H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Feliciano Lopez vs Lukas Lacko H2H: 2-0
Feliciano Lopez holds a 2–0 lead over Lukas Lacko in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Feliciano Lopez leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Feliciano Lopez won the 2016 Houston fourth round 7-6(4) 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.
ESP
Age 44
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 38
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 2016* | Houston | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Feliciano Lopez | 7-6(4) 6-1 | Lukas Lacko | Match data |
| Sep 27, 2012* | Kuala Lumpur | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Feliciano Lopez | 6-3 7-6(3) | Lukas Lacko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feliciano Lopez | #672 | #12 | 2,415 | 2,013 | 497 | 477 | 51.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Lukas Lacko | #1,505 | #44 | 917 | 1,837 | 81 | 133 | 37.9% | 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 | Feliciano Lopez | Lukas Lacko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #546 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #271 | 1,480 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2001 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #159 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #62 | 1,699 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #325 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 34–31 | 52.3% | #28 | 1,841 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #82 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2004 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #25 | 1,833 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #89 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2005 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #33 | 1,759 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #112 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2006 | 19–28 | 40.4% | #79 | 1,676 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #51 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2007 | 27–24 | 52.9% | #35 | 1,804 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #81 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2008 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #30 | 1,829 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #94 | 1,735 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2009 | 17–23 | 42.5% | #47 | 1,724 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #110 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2010 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #32 | 1,807 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #122 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2011 | 35–25 | 58.3% | #20 | 1,968 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #92 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2012 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #40 | 1,844 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #114 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2013 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #28 | 1,914 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #183 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2014 | 40–25 | 61.5% | #14 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2015 | 32–26 | 55.2% | #17 | 1,943 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2016 | 29–24 | 54.7% | #28 | 1,890 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2017 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #36 | 1,900 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2018 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #64 | 1,817 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2019 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #62 | 1,824 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2020 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #64 | 1,763 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2021 | 9–20 | 31.0% | #106 | 1,595 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 40 | 2022 | 0–11 | 0.0% | #830 | 1,468 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 41 | 2023 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #468 | 1,517 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |