H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Federico Delbonis vs Ivan Dodig H2H: 0-1
Ivan Dodig holds a 1–0 lead over Federico Delbonis in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ivan Dodig leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Ivan Dodig won the 2014 Rome Masters second round 6-3 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
CRO
Age 41
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 2014* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Ivan Dodig | 6-3 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 |
| Ivan Dodig | #423 | #29 | 1,330 | 1,964 | 114 | 129 | 46.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Ivan Dodig | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #422 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2015 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #52 | 1,692 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2016 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #41 | 1,754 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #88 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2017 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #68 | 1,811 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #36 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2018 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #80 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #72 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2019 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #76 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #33 | 1,916 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2020 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,705 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #95 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2021 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #44 | 1,719 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #87 | 1,666 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2022 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #125 | 1,672 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #147 | 1,571 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2023 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #279 | 1,599 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #336 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |