H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 01:16 UTC
Albert Ramos-Vinolas vs John Isner H2H: 1-2
John Isner holds a 2–1 lead over Albert Ramos-Vinolas in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while John Isner leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, John Isner won the 2019 Miami Masters third round 7-5 7-6(6).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Spain
Age 38
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 41
Right-Handed
208 cm / 6'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 25, 2019* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | John Isner | 7-5 7-6(6) | Albert Ramos-Vinolas | Match data |
| May 16, 2018* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Clay | Albert Ramos-Vinolas | 6-7(5) 7-6(2) 7-6(5) | John Isner | Match data |
| May 16, 2017* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | John Isner | 6-7(4) 7-6(4) 6-1 | Albert Ramos-Vinolas | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Albert Ramos-Vinolas | #477 | #17 | 2,180 | 1,966 | 276 | 327 | 45.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| John Isner | #660 | #8 | 3,720 | 2,053 | 467 | 293 | 61.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 16 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Albert Ramos-Vinolas | John Isner | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 22 | 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #123 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #106 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #66 | 1,722 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #144 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 26–30 | 46.4% | #50 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #34 | 1,828 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #83 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2014 | 13–20 | 39.4% | #63 | 1,725 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #18 | 2,021 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2015 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #54 | 1,768 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #14 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2016 | 34–30 | 53.1% | #27 | 1,886 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,983 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2017 | 33–30 | 52.4% | #23 | 1,813 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #19 | 1,922 | 0 | 9 |
| 30 | 2018 | 18–28 | 39.1% | #65 | 1,700 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 2,026 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 2019 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #41 | 1,854 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #19 | 2,019 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | 2020 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #46 | 1,704 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #17 | 1,984 | 0 | 12 |
| 33 | 2021 | 24–25 | 49.0% | #45 | 1,730 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #10 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 |
| 34 | 2022 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #39 | 1,741 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,921 | 0 | 15 |
| 35 | 2023 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #89 | 1,660 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #25 | 1,845 | 0 | 15 |
| 36 | 2024 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #165 | 1,570 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 23–11 | 67.6% | #24 | 1,933 | 0 | 16 |
| 37 | 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #403 | 1,570 | 0 | 4 | 2022 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #41 | 1,891 | 0 | 16 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #172 | 1,698 | 0 | 16 |