H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Dusan Lajovic vs Yen-Hsun Lu H2H: 1-0
Dusan Lajovic holds a 1–0 lead over Yen-Hsun Lu in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Dusan Lajovic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Dusan Lajovic won the 2014 Miami Masters second round 6-1 6-7(3) 6-3.
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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
TPE
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2014* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Dusan Lajovic | 6-1 6-7(3) 6-3 | Yen-Hsun Lu | 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 |
| Yen-Hsun Lu | #991 | #33 | 1,244 | 1,855 | 143 | 222 | 39.2% | 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.
| Dusan Lajovic | Yen-Hsun Lu | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #434 | 1,455 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #87 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #190 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #158 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #89 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #116 | 1,557 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #110 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #69 | 1,686 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #64 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #76 | 1,794 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #98 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #93 | 1,751 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #35 | 1,704 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #75 | 1,717 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #82 | 1,708 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,822 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #59 | 1,751 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #34 | 1,704 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #65 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #26 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #38 | 1,798 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #33 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #77 | 1,818 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #80 | 1,656 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #64 | 1,810 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #52 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #71 | 1,704 | 0 | 0 |
| 2024 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #81 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1008 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 |
| 2025 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #121 | 1,607 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #568 | 1,614 | 0 | 0 |
| 2026 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #152 | 1,591 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |