H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Nicolas Kiefer H2H: 0-1
Nicolas Kiefer holds a 1–0 lead over Mario Ancic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Nicolas Kiefer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nicolas Kiefer won the 2003 Indian Wells Masters second round 6-2 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
GER
Age 49
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2003* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Nicolas Kiefer | 6-2 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 |
| Nicolas Kiefer | #720 | #4 | 2,447 | 1,984 | 343 | 252 | 57.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
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 Kiefer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1994 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1198 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1995 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #206 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #128 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #32 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 31–25 | 55.4% | #35 | 1,790 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #6 | 1,921 | 0 | 4 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 30–15 | 66.7% | #20 | 1,921 | 0 | 6 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 26–25 | 51.0% | #42 | 1,766 | 0 | 6 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 19–24 | 44.2% | #72 | 1,718 | 0 | 6 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,727 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 32–19 | 62.7% | #21 | 1,897 | 0 | 6 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 31–22 | 58.5% | #22 | 1,854 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 14–8 | 63.6% | #48 | 1,843 | 0 | 6 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 19–12 | 61.3% | #49 | 1,893 | 0 | 6 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #38 | 1,876 | 0 | 6 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #116 | 1,757 | 0 | 6 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #722 | 1,717 | 0 | 6 |