Djokovic was ruthless, converting 6 of his 16 opportunities. Maestrelli, by contrast, converted just 1 of the few chances he generated, the lone break in the third set.

Legacy and Looking Ahead

“I didn’t know much about him until yesterday,” Djokovic admitted post-match, acknowledging the Italian’s potential. “He’s got a big serve. He’s got a big game… he’s got the game to go high”.

For Maestrelli, this match will serve as a valuable lesson in the relentless consistency required at the top level. For Djokovic, it is business as usual. He moves into the Round of 32 with his eyes firmly fixed on a 25th major title. As he closes in on 400 Grand Slam wins, the Serbian legend shows no signs of slowing down, turning what could have been a tricky encounter against an unknown quantity into a routine stepping stone toward history.