H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Bernard Tomic vs Lukas Lacko H2H: 2-0
Bernard Tomic holds a 2–0 lead over Lukas Lacko in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Bernard Tomic leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Bernard Tomic won the 2019 New York third round 6-4 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Australia
Age 33
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 38
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2019* | New York | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Bernard Tomic | 6-4 6-2 | Lukas Lacko | Match data |
| May 23, 2012* | Nice | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Bernard Tomic | 6-2 6-3 | Lukas Lacko | Match data |
| Feb 21, 2011 | Delray Beach | ATP 250 | Q1 | Hard | Lukas Lacko | 7-5 6-3 | Bernard Tomic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bernard Tomic | #206 | #17 | 1,885 | 1,968 | 170 | 182 | 48.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Lukas Lacko | #1,505 | #44 | 917 | 1,837 | 81 | 133 | 37.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Bernard Tomic | Lukas Lacko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #286 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2010 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #208 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2011 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2012 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #52 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2013 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #51 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #325 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #56 | 1,828 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #82 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #18 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #89 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #26 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #112 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2017 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,726 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #51 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2018 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #83 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #81 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2019 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #185 | 1,632 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #94 | 1,735 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,598 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #110 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,613 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #122 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #92 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #114 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #183 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #192 | 1,595 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |