H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Facundo Bagnis vs Marcos Baghdatis H2H: 0-1
Marcos Baghdatis holds a 1–0 lead over Facundo Bagnis in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Marcos Baghdatis leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Marcos Baghdatis won the 2016 US Open first round 6-4 6-2 1-1 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Argentina
Age 36
Left-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2016* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Marcos Baghdatis | 6-4 6-2 1-1 (ret.) | Facundo Bagnis | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Facundo Bagnis | #431 | #55 | 985 | 1,760 | 45 | 87 | 34.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | Facundo Bagnis | Marcos Baghdatis | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #159 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #55 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #157 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #12 | 1,842 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #237 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #16 | 1,937 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #98 | 1,815 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2014 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #125 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #42 | 1,810 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2015 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 41–27 | 60.3% | #20 | 1,852 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2016 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #56 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 26–27 | 49.1% | #44 | 1,844 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2017 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #181 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 31–24 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,897 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 2018 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #153 | 1,643 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #87 | 1,804 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2019 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #137 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #85 | 1,703 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2020 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #125 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #46 | 1,869 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | 2021 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #76 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #36 | 1,884 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | 2022 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #89 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,839 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | 2023 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #242 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #124 | 1,723 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | 2024 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #144 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #179 | 1,740 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #398 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |