H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ivan Lendl vs Jaime Fillol H2H: 4-0
Ivan Lendl holds a 4–0 lead over Jaime Fillol in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Ivan Lendl leads 3–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ivan Lendl won the 1980 Hong Kong semifinal 6-3 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.
USA
Age 66
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
4
–
0
4 main draw meetings
CHI
Age 80
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 8, 1980* | Hong Kong | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Ivan Lendl | 6-3 6-1 | Jaime Fillol | Match data |
| Oct 1, 1980* | Madrid | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Ivan Lendl | 6-2 6-3 | Jaime Fillol | Match data |
| Aug 6, 1979 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Ivan Lendl | 6-2 7-5 | Jaime Fillol | Match data |
| May 30, 1979* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Ivan Lendl | 7-6 6-3 4-6 6-3 | Jaime Fillol | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivan Lendl | #667 | #1 | 3,420 | 2,424 | 1,051 | 229 | 82.1% | 8 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 69 | 94 |
| Jaime Fillol | #1,171 | #14 | 8 | 2,041 | 532 | 367 | 59.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
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 | Ivan Lendl | Jaime Fillol | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 1978 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #74 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1979 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #21 | 1,882 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1980 | 103–28 | 78.6% | #6 | 2,131 | 0 | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 1981 | 95–12 | 88.8% | #3 | 2,321 | 0 | 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 1982 | 104–8 | 92.9% | #3 | 2,369 | 0 | 32 | 1968 | 30–10 | 75.0% | — | 1,658 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 1983 | 75–16 | 82.4% | #2 | 2,235 | 0 | 39 | 1969 | 27–19 | 58.7% | — | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 1984 | 58–12 | 82.9% | #3 | 2,234 | 1 | 42 | 1970 | 32–23 | 58.2% | — | 1,749 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 1985 | 80–6 | 93.0% | #1 | 2,367 | 2 | 53 | 1971 | 43–21 | 67.2% | — | 1,774 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 1986 | 75–6 | 92.6% | #1 | 2,355 | 4 | 62 | 1972 | 44–32 | 57.9% | — | 1,745 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 1987 | 75–7 | 91.5% | #1 | 2,362 | 6 | 70 | 1973 | 51–33 | 60.7% | #17 | 1,867 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 1988 | 41–8 | 83.7% | #2 | 2,220 | 6 | 73 | 1974 | 48–32 | 60.0% | #31 | 1,830 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 1989 | 80–7 | 92.0% | #1 | 2,261 | 7 | 83 | 1975 | 56–27 | 67.5% | #16 | 1,962 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 1990 | 54–12 | 81.8% | #3 | 2,130 | 8 | 88 | 1976 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #24 | 1,928 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | 1991 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #5 | 2,031 | 8 | 91 | 1977 | 44–21 | 67.7% | #24 | 1,894 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | 1992 | 51–24 | 68.0% | #8 | 2,006 | 8 | 92 | 1978 | 33–29 | 53.2% | #77 | 1,756 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | 1993 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #19 | 1,780 | 8 | 94 | 1979 | 21–28 | 42.9% | #124 | 1,736 | 0 | 5 |
| 34 | 1994 | 28–18 | 60.9% | #55 | 1,754 | 8 | 94 | 1980 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #86 | 1,644 | 0 | 5 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1981 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #95 | 1,654 | 0 | 6 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1982 | 14–8 | 63.6% | #77 | 1,707 | 0 | 7 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1983 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #85 | 1,649 | 0 | 7 |