H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Jaime Fillol vs Mark Cox H2H: 1-1
Jaime Fillol and Mark Cox are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mark Cox leads 1–0 on carpet, while Jaime Fillol leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jaime Fillol won the 1976 Paris Indoor semifinal 6-0 6-3 7-6.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CHI
Age 80
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 83
Left-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30, 1976* | Paris Indoor | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Jaime Fillol | 6-0 6-3 7-6 | Mark Cox | Match data |
| Feb 20, 1969* | Macon | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Mark Cox | 7-5 6-3 | Jaime Fillol | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jaime Fillol | #1,171 | #14 | 8 | 2,041 | 532 | 367 | 59.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Mark Cox | #486 | #12 | 0 | 2,009 | 408 | 274 | 59.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 |
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 | Jaime Fillol | Mark Cox | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 22 | 1968 | 30–10 | 75.0% | — | 1,658 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 1969 | 27–19 | 58.7% | — | 1,673 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 1970 | 32–23 | 58.2% | — | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 1968 | 52–23 | 69.3% | — | 1,722 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 1971 | 43–21 | 67.2% | — | 1,774 | 0 | 3 | 1969 | 35–16 | 68.6% | — | 1,836 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 1972 | 44–32 | 57.9% | — | 1,745 | 0 | 3 | 1970 | 39–31 | 55.7% | — | 1,796 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 1973 | 51–33 | 60.7% | #17 | 1,867 | 0 | 4 | 1971 | 27–31 | 46.6% | — | 1,815 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 1974 | 48–32 | 60.0% | #31 | 1,830 | 0 | 4 | 1972 | 43–29 | 59.7% | — | 1,871 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 1975 | 56–27 | 67.5% | #16 | 1,962 | 0 | 4 | 1973 | 56–28 | 66.7% | #22 | 1,890 | 0 | 10 |
| 30 | 1976 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #24 | 1,928 | 0 | 5 | 1974 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #30 | 1,828 | 0 | 10 |
| 31 | 1977 | 44–21 | 67.7% | #24 | 1,894 | 0 | 5 | 1975 | 31–13 | 70.5% | #25 | 1,915 | 0 | 13 |
| 32 | 1978 | 33–29 | 53.2% | #77 | 1,756 | 0 | 5 | 1976 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #17 | 1,954 | 0 | 14 |
| 33 | 1979 | 21–28 | 42.9% | #124 | 1,736 | 0 | 5 | 1977 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #26 | 1,823 | 0 | 15 |
| 34 | 1980 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #86 | 1,644 | 0 | 5 | 1978 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #68 | 1,765 | 0 | 15 |
| 35 | 1981 | 18–19 | 48.6% | #95 | 1,654 | 0 | 6 | 1979 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #76 | 1,786 | 0 | 15 |
| 36 | 1982 | 14–8 | 63.6% | #77 | 1,707 | 0 | 7 | 1980 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #140 | 1,673 | 0 | 15 |
| 37 | 1983 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #85 | 1,649 | 0 | 7 | 1981 | 0–5 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,597 | 0 | 15 |