H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Marin Cilic vs Mikhail Youzhny H2H: 5-5
Marin Cilic and Mikhail Youzhny are tied 5–5 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 10 main-draw meetings, Marin Cilic leads 4–3 on hard courts, while Mikhail Youzhny leads 2–1 on clay. Most recently, Marin Cilic won the 2016 Basel third round 6-4 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.
Croatia
Age 37
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
5
–
5
10 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 2016* | Basel | ATP 500 | R32 | Hard | Marin Cilic | 6-4 6-2 | Mikhail Youzhny | Match data |
| Feb 9, 2013* | Zagreb | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Marin Cilic | 4-6 6-4 6-3 | Mikhail Youzhny | Match data |
| May 5, 2012* | Munich | ATP 250 | QF | Clay | Marin Cilic | 6-3 6-7(6) 6-3 | Mikhail Youzhny | Match data |
| Oct 29, 2011* | St. Petersburg | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Marin Cilic | 6-3 6-4 | Mikhail Youzhny | Match data |
| Jul 23, 2011* | Hamburg | ATP 500 | QF | Clay | Mikhail Youzhny | 4-6 6-3 7-6(6) | Marin Cilic | Match data |
| Feb 19, 2011* | Marseille | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Marin Cilic | 6-2 1-6 7-5 | Mikhail Youzhny | Match data |
| May 9, 2010* | Munich | ATP 250 | F | Clay | Mikhail Youzhny | 6-3 4-6 6-4 | Marin Cilic | Match data |
| Aug 12, 2009* | Canada Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Mikhail Youzhny | 4-6 7-6(4) 6-1 | Marin Cilic | Match data |
| Feb 14, 2008* | Marseille | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Mikhail Youzhny | 6-4 7-6(3) | Marin Cilic | Match data |
| Jan 5, 2008* | Chennai | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Mikhail Youzhny | 6-2 6-3 | Marin Cilic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marin Cilic | #88 | #3 | 5,155 | 2,195 | 572 | 344 | 62.4% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 17 | 21 |
| Mikhail Youzhny | #115 | #8 | 3,500 | 2,069 | 477 | 405 | 54.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 10 |
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 | Marin Cilic | Mikhail Youzhny | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #587 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2006 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #170 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #286 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2007 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #71 | 1,714 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #113 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 36–23 | 61.0% | #23 | 1,904 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #58 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 45–20 | 69.2% | #14 | 1,989 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #32 | 1,866 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2010 | 38–21 | 64.4% | #14 | 1,854 | 0 | 5 | 2003 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #43 | 1,746 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2011 | 40–23 | 63.5% | #21 | 1,963 | 0 | 6 | 2004 | 38–25 | 60.3% | #16 | 1,870 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2012 | 37–17 | 68.5% | #15 | 2,009 | 0 | 8 | 2005 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #43 | 1,758 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2013 | 24–13 | 64.9% | #37 | 1,964 | 0 | 9 | 2006 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #24 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2014 | 51–21 | 70.8% | #9 | 2,127 | 1 | 13 | 2007 | 48–24 | 66.7% | #19 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2015 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #13 | 2,061 | 1 | 14 | 2008 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #32 | 1,761 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2016 | 42–20 | 67.7% | #6 | 2,133 | 1 | 16 | 2009 | 41–27 | 60.3% | #19 | 1,960 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2017 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #6 | 2,055 | 1 | 17 | 2010 | 40–19 | 67.8% | #10 | 1,936 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2018 | 40–19 | 67.8% | #7 | 2,056 | 1 | 18 | 2011 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #35 | 1,837 | 0 | 7 |
| 30 | 2019 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #39 | 1,911 | 1 | 18 | 2012 | 33–21 | 61.1% | #25 | 1,902 | 0 | 8 |
| 31 | 2020 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,850 | 1 | 18 | 2013 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #15 | 2,016 | 0 | 10 |
| 32 | 2021 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #30 | 1,933 | 1 | 20 | 2014 | 18–24 | 42.9% | #48 | 1,795 | 0 | 10 |
| 33 | 2022 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #17 | 1,958 | 1 | 20 | 2015 | 9–24 | 27.3% | #127 | 1,701 | 0 | 10 |
| 34 | 2023 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #672 | 1,912 | 1 | 20 | 2016 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #57 | 1,774 | 0 | 10 |
| 35 | 2024 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #179 | 1,816 | 1 | 21 | 2017 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #84 | 1,679 | 0 | 10 |
| 36 | 2025 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,819 | 1 | 21 | 2018 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #115 | 1,637 | 0 | 10 |
| 37 | 2026 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #88 | 1,758 | 1 | 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |