H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Kenneth Carlsen H2H: 2-0
Mario Ancic holds a 2–0 lead over Kenneth Carlsen 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 Tokyo third round 6-1 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
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
DEN
Age 53
Left-Handed
190 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 5, 2006* | Tokyo | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 6-1 6-4 | Kenneth Carlsen | Match data |
| Sep 18, 2004* | Delray Beach | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Mario Ancic | 6-2 7-5 | Kenneth Carlsen | 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 |
| Kenneth Carlsen | #1,158 | #41 | 791 | 1,754 | 239 | 273 | 46.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Kenneth Carlsen | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1992 | 10–7 | 58.8% | #69 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 17–27 | 38.6% | #92 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #108 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 1995 | 25–22 | 53.2% | #72 | 1,693 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 1996 | 17–22 | 43.6% | #73 | 1,620 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 1997 | 24–26 | 48.0% | #75 | 1,654 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 1998 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #83 | 1,621 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #85 | 1,657 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #153 | 1,679 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2002 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #65 | 1,743 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #108 | 1,595 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #84 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 17–25 | 40.5% | #66 | 1,581 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #137 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #498 | 1,487 | 0 | 3 |