H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 10:34 UTC
Jakub Mensik vs Grigor Dimitrov H2H: 2-1
Jakub Mensik holds a 2–1 lead over Grigor Dimitrov in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Jakub Mensik leads 1–0 on clay, while Grigor Dimitrov leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Grigor Dimitrov won the 2026 Wimbledon second round 7-6(5) 4-6 7-5 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.
Czechia
Age 20
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
Bulgaria
Age 35
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2026 | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Grigor Dimitrov | 7-6(5) 4-6 7-5 6-3 | Jakub Mensik | Match data |
| Oct 9, 2024* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Jakub Mensik | 6-3 3-6 6-4 | Grigor Dimitrov | Match data |
| Apr 27, 2024* | Madrid Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Jakub Mensik | 6-2 6-7(4) 6-3 | Grigor Dimitrov | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jakub Mensik | #19 | #12 | 2,650 | 1,986 | 78 | 46 | 62.9% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Grigor Dimitrov | #146 | #3 | 5,150 | 2,176 | 476 | 310 | 60.6% | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 9 |
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 | Jakub Mensik | Grigor Dimitrov | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2023 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #167 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #493 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2024 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #48 | 1,847 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #288 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2025 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #19 | 1,834 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #106 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2026 | 23–11 | 67.6% | #19 | 1,916 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #76 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #48 | 1,846 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 35–23 | 60.3% | #23 | 1,954 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 50–18 | 73.5% | #11 | 2,095 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #28 | 1,950 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 40–25 | 61.5% | #17 | 2,018 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 49–19 | 72.1% | #3 | 2,134 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #19 | 1,933 | 0 | 8 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #20 | 1,944 | 0 | 8 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,957 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #28 | 1,935 | 0 | 8 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #28 | 1,864 | 0 | 8 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #14 | 2,095 | 0 | 8 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 45–18 | 71.4% | #10 | 2,008 | 0 | 9 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 18–12 | 60.0% | #44 | 1,956 | 0 | 9 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #146 | 1,810 | 0 | 9 |