H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 13:16 UTC
Ivan Ljubicic vs Lukas Lacko H2H: 0-2
Lukas Lacko holds a 2–0 lead over Ivan Ljubicic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Lukas Lacko leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lukas Lacko won the 2012 Australian Open first round 3-6 4-6 6-3 6-4 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.
CRO
Age 47
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
0
–
2
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 18, 2012* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Lukas Lacko | 3-6 4-6 6-3 6-4 6-4 | Ivan Ljubicic | Match data |
| Feb 5, 2010* | Zagreb | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | Lukas Lacko | 7-6(3) 5-7 7-6(5) | Ivan Ljubicic | 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 |
| 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 | Ivan Ljubicic | Lukas Lacko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #77 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #325 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #91 | 1,654 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #82 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #37 | 1,824 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #89 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #49 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #112 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #42 | 1,791 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #51 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,809 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #81 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2005 | 50–23 | 68.5% | #9 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #94 | 1,735 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2006 | 55–19 | 74.3% | #5 | 1,944 | 0 | 6 | 2015 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #110 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2007 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #18 | 1,807 | 0 | 8 | 2016 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #122 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2008 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #44 | 1,724 | 0 | 8 | 2017 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #92 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2009 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #24 | 1,894 | 0 | 9 | 2018 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #114 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2010 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #17 | 1,884 | 0 | 10 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #183 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2011 | 25–19 | 56.8% | #30 | 1,909 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2012 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #53 | 1,794 | 0 | 10 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |