H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Taylor Dent H2H: 2-1
Mario Ancic holds a 2–1 lead over Taylor Dent in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Mario Ancic leads 1–0 on clay, while Taylor Dent leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Mario Ancic won the 2005 Rotterdam third round 7-6(5) 7-5.
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
–
1
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 45
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 17, 2005* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 7-6(5) 7-5 | Taylor Dent | Match data |
| May 22, 2003* | St. Poelten | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Mario Ancic | 2-6 7-6(3) 6-4 | Taylor Dent | Match data |
| Jul 11, 2002* | Newport | ATP 250 | R32 | Grass | Taylor Dent | 6-3 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 |
| Taylor Dent | #979 | #21 | 1,345 | 1,905 | 148 | 138 | 51.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Taylor Dent | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #410 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2002 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #89 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #276 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #181 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 10–13 | 43.5% | #124 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #57 | 1,690 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 28–12 | 70.0% | #33 | 1,883 | 0 | 4 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #32 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2005 | 33–21 | 61.1% | #29 | 1,783 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | 2006 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #574 | 1,712 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #865 | 1,671 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #76 | 1,730 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #118 | 1,776 | 0 | 4 |