H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Daniil Medvedev vs Viktor Troicki H2H: 1-0
Daniil Medvedev holds a 1–0 lead over Viktor Troicki in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Daniil Medvedev leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Daniil Medvedev won the 2016 Moscow fourth round 3-6 6-3 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Russia
Age 30
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 40
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 21, 2016* | Moscow | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Daniil Medvedev | 3-6 6-3 6-1 | Viktor Troicki | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daniil Medvedev | #8 | #1 | 10,780 | 2,285 | 427 | 182 | 70.1% | 1 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 10 | 23 |
| Viktor Troicki | #1,433 | #12 | 2,015 | 2,008 | 268 | 256 | 51.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Daniil Medvedev | Viktor Troicki | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 2016 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #99 | 1,684 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #211 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2017 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #65 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #127 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2018 | 41–23 | 64.1% | #16 | 2,033 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,786 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2019 | 58–21 | 73.4% | #5 | 2,126 | 0 | 7 | 2009 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #29 | 1,803 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2020 | 24–9 | 72.7% | #4 | 2,177 | 0 | 9 | 2010 | 36–25 | 59.0% | #28 | 1,935 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2021 | 50–12 | 80.6% | #2 | 2,244 | 1 | 13 | 2011 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #22 | 1,846 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2022 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #7 | 2,064 | 1 | 15 | 2012 | 21–26 | 44.7% | #38 | 1,769 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2023 | 67–18 | 78.8% | #3 | 2,160 | 1 | 20 | 2013 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #75 | 1,823 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2024 | 44–18 | 71.0% | #5 | 2,099 | 1 | 20 | 2014 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #101 | 1,903 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2025 | 43–23 | 65.2% | #13 | 1,950 | 1 | 21 | 2015 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #22 | 1,844 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2026 | 31–12 | 72.1% | #8 | 1,936 | 1 | 23 | 2016 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #29 | 1,895 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 23–28 | 45.1% | #55 | 1,814 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #205 | 1,647 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #158 | 1,635 | 0 | 3 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #201 | 1,634 | 0 | 3 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #232 | 1,643 | 0 | 3 |