H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
John Isner vs Leonardo Mayer H2H: 3-0
John Isner holds a 3–0 lead over Leonardo Mayer in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, John Isner leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, John Isner won the 2017 Beijing fourth round 6-0 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.
USA
Age 41
Right-Handed
208 cm / 6'10"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 39
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 6, 2017* | Beijing | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | John Isner | 6-0 6-3 | Leonardo Mayer | Match data |
| Apr 14, 2017* | Houston | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | John Isner | 6-7(5) 7-6(3) 6-3 | Leonardo Mayer | Match data |
| May 13, 2015* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Clay | John Isner | 7-6(6) 6-4 | Leonardo Mayer | 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 |
| Leonardo Mayer | #748 | #21 | 1,605 | 1,937 | 166 | 194 | 46.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
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 | Leonardo Mayer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #115 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #106 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #75 | 1,674 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #144 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #94 | 1,652 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #34 | 1,828 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #78 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2010 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #71 | 1,725 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2011 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #18 | 2,021 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #94 | 1,715 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2012 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #14 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 | 2014 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,830 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2013 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,983 | 0 | 7 | 2015 | 24–23 | 51.1% | #35 | 1,837 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2014 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #19 | 1,922 | 0 | 9 | 2016 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #139 | 1,727 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2015 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 2,026 | 0 | 10 | 2017 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #52 | 1,796 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2016 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #19 | 2,019 | 0 | 10 | 2018 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #56 | 1,746 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2017 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #17 | 1,984 | 0 | 12 | 2019 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #92 | 1,710 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 2018 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #10 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 | 2020 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #135 | 1,605 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | 2019 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,921 | 0 | 15 | 2021 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #309 | 1,520 | 0 | 2 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |