H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 02:15 UTC
John Isner vs Sergiy Stakhovsky H2H: 1-1
John Isner and Sergiy Stakhovsky are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Sergiy Stakhovsky leads 1–0 on clay, while John Isner leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Sergiy Stakhovsky won the 2011 Madrid Masters third round 7-5 4-6 7-6(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
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
UKR
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 2011* | Madrid Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Clay | Sergiy Stakhovsky | 7-5 4-6 7-6(3) | John Isner | Match data |
| Mar 27, 2009* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R128 | Hard | John Isner | 6-4 6-4 | Sergiy Stakhovsky | 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 |
| Sergiy Stakhovsky | #678 | #31 | 1,263 | 1,839 | 145 | 195 | 42.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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.
| John Isner | Sergiy Stakhovsky | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2007 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #106 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #335 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #144 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #184 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #34 | 1,828 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #195 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,882 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #199 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #18 | 2,021 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #92 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #14 | 1,965 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 14–13 | 51.9% | #60 | 1,750 | 0 | 2 |
| 2013 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,983 | 0 | 7 | 2010 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #46 | 1,743 | 0 | 4 |
| 2014 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #19 | 1,922 | 0 | 9 | 2011 | 22–26 | 45.8% | #62 | 1,707 | 0 | 4 |
| 2015 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 2,026 | 0 | 10 | 2012 | 13–26 | 33.3% | #103 | 1,739 | 0 | 4 |
| 2016 | 30–20 | 60.0% | #19 | 2,019 | 0 | 10 | 2013 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #98 | 1,679 | 0 | 4 |
| 2017 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #17 | 1,984 | 0 | 12 | 2014 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #58 | 1,686 | 0 | 4 |
| 2018 | 32–22 | 59.3% | #10 | 1,956 | 0 | 14 | 2015 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #62 | 1,715 | 0 | 4 |
| 2019 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,921 | 0 | 15 | 2016 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #109 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 |
| 2020 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #25 | 1,845 | 0 | 15 | 2017 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #122 | 1,728 | 0 | 4 |
| 2021 | 23–11 | 67.6% | #24 | 1,933 | 0 | 16 | 2018 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #134 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 |
| 2022 | 22–16 | 57.9% | #41 | 1,891 | 0 | 16 | 2019 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #150 | 1,576 | 0 | 4 |
| 2023 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #172 | 1,698 | 0 | 16 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #202 | 1,568 | 0 | 4 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #220 | 1,530 | 0 | 4 |