H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Bobby Reynolds H2H: 1-0
Mario Ancic holds a 1–0 lead over Bobby Reynolds in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mario Ancic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mario Ancic won the 2010 Indian Wells Masters first round 4-6 6-3 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.
CRO
Age 42
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 44
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 13, 2010* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | R128 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 4-6 6-3 6-4 | Bobby Reynolds | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mario Ancic | #475 | #7 | 2,075 | 2,019 | 193 | 124 | 60.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Bobby Reynolds | #1,116 | #63 | 1,146 | 1,781 | 28 | 72 | 28.0% | 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 | Mario Ancic | Bobby Reynolds | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #475 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #288 | 1,439 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #92 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 1–11 | 8.3% | #190 | 1,410 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #111 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 13–18 | 41.9% | #70 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 3–13 | 18.8% | #332 | 1,611 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #163 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #127 | 1,561 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #148 | 1,664 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #179 | 1,734 | 0 | 0 |