H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Ivo Karlovic vs Hyung-Taik Lee H2H: 1-0
Ivo Karlovic holds a 1–0 lead over Hyung-Taik Lee in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ivo Karlovic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ivo Karlovic won the 2007 Tokyo fourth round 7-6(6) 6-7(8) 7-6(8).
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
211 cm / 6'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
KOR
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 5, 2007* | Tokyo | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | Ivo Karlovic | 7-6(6) 6-7(8) 7-6(8) | Hyung-Taik Lee | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivo Karlovic | #1,066 | #14 | 2,295 | 1,998 | 357 | 333 | 51.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| Hyung-Taik Lee | #1,256 | #36 | 864 | 1,798 | 120 | 153 | 44.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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.
| Ivo Karlovic | Hyung-Taik Lee | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #193 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #241 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 2002 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #201 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #283 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2003 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #73 | 1,666 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #191 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2004 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #61 | 1,667 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #90 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 2005 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #70 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #116 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #98 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #87 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 45–21 | 68.2% | #22 | 1,940 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #56 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 |
| 2008 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #26 | 1,815 | 0 | 4 | 2004 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,668 | 0 | 1 |
| 2009 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,795 | 0 | 4 | 2005 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #107 | 1,618 | 0 | 1 |
| 2010 | 16–9 | 64.0% | #73 | 1,864 | 0 | 4 | 2006 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #49 | 1,735 | 0 | 1 |
| 2011 | 16–20 | 44.4% | #56 | 1,819 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #51 | 1,769 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #100 | 1,768 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #107 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 |
| 2013 | 15–13 | 53.6% | #78 | 1,772 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #871 | 1,597 | 0 | 1 |
| 2014 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #27 | 1,853 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2015 | 38–25 | 60.3% | #23 | 1,916 | 0 | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2016 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #20 | 1,970 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2017 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #80 | 1,770 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #100 | 1,644 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #95 | 1,668 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #147 | 1,615 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #279 | 1,623 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |