H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Dominic Thiem vs Marcos Baghdatis H2H: 0-1
Marcos Baghdatis holds a 1–0 lead over Dominic Thiem in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Marcos Baghdatis leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Marcos Baghdatis won the 2018 Wimbledon first round 6-4 7-5 2-0 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUT
Age 32
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CYP
Age 41
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 4, 2018* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Marcos Baghdatis | 6-4 7-5 2-0 (ret.) | Dominic Thiem | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dominic Thiem | #1,174 | #3 | 9,125 | 2,241 | 337 | 207 | 61.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 17 |
| 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 | Dominic Thiem | Marcos Baghdatis | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #638 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #309 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2013 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #139 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #39 | 1,848 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #55 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #20 | 1,889 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #12 | 1,842 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2016 | 58–24 | 70.7% | #8 | 2,015 | 0 | 7 | 2007 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #16 | 1,937 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2017 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #5 | 1,958 | 0 | 8 | 2008 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #98 | 1,815 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2018 | 50–21 | 70.4% | #8 | 2,064 | 0 | 11 | 2009 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #42 | 1,810 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2019 | 48–17 | 73.8% | #4 | 2,145 | 0 | 16 | 2010 | 41–27 | 60.3% | #20 | 1,852 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2020 | 24–7 | 77.4% | #3 | 2,200 | 1 | 17 | 2011 | 26–27 | 49.1% | #44 | 1,844 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2021 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #15 | 2,014 | 1 | 17 | 2012 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,897 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 2022 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,907 | 1 | 17 | 2013 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #87 | 1,804 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2023 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #98 | 1,799 | 1 | 17 | 2014 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #85 | 1,703 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2024 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #524 | 1,627 | 1 | 17 | 2015 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #46 | 1,869 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #36 | 1,884 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,839 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #124 | 1,723 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #179 | 1,740 | 0 | 4 |