H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Ivan Ljubicic vs Guillermo Garcia-Lopez H2H: 2-0
Ivan Ljubicic holds a 2–0 lead over Guillermo Garcia-Lopez in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Ivan Ljubicic leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ivan Ljubicic won the 2006 Chennai third round 7-6(6) 7-5.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CRO
Age 47
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 43
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2006* | Chennai | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Ivan Ljubicic | 7-6(6) 7-5 | Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | Match data |
| Apr 15, 2004* | Valencia | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Ivan Ljubicic | 6-3 6-4 | Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | 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 Ljubicic | #53 | #3 | 3,315 | 2,052 | 400 | 282 | 58.7% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 10 |
| Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | #1,009 | #23 | 1,465 | 1,938 | 299 | 353 | 45.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
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 Ljubicic | Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1996 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #576 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1997 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #289 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #293 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 1999 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #77 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #244 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #91 | 1,654 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #129 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #37 | 1,824 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #91 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #49 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #68 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #42 | 1,791 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #90 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,809 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,646 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2005 | 50–23 | 68.5% | #9 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #41 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2006 | 55–19 | 74.3% | #5 | 1,944 | 0 | 6 | 2010 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #33 | 1,874 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2007 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #18 | 1,807 | 0 | 8 | 2011 | 20–29 | 40.8% | #65 | 1,712 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2008 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #44 | 1,724 | 0 | 8 | 2012 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #76 | 1,719 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2009 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #24 | 1,894 | 0 | 9 | 2013 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #62 | 1,774 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2010 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #17 | 1,884 | 0 | 10 | 2014 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #36 | 1,740 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | 2011 | 25–19 | 56.8% | #30 | 1,909 | 0 | 10 | 2015 | 32–25 | 56.1% | #27 | 1,853 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | 2012 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #53 | 1,794 | 0 | 10 | 2016 | 22–31 | 41.5% | #70 | 1,686 | 0 | 5 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #70 | 1,747 | 0 | 5 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #105 | 1,675 | 0 | 5 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #144 | 1,694 | 0 | 5 |