H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Lleyton Hewitt H2H: 0-1
Lleyton Hewitt holds a 1–0 lead over Mario Ancic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Lleyton Hewitt leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lleyton Hewitt won the 2005 Cincinnati Masters fourth 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
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 45
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2005* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Lleyton Hewitt | 6-1 6-4 | Mario Ancic | 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 |
| Lleyton Hewitt | #636 | #1 | 5,205 | 2,159 | 564 | 241 | 70.1% | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 23 | 30 |
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 | Lleyton Hewitt | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #550 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #100 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 40–18 | 69.0% | #25 | 1,853 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 53–15 | 77.9% | #7 | 1,993 | 0 | 6 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 71–15 | 82.6% | #1 | 2,116 | 1 | 12 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 61–16 | 79.2% | #1 | 2,062 | 2 | 17 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 29–10 | 74.4% | #17 | 1,939 | 2 | 19 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 64–16 | 80.0% | #3 | 2,076 | 2 | 23 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 36–9 | 80.0% | #4 | 2,092 | 2 | 24 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #20 | 1,964 | 2 | 25 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 34–15 | 69.4% | #21 | 1,925 | 2 | 26 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #67 | 1,936 | 2 | 26 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 33–19 | 63.5% | #22 | 1,956 | 2 | 27 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 18–11 | 62.1% | #54 | 1,907 | 2 | 28 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #186 | 1,817 | 2 | 28 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #83 | 1,867 | 2 | 28 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #60 | 1,884 | 2 | 28 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #50 | 1,841 | 2 | 30 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #307 | 1,715 | 2 | 30 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #633 | 1,727 | 2 | 30 |