H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 07:16 UTC
Federico Delbonis vs Inigo Cervantes Huegun H2H: 0-1
Inigo Cervantes Huegun holds a 1–0 lead over Federico Delbonis in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Inigo Cervantes Huegun leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Inigo Cervantes Huegun won the 2016 Sao Paulo quarterfinal 7-6(6) 2-6 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ARG
Age 35
Left-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 36
Right-Handed
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 27, 2016* | Sao Paulo | ATP 250 | QF | Clay | Inigo Cervantes Huegun | 7-6(6) 2-6 6-4 | Federico Delbonis | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Federico Delbonis | #939 | #33 | 1,435 | 1,905 | 158 | 195 | 44.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Inigo Cervantes Huegun | — | — | — | 1,666 | — | — | — | 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 | Federico Delbonis | Inigo Cervantes Huegun | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #160 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2011 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #166 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2012 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #133 | 1,716 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2013 | 12–8 | 60.0% | #55 | 1,757 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2014 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #60 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2015 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #52 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2016 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #41 | 1,754 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2017 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #68 | 1,811 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2018 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #80 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2019 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #76 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2020 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,705 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2021 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #44 | 1,719 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2022 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #125 | 1,672 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2023 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #279 | 1,599 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |