H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Nicolas Almagro H2H: 1-1
Mario Ancic and Nicolas Almagro are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Nicolas Almagro leads 1–0 on clay, while Mario Ancic leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Nicolas Almagro won the 2008 Barcelona fourth round 7-6(5) 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
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 40
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 2, 2008* | Barcelona | ATP 500 | R16 | Clay | Nicolas Almagro | 7-6(5) 6-2 | Mario Ancic | Match data |
| Jun 28, 2006* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Mario Ancic | 7-6(2) 7-5 7-6(4) | Nicolas Almagro | 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 |
| Nicolas Almagro | #846 | #9 | 2,735 | 2,076 | 385 | 272 | 58.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 11 | 13 |
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 | Nicolas Almagro | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2003 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #156 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #103 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #114 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #32 | 1,721 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #28 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 34–16 | 68.0% | #18 | 1,794 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #26 | 1,831 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 41–23 | 64.1% | #15 | 1,885 | 0 | 7 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 47–23 | 67.1% | #10 | 1,874 | 0 | 10 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 51–21 | 70.8% | #11 | 2,010 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #13 | 1,961 | 0 | 12 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 15–10 | 60.0% | #71 | 1,928 | 0 | 12 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #73 | 1,795 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #44 | 1,790 | 0 | 13 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 10–12 | 45.5% | #151 | 1,833 | 0 | 13 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #846 | 1,777 | 0 | 13 |