H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC

David Ferrer vs Marcos Baghdatis H2H: 4-2

David Ferrer holds a 4–2 lead over Marcos Baghdatis in their ATP head-to-head. Across 6 main-draw meetings, David Ferrer leads 3–1 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Marcos Baghdatis won the 2015 Nottingham third round 6-2 7-6(4).

Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.

David Ferrer
ESP Age 44 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
4 – 2
6 main draw meetings
Marcos Baghdatis
CYP Age 41 Right-Handed 183 cm / 6'0"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Jun 24, 2015* Nottingham ATP 250 R32 Grass Marcos Baghdatis #59 6-2 7-6(4) David Ferrer #7 Match data
Jan 20, 2013* Australian Open Grand Slam R32 Hard David Ferrer #5 6-4 6-2 6-3 Marcos Baghdatis #35 Match data
May 12, 2010* Madrid Masters Masters 1000 R32 Clay David Ferrer #12 1-6 6-3 7-5 Marcos Baghdatis #28 Match data
Jan 21, 2010* Australian Open Grand Slam R64 Hard Marcos Baghdatis #31 4-6 3-6 7-6(4) 6-3 6-1 David Ferrer #18 Match data
Feb 7, 2009* Johannesburg ATP 250 QF Hard David Ferrer #13 7-5 6-2 Marcos Baghdatis #85 Match data
Aug 19, 2006* Cincinnati Masters Masters 1000 R16 Hard David Ferrer #16 7-5 6-4 Marcos Baghdatis #10 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
David Ferrer #224 #3 7,220 2,270 700 368 65.5% 0 1 0 7 19 27
Marcos Baghdatis #179 #8 2,111 1,952 324 272 54.4% 0 0 0 0 4 4

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 David Ferrer Marcos Baghdatis
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
19 — — — — — — — 2004 1–1 50.0% #159 1,559 0 0
20 2002 10–6 62.5% #59 1,610 0 1 2005 11–12 47.8% #55 1,694 0 0
21 2003 20–27 42.6% #71 1,672 0 1 2006 33–20 62.3% #12 1,842 0 1
22 2004 29–31 48.3% #49 1,651 0 1 2007 44–22 66.7% #16 1,937 0 2
23 2005 41–28 59.4% #14 1,776 0 1 2008 12–12 50.0% #98 1,815 0 2
24 2006 37–24 60.7% #14 1,815 0 2 2009 18–16 52.9% #42 1,810 0 3
25 2007 57–22 72.2% #5 2,036 0 5 2010 41–27 60.3% #20 1,852 0 4
26 2008 40–20 66.7% #12 1,856 0 7 2011 26–27 49.1% #44 1,844 0 4
27 2009 40–24 62.5% #17 1,853 0 7 2012 31–24 56.4% #36 1,897 0 4
28 2010 58–23 71.6% #7 2,033 0 9 2013 14–22 38.9% #87 1,804 0 4
29 2011 55–19 74.3% #5 2,108 0 11 2014 7–11 38.9% #85 1,703 0 4
30 2012 68–14 82.9% #5 2,241 0 18 2015 26–19 57.8% #46 1,869 0 4
31 2013 63–24 72.4% #3 2,100 0 20 2016 26–23 53.1% #36 1,884 0 4
32 2014 55–24 69.6% #10 2,065 0 21 2017 18–16 52.9% #102 1,839 0 4
33 2015 53–16 76.8% #7 2,126 0 26 2018 12–17 41.4% #124 1,723 0 4
34 2016 33–22 60.0% #21 1,966 0 26 2019 4–3 57.1% #179 1,740 0 4
35 2017 25–21 54.3% #37 1,914 0 27 — — — — — — —
36 2018 8–17 32.0% #125 1,710 0 27 — — — — — — —
37 2019 8–6 57.1% #224 1,804 0 27 — — — — — — —