H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 19:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Nicolas Lapentti H2H: 2-0
Mario Ancic holds a 2–0 lead over Nicolas Lapentti in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mario Ancic leads 1–0 on carpet and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Mario Ancic won the 2008 Queen's Club second round 7-5 6-3.
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
ECU
Age 49
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2008* | Queen's Club | ATP 500 | R64 | Grass | Mario Ancic | 7-5 6-3 | Nicolas Lapentti | Match data |
| Oct 25, 2007* | St. Petersburg | ATP 250 | R32 | Carpet | Mario Ancic | 6-4 6-1 | Nicolas Lapentti | 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 Lapentti | #885 | #6 | 2,293 | 1,935 | 282 | 280 | 50.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
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 Lapentti | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1995 | 5–0 | 100.0% | #109 | 1,594 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #121 | 1,576 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #63 | 1,660 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 1998 | 16–29 | 35.6% | #90 | 1,596 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 1999 | 52–24 | 68.4% | #8 | 1,883 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 40–28 | 58.8% | #24 | 1,755 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #23 | 1,837 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 32–27 | 54.2% | #29 | 1,714 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #57 | 1,697 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #122 | 1,600 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #95 | 1,579 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 12–9 | 57.1% | #67 | 1,682 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,611 | 0 | 5 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,658 | 0 | 5 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #97 | 1,668 | 0 | 5 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #447 | 1,582 | 0 | 5 |