H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ivan Ljubicic vs Rajeev Ram H2H: 1-0
Ivan Ljubicic holds a 1–0 lead over Rajeev Ram in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ivan Ljubicic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ivan Ljubicic won the 2004 Indianapolis third round 6-2 6-3.
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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 42
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 16, 2009 | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | Q2 | Hard | Ivan Ljubicic | 6-4 4-6 6-3 | Rajeev Ram | Match data |
| Jul 19, 2004 | Indianapolis | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Ivan Ljubicic | 6-2 6-3 | Rajeev Ram | Match data |
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 |
| Rajeev Ram | #1,076 | #56 | 826 | 1,747 | 57 | 94 | 37.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Rajeev Ram | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #536 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1998 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #293 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #437 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #77 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #297 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2000 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #91 | 1,654 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #195 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #37 | 1,824 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #197 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2002 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #49 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #253 | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2003 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #42 | 1,791 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #190 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #22 | 1,809 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #79 | 1,579 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2005 | 50–23 | 68.5% | #9 | 1,951 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 6–18 | 25.0% | #184 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2006 | 55–19 | 74.3% | #5 | 1,944 | 0 | 6 | 2011 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #149 | 1,605 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2007 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #18 | 1,807 | 0 | 8 | 2012 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #132 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2008 | 20–19 | 51.3% | #44 | 1,724 | 0 | 8 | 2013 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #127 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2009 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #24 | 1,894 | 0 | 9 | 2014 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #139 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2010 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #17 | 1,884 | 0 | 10 | 2015 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #89 | 1,654 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2011 | 25–19 | 56.8% | #30 | 1,909 | 0 | 10 | 2016 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #129 | 1,615 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 2012 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #53 | 1,794 | 0 | 10 | 2017 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #353 | 1,582 | 0 | 2 |