H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Igor Kunitsyn H2H: 1-0
Mario Ancic holds a 1–0 lead over Igor Kunitsyn 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 2006 Mumbai third round 6-3 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.
CRO
Age 42
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19, 2007 | New Haven | ATP 250 | Q1 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 4-6 6-0 6-3 | Igor Kunitsyn | Match data |
| Sep 28, 2006* | Mumbai | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 6-3 6-2 | Igor Kunitsyn | 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 |
| Igor Kunitsyn | #1,093 | #35 | 1,562 | 1,755 | 87 | 149 | 36.9% | 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.
| Age | Mario Ancic | Igor Kunitsyn | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #315 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #149 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #193 | 1,479 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #158 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #129 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #94 | 1,612 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #116 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #47 | 1,690 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 16–30 | 34.8% | #104 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #100 | 1,682 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #71 | 1,720 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 4–19 | 17.4% | #162 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #548 | 1,556 | 0 | 1 |