H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
John Isner vs Juan Monaco H2H: 3-1
John Isner holds a 3–1 lead over Juan Monaco in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while John Isner leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, John Isner won the 2013 Houston semifinal 1-6 6-4 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 41
Right-Handed
208 cm / 6'10"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 42
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2013* | Houston | ATP 250 | SF | Clay | John Isner | 1-6 6-4 6-4 | Juan Monaco | Match data |
| Apr 15, 2012* | Houston | ATP 250 | F | Clay | Juan Monaco | 6-2 3-6 6-3 | John Isner | Match data |
| Mar 13, 2012* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | John Isner | 7-5 7-5 | Juan Monaco | Match data |
| Jan 14, 2010* | Auckland | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | John Isner | 5-7 6-4 6-3 | Juan Monaco | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| John Isner | #660 | #8 | 3,720 | 2,053 | 467 | 293 | 61.4% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 16 |
| Juan Monaco | #226 | #10 | 2,775 | 2,046 | 319 | 256 | 55.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 8 |
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 | John Isner | Juan Monaco | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #73 | 1,661 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #85 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #106 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #69 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #144 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 41–19 | 68.3% | #23 | 1,864 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2009 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #34 | 1,828 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #46 | 1,768 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2010 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #30 | 1,850 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2011 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #18 | 2,021 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 28–18 | 60.9% | #26 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2012 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #14 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #26 | 1,932 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2013 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,983 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #12 | 1,944 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2014 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #19 | 1,922 | 0 | 9 | 2013 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #42 | 1,809 | 0 | 7 |
| 30 | 2015 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 2,026 | 0 | 10 | 2014 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #62 | 1,856 | 0 | 7 |
| 31 | 2016 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #19 | 2,019 | 0 | 10 | 2015 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #53 | 1,811 | 0 | 7 |
| 32 | 2017 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #17 | 1,984 | 0 | 12 | 2016 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #65 | 1,864 | 0 | 8 |
| 33 | 2018 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #10 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 | 2017 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,805 | 0 | 8 |
| 34 | 2019 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,921 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2020 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #25 | 1,845 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2021 | 23–11 | 67.6% | #24 | 1,933 | 0 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2022 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #41 | 1,891 | 0 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2023 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #172 | 1,698 | 0 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |