H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Jack Sock vs Lukas Lacko H2H: 3-0
Jack Sock holds a 3–0 lead over Lukas Lacko in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Jack Sock leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Jack Sock won the 2016 Washington third round 7-6(1) 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.
USA
Age 33
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 38
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 21, 2016* | Washington | ATP 500 | R32 | Hard | Jack Sock | 7-6(1) 6-4 | Lukas Lacko | Match data |
| Jul 17, 2015* | Newport | ATP 250 | R16 | Grass | Jack Sock | 3-6 7-6(4) 6-4 | Lukas Lacko | Match data |
| Jul 26, 2014* | Atlanta | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Jack Sock | 7-6(6) 6-2 | Lukas Lacko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jack Sock | #808 | #8 | 3,165 | 2,127 | 177 | 147 | 54.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| 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 | Jack Sock | Lukas Lacko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #878 | 1,458 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #381 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2012 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #150 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2013 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #102 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #325 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #42 | 1,893 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #82 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #26 | 1,984 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #89 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #23 | 2,034 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #112 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2017 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #8 | 1,992 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #51 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2018 | 9–21 | 30.0% | #106 | 1,716 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #81 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2019 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #253 | 1,634 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #94 | 1,735 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2020 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #253 | 1,725 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #110 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2021 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #145 | 1,775 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #122 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2022 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #131 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #92 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2023 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #671 | 1,716 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #114 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #183 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |