H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 13:16 UTC
Jeremy Chardy vs Ivan Dodig H2H: 1-1
Jeremy Chardy and Ivan Dodig are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Jeremy Chardy leads 1–0 on clay, while Ivan Dodig leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jeremy Chardy won the 2014 Rome Masters fourth round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
CRO
Age 41
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2014* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Clay | Jeremy Chardy | 6-3 6-2 | Ivan Dodig | Match data |
| Aug 10, 2011* | Canada Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Ivan Dodig | 6-3 6-4 | Jeremy Chardy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Chardy | #1,077 | #25 | 1,486 | 1,968 | 290 | 303 | 48.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Ivan Dodig | #423 | #29 | 1,330 | 1,964 | 114 | 129 | 46.9% | 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.
| Age | Jeremy Chardy | Ivan Dodig | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2008 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2009 | 34–28 | 54.8% | #32 | 1,780 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2010 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #45 | 1,827 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #422 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 8–18 | 30.8% | #103 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #180 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #32 | 1,822 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #88 | 1,723 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2013 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #34 | 1,797 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #36 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2014 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #29 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #72 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2015 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,896 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #33 | 1,916 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2016 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #69 | 1,752 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #95 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2017 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #78 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #87 | 1,666 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | 2018 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #40 | 1,830 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #147 | 1,571 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | 2019 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,918 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #336 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | 2020 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #75 | 1,786 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2021 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #107 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2023 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #519 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |