H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Lukas Rosol vs Lukas Lacko H2H: 1-0
Lukas Rosol holds a 1–0 lead over Lukas Lacko in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Lukas Rosol leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lukas Rosol won the 2014 Vienna third round 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.
CZE
Age 40
Right-Handed
193 cm / 6'4"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 38
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 16, 2014* | Vienna | ATP 500 | R32 | Hard | Lukas Rosol | 6-2 6-4 | Lukas Lacko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lukas Rosol | #1,777 | #26 | 1,290 | 1,921 | 110 | 148 | 42.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Lukas Lacko | #1,505 | #44 | 917 | 1,837 | 81 | 133 | 37.9% | 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 | Lukas Rosol | Lukas Lacko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #325 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #271 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #82 | 1,607 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2008 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #182 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #89 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #148 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #112 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #164 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #51 | 1,657 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2011 | 5–13 | 27.8% | #70 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #81 | 1,675 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2012 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #73 | 1,748 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 11–17 | 39.3% | #94 | 1,735 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2013 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #47 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 2–12 | 14.3% | #110 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2014 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #31 | 1,798 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #122 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2015 | 19–28 | 40.4% | #55 | 1,846 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 7–10 | 41.2% | #92 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2016 | 14–22 | 38.9% | #113 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #114 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2017 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #203 | 1,671 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #183 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2018 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #142 | 1,703 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #180 | 1,660 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #199 | 1,658 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2022 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #216 | 1,588 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |