H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Diego Nargiso vs Mark Woodforde H2H: 1-3
Mark Woodforde holds a 3–1 lead over Diego Nargiso in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on grass, while Mark Woodforde leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Mark Woodforde won the 1992 Tokyo Indoor second round 6-3 7-6(5).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ITA
Age 56
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 60
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 1992* | Tokyo Indoor | ATP 250 | R64 | Carpet | Mark Woodforde | 6-3 7-6(5) | Diego Nargiso | Match data |
| Jun 26, 1991* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Diego Nargiso | 6-4 7-6(7) 7-6(3) | Mark Woodforde | Match data |
| Sep 4, 1988* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Mark Woodforde | 6-1 5-7 6-3 6-0 | Diego Nargiso | Match data |
| Jun 26, 1988* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Mark Woodforde | 6-3 6-4 6-3 | Diego Nargiso | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diego Nargiso | #1,400 | #67 | 531 | 1,702 | 94 | 152 | 38.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mark Woodforde | #985 | #19 | 1,291 | 1,922 | 313 | 294 | 51.6% | 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 | Diego Nargiso | Mark Woodforde | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1987 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #191 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1988 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #90 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1989 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #150 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 | 1985 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #127 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1990 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #147 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 | 1986 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #181 | 1,546 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 1991 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #109 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 | 1987 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #67 | 1,648 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 1992 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #88 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 | 1988 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #42 | 1,800 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 1993 | 8–23 | 25.8% | #120 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 | 1989 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #75 | 1,710 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 1994 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #118 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 1990 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #101 | 1,716 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 1995 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #183 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 | 1991 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #88 | 1,631 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1996 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #280 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 1992 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #40 | 1,814 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1997 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #152 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #28 | 1,792 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 1998 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #128 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #43 | 1,792 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 1999 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #220 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 31–25 | 55.4% | #51 | 1,760 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2000 | 8–4 | 66.7% | #134 | 1,612 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 32–25 | 56.1% | #27 | 1,800 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #46 | 1,731 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #58 | 1,747 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #130 | 1,611 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #321 | 1,584 | 0 | 4 |