H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Juan Ignacio Chela vs Michael Llodra H2H: 2-1
Juan Ignacio Chela holds a 2–1 lead over Michael Llodra in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Juan Ignacio Chela leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Michael Llodra won the 2011 Australian Open first round 6-3 3-6 6-2 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.
ARG
Age 46
Right-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 46
Left-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2011* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Michael Llodra | 6-3 3-6 6-2 6-4 | Juan Ignacio Chela | Match data |
| May 4, 2005* | Rome Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Juan Ignacio Chela | 6-4 6-4 | Michael Llodra | Match data |
| Aug 30, 2002* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Juan Ignacio Chela | 7-6(7) 6-3 6-2 | Michael Llodra | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Juan Ignacio Chela | #967 | #15 | 1,510 | 1,909 | 306 | 268 | 53.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Michael Llodra | #631 | #21 | 1,575 | 1,901 | 182 | 215 | 45.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Juan Ignacio Chela | Michael Llodra | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1999 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,463 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2000 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #63 | 1,540 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #159 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2001 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #70 | 1,594 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #89 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2002 | 44–27 | 62.0% | #23 | 1,783 | 0 | 2 | 2002 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #104 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2003 | 35–27 | 56.5% | #38 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #173 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2004 | 33–25 | 56.9% | #26 | 1,735 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 20–12 | 62.5% | #41 | 1,734 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2005 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #39 | 1,691 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2006 | 27–26 | 50.9% | #33 | 1,721 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #96 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2007 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #20 | 1,796 | 0 | 4 | 2007 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #93 | 1,640 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2008 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #140 | 1,737 | 0 | 4 | 2008 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #40 | 1,725 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2009 | 9–14 | 39.1% | #73 | 1,731 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #67 | 1,738 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2010 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #38 | 1,835 | 0 | 6 | 2010 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #23 | 1,879 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | 2011 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #29 | 1,737 | 0 | 6 | 2011 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #47 | 1,776 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | 2012 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #176 | 1,634 | 0 | 6 | 2012 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #53 | 1,842 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #105 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #269 | 1,688 | 0 | 5 |