H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Kim Warwick vs Ricardo Cano H2H: 2-2
Kim Warwick and Ricardo Cano are tied 2–2 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Ricardo Cano leads 2–1 on clay, while Kim Warwick leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Ricardo Cano won the 1979 Nations Cup semifinal 6-1 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
AUS
Age 74
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 75
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 12, 1979* | Nations Cup | ATP 250 | SF | Clay | Ricardo Cano | 6-1 6-2 | Kim Warwick | Match data |
| Aug 11, 1977* | Columbus | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Ricardo Cano | 6-0 6-0 | Kim Warwick | Match data |
| May 11, 1977* | Hamburg | ATP 250 | R64 | Clay | Kim Warwick | 6-3 6-4 | Ricardo Cano | Match data |
| Jun 23, 1976* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Kim Warwick | 6-4 6-2 6-1 | Ricardo Cano | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim Warwick | #1,294 | #15 | 15 | 1,945 | 290 | 273 | 51.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Ricardo Cano | #768 | #41 | 0 | 1,792 | 142 | 147 | 49.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Kim Warwick | Ricardo Cano | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 1969 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 1970 | 6–8 | 42.9% | — | 1,472 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 1971 | 4–7 | 36.4% | — | 1,467 | 0 | 0 | 1970 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1972 | 11–9 | 55.0% | — | 1,569 | 0 | 0 | 1971 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1973 | 11–22 | 33.3% | #108 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 1972 | 2–5 | 28.6% | — | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1974 | 30–23 | 56.6% | #48 | 1,717 | 0 | 0 | 1973 | 1–1 | 50.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1975 | 28–24 | 53.8% | #49 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 | 1974 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #274 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1976 | 28–32 | 46.7% | #67 | 1,746 | 0 | 1 | 1975 | 18–13 | 58.1% | #42 | 1,737 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1977 | 35–29 | 54.7% | #50 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | 1976 | 43–26 | 62.3% | #51 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 1978 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #41 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | 1977 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #121 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 1979 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #52 | 1,804 | 0 | 2 | 1978 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #81 | 1,629 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 1980 | 39–25 | 60.9% | #36 | 1,926 | 0 | 3 | 1979 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #169 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 1981 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #29 | 1,743 | 0 | 3 | 1980 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #73 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 1982 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #36 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 | 1981 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #62 | 1,718 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 1983 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #99 | 1,688 | 0 | 3 | 1982 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #91 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 1984 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #196 | 1,686 | 0 | 3 | 1983 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #219 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 1985 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #497 | 1,664 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 1988 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #600 | 1,652 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |