H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 01:16 UTC
Dusan Lajovic vs Jurgen Zopp H2H: 2-0
Dusan Lajovic holds a 2–0 lead over Jurgen Zopp in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Dusan Lajovic leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Dusan Lajovic won the 2015 Bucharest third round 7-5 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.
Serbia
Age 36
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
EST
Age 38
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2015* | Bucharest | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Dusan Lajovic | 7-5 6-1 | Jurgen Zopp | Match data |
| May 29, 2014* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R64 | Clay | Dusan Lajovic | 6-2 6-4 6-4 | Jurgen Zopp | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dusan Lajovic | #152 | #23 | 1,895 | 1,900 | 192 | 257 | 42.8% | 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 | Dusan Lajovic | Jurgen Zopp | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #434 | 1,455 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2011 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #190 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2012 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2013 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #116 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #146 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2014 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #69 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #89 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2015 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #76 | 1,794 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #334 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2016 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #93 | 1,751 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #189 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2017 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #75 | 1,717 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #163 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2018 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,822 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #329 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2019 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #34 | 1,704 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,616 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2020 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #26 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #143 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2021 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #33 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2022 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #80 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2023 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #52 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2024 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #81 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2025 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #121 | 1,607 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2026 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #152 | 1,591 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |