H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
John Isner vs Robin Haase H2H: 1-2
Robin Haase holds a 2–1 lead over John Isner in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Robin Haase leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Robin Haase won the 2013 Nice fourth round 6-4 1-6 7-5.
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
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
NED
Age 39
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2013* | Nice | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Robin Haase | 6-4 1-6 7-5 | John Isner | Match data |
| Jan 13, 2011* | Auckland | ATP 250 | R16 | Hard | John Isner | 3-6 7-6(4) 7-5 | Robin Haase | Match data |
| Nov 5, 2010* | Basel | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | Robin Haase | 6-2 6-7(5) 7-5 | John Isner | 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 |
| Robin Haase | #1,206 | #33 | 1,220 | 1,860 | 202 | 255 | 44.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 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 | Robin Haase | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #167 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #114 | 1,618 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #116 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #106 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2008 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #144 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #65 | 1,691 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #34 | 1,828 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 25–24 | 51.0% | #45 | 1,778 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2010 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #56 | 1,700 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2011 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #18 | 2,021 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #43 | 1,852 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2012 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #14 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 | 2014 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #83 | 1,715 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2013 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,983 | 0 | 7 | 2015 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #66 | 1,767 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2014 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #19 | 1,922 | 0 | 9 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #59 | 1,756 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2015 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 2,026 | 0 | 10 | 2017 | 25–29 | 46.3% | #42 | 1,811 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2016 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #19 | 2,019 | 0 | 10 | 2018 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #50 | 1,779 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2017 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #17 | 1,984 | 0 | 12 | 2019 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #162 | 1,685 | 0 | 2 |
| 33 | 2018 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #10 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #197 | 1,661 | 0 | 2 |
| 34 | 2019 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,921 | 0 | 15 | 2021 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #230 | 1,615 | 0 | 2 |
| 35 | 2020 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #25 | 1,845 | 0 | 15 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #258 | 1,568 | 0 | 2 |
| 36 | 2021 | 23–11 | 67.6% | #24 | 1,933 | 0 | 16 | 2023 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #756 | 1,531 | 0 | 2 |
| 37 | 2022 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #41 | 1,891 | 0 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2023 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #172 | 1,698 | 0 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |