H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 01:16 UTC
Jarkko Nieminen vs Mario Ancic H2H: 3-0
Jarkko Nieminen holds a 3–0 lead over Mario Ancic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Jarkko Nieminen leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jarkko Nieminen won the 2006 Rotterdam third round 7-5 7-6(5).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FIN
Age 44
Left-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 42
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2006* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Jarkko Nieminen | 7-5 7-6(5) | Mario Ancic | Match data |
| Jan 15, 2006* | Auckland | ATP 250 | F | Hard | Jarkko Nieminen | 6-2 6-2 | Mario Ancic | Match data |
| Apr 29, 2005* | Munich | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Jarkko Nieminen | 7-6(5) 6-4 | Mario Ancic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jarkko Nieminen | #1,029 | #13 | 1,700 | 1,917 | 357 | 334 | 51.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Mario Ancic | #475 | #7 | 2,075 | 2,019 | 193 | 124 | 60.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Jarkko Nieminen | Mario Ancic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #308 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 4–1 | 80.0% | #61 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,703 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 37–29 | 56.1% | #36 | 1,728 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2004 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #77 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2005 | 29–22 | 56.9% | #28 | 1,797 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2006 | 49–27 | 64.5% | #15 | 1,789 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2007 | 31–26 | 54.4% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2008 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #37 | 1,758 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2009 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #88 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2010 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #39 | 1,873 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2011 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #77 | 1,830 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2012 | 23–26 | 46.9% | #41 | 1,744 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2013 | 27–26 | 50.9% | #39 | 1,789 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2014 | 23–25 | 47.9% | #73 | 1,767 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2015 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #153 | 1,692 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |