H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Denis Istomin vs Jurgen Zopp H2H: 0-1
Jurgen Zopp holds a 1–0 lead over Denis Istomin in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jurgen Zopp leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jurgen Zopp won the 2012 US Open first round 3-6 6-3 6-3 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
UZB
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
EST
Age 38
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2012* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Jurgen Zopp | 3-6 6-3 6-3 7-5 | Denis Istomin | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denis Istomin | #1,509 | #33 | 1,217 | 1,900 | 191 | 245 | 43.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Jurgen Zopp | #1,406 | #71 | 656 | 1,718 | 16 | 31 | 34.0% | 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 | Denis Istomin | Jurgen Zopp | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #200 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2008 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #105 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2009 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #102 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2010 | 29–29 | 50.0% | #40 | 1,767 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #146 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 10–21 | 32.3% | #73 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #89 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 26–29 | 47.3% | #43 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #334 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2013 | 30–29 | 50.8% | #45 | 1,808 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #189 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2014 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #49 | 1,853 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #163 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2015 | 20–23 | 46.5% | #61 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #329 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2016 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #121 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2017 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #63 | 1,724 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #143 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2018 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #92 | 1,679 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2019 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #177 | 1,567 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,545 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2021 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #254 | 1,545 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2022 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #467 | 1,577 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |