H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Hyung-Taik Lee H2H: 2-0
Mario Ancic holds a 2–0 lead over Hyung-Taik Lee in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mario Ancic leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mario Ancic won the 2006 Beijing semifinal 4-6 6-1 6-1.
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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
KOR
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 2006* | Beijing | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Mario Ancic | 4-6 6-1 6-1 | Hyung-Taik Lee | Match data |
| Aug 31, 2005* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 6-2 6-1 7-5 | Hyung-Taik Lee | 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 |
| Hyung-Taik Lee | #1,256 | #36 | 864 | 1,798 | 120 | 153 | 44.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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.
| Mario Ancic | Hyung-Taik Lee | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #241 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #283 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #191 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2000 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #90 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #116 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #87 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #56 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 |
| 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #59 | 1,668 | 0 | 1 |
| 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #107 | 1,618 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #49 | 1,735 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #51 | 1,769 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #107 | 1,629 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #871 | 1,597 | 0 | 1 |