H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Mario Ancic vs Tommy Haas H2H: 2-0
Mario Ancic holds a 2–0 lead over Tommy Haas in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mario Ancic leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mario Ancic won the 2007 Cincinnati Masters second round 3-6 7-6(3) 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
GER
Age 48
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2007* | Cincinnati Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 3-6 7-6(3) 6-3 | Tommy Haas | Match data |
| Mar 24, 2005* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | Mario Ancic | 6-4 6-4 | Tommy Haas | 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 |
| Tommy Haas | #616 | #2 | 3,030 | 2,103 | 533 | 330 | 61.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 11 | 15 |
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 | Tommy Haas | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1996 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #170 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2003 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #74 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 | 1997 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #45 | 1,721 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2004 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,732 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 34–26 | 56.7% | #34 | 1,840 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2005 | 42–23 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 1999 | 45–23 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2006 | 52–18 | 74.3% | #9 | 1,954 | 0 | 3 | 2000 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #23 | 1,777 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2007 | 13–10 | 56.5% | #83 | 1,880 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #8 | 2,009 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2008 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #36 | 1,903 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #11 | 1,849 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2009 | 12–7 | 63.2% | #95 | 1,905 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2010 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #478 | 1,866 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 35–18 | 66.0% | #17 | 1,909 | 0 | 7 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #45 | 1,766 | 0 | 7 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 48–19 | 71.6% | #11 | 1,893 | 0 | 10 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #12 | 1,892 | 0 | 11 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 18–15 | 54.5% | #82 | 1,855 | 0 | 11 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #18 | 1,913 | 0 | 12 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #372 | 1,844 | 0 | 12 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #205 | 1,762 | 0 | 12 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 31–17 | 64.6% | #21 | 1,966 | 0 | 13 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 46–23 | 66.7% | #12 | 2,011 | 0 | 15 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 14–11 | 56.0% | #77 | 1,904 | 0 | 15 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #470 | 1,784 | 0 | 15 |
| 39 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #252 | 1,686 | 0 | 15 |