H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 13:16 UTC
Borna Coric vs Thiemo de Bakker H2H: 1-0
Borna Coric holds a 1–0 lead over Thiemo de Bakker in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Borna Coric leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Borna Coric won the 2016 Rotterdam third round 7-6(9) 4-6 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Croatia
Age 29
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
NED
Age 37
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2016* | Rotterdam | ATP 500 | R32 | Hard | Borna Coric | 7-6(9) 4-6 6-3 | Thiemo de Bakker | Match data |
| Aug 25, 2014 | US Open | Grand Slam | Q1 | Hard | Borna Coric | 1-0 (ret.) | Thiemo de Bakker | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Borna Coric | #237 | #12 | 2,695 | 2,047 | 200 | 187 | 51.7% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Thiemo de Bakker | #1,382 | #40 | 1,010 | 1,853 | 54 | 80 | 40.3% | 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 | Borna Coric | Thiemo de Bakker | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #303 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2014 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #102 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #464 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2015 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #44 | 1,824 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #444 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2016 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #48 | 1,866 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #249 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2017 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #48 | 1,803 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #96 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2018 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #12 | 2,014 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #43 | 1,762 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2019 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #28 | 1,814 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #223 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2020 | 15–10 | 60.0% | #24 | 1,883 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2021 | 6–3 | 66.7% | #73 | 1,891 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #146 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2022 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,931 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #144 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2023 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,789 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #99 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2024 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #90 | 1,650 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #257 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2025 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #115 | 1,574 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #242 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #511 | 1,537 | 0 | 0 |